Posts
So, why would I leave the cold windy plains of North Dakota? Hmmm, real easy. This mountain!
If you are looking for some of the best and truly challenging terrain in Colorado, its here!
Sunday, December 2, 2007
29 inches on the mountain.
Wow, we finally got snow. Now we got a reported 29" of the fresh white stuff, and we needed it. However, there was a price to pay for the new snow. We had high winds which caused our main base area lift currently to be shut down for a couple hours.
Resort staff were out in force handing out free hot cocoa, candy, and selling beers to those stuck down at the bottom.
We are in the middle of Free Ski where all you have to do is show up at our ticket office and give your zip code and you get a lift ticket to ride.
Here is video of the days leading up to our storm. The last video is from the second day of the storm.
Do not complain about video quality please since this is my old phone which is providing these for you.
Enjoy.
Resort staff were out in force handing out free hot cocoa, candy, and selling beers to those stuck down at the bottom.
We are in the middle of Free Ski where all you have to do is show up at our ticket office and give your zip code and you get a lift ticket to ride.
Here is video of the days leading up to our storm. The last video is from the second day of the storm.
Do not complain about video quality please since this is my old phone which is providing these for you.
Enjoy.
Ok, just a couple more dumps like this and we will be able to completely open the mountain.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Tancredo is right / Islamists target Arizona base
What will the LA Times say about this now? I doubt they will say anything.
-------------------------------
Islamists target Arizona base
By Sara A. Carter
The Washington Times,
November 26, 2007 http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071126/NATION/111260034/1002
Fort Huachuca, the nation's largest intelligence-training center, changed security measures in May after being warned that Islamist terrorists, with the aid of Mexican drug cartels, were planning an attack on the facility.
Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times.
'A portion of the operatives were in the United States, with the remainder not yet in the United States,' according to one of the documents, an FBI advisory that was distributed to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the CIA, Customs and Border Protection and the Justice Department, among several other law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. 'The Afghanis and Iraqis shaved their beards so as not to appear to be Middle Easterners.'
According to the FBI advisory, each Middle Easterner paid Mexican drug lords $20,000 'or the equivalent in weapons' for the cartel's assistance in smuggling them and their weapons through tunnels along the border into the U.S. The weapons would be sent through tunnels that supposedly ended in Arizona and New Mexico, but the Islamist terrorists would be smuggled through Laredo, Texas, and reclaim the weapons later.
A number of the Afghans and Iraqis are already in a safe house in Texas, the FBI advisory said.
Fort Huachuca, which lies about 20 miles from the Mexican border, has members of all four service branches training in intelligence and secret operations. About 12,000 persons work at the fort and many have their families on base.
Lt. Col. Matthew Garner, spokesman for Fort Huachuca, said details about the current phase of the investigation or security changes on the post 'will not be disclosed.'
'We are always taking precautions to ensure that soldiers, family members and civilians that work and live on Fort Huachuca are safe,' Col. Garner said. 'With this specific threat, we did change some aspects of our security that we did have in place.'
According to the FBI report, some of the weapons associated with the plot have been smuggled through a tunnel from Mexico to the U.S.
The FBI report is based on Drug Enforcement Administration sources, including Mexican nationals with access to 'sub-sources' in the drug cartels. The report's assessment is that the DEA's Mexican contacts have proven reliable in the past but the 'sub-source' is of uncertain reliability.
According to the source who spoke with DEA intelligence agents, the weapons included two Milan anti-tank missiles, Soviet-made surface-to-air missiles, grenade launchers, long guns and handguns.
'FBI Comment: The surface-to-air missiles may in fact be RPGs,' the advisory stated, adding that the weapons stash in Mexico could include two or three more Milan missiles.
The Milan, a French-German portable anti-tank weapon, was developed in the 1970s and widely sold to militaries around the world, including Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Insurgents in Iraq reportedly have used a Milan missile in an attack on a British tank. Iraqi guerrillas also have shot down U.S. helicopters using RPGs, or rocket-propelled grenades.
FBI spokesman Paul Bresson would not elaborate on the current investigation regarding the threat, but said that many times the initial reports are based on 'raw, uncorroborated information that has not been completely vetted.' He added that this report shows the extent to which all law enforcement and intelligence agencies cooperate in terror investigations.
'If nothing else, it provides a good look at the inner working of the law-enforcement and intelligence community and how they work together on a daily basis to share and deal with threat information,' Mr. Bresson said. 'It also demonstrates the cross-pollination that frequently exists between criminal and terrorist groups.'
The connections between criminal enterprises, such as powerful drug cartels, and terrorist organizations have become a serious concern for intelligence agencies monitoring the U.S.-Mexico border.
'Based upon the information provided by the DEA handling agent, the DEA has classified the source as credible,' stated a Department of Homeland Security document, regarding the possibility of an attack on Fort Huachuca. 'The identity of the sub-source has been established; however, none of the information provided by the sub-source in the past has been corroborated.'
The FBI advisory stated the 'sub-source' for the information 'is a member of the Zetas,' the military arm of one of Mexico's most dangerous drug-trafficking organizations, the Gulf Cartel. The Gulf Cartel controls the movement of narcotics from Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, into the U.S. along the Laredo corridor.
However, the sub-source 'for this information is of unknown reliability,' the FBI advisory stated.
According to the DEA, the sub-source identified Mexico's Sinaloa cartel as the drug lords who would assist the terrorists in their plot.
This led the DEA to caution the FBI that its information may be a Gulf Cartel plant to bring the U.S. military in against its main rival. The Sinaloa and Gulf cartels have fought bloody battles along the border for control of shipping routes into the U.S.
'It doesn't mean that there isn't truth to some of what this source delivered to U.S. agents,' said one law-enforcement intelligence agent, on the condition of anonymity. 'The cartels have no loyalty to any nation or person. It isn't surprising that for the right price they would assist terrorists, knowingly or unknowingly.'
---------------------------------------------------
This isn't new news, just news which proves the report I have been sharing is correct, and Tancredo knows what he is talking about.
What is it going to take for the citizens of this nation to wake up and take national security seriously? A nuke at the Mall of America? Small pox released at the Super Bowl? How about active wars in the streets of LA, oh wait, we have that already.
I am afraid of what it will take to awaken Americans. Perhaps until the power goes out and the phones quit working no one will notice.
-------------------------------
Islamists target Arizona base
By Sara A. Carter
The Washington Times,
November 26, 2007 http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071126/NATION/111260034/1002
Fort Huachuca, the nation's largest intelligence-training center, changed security measures in May after being warned that Islamist terrorists, with the aid of Mexican drug cartels, were planning an attack on the facility.
Fort officials changed security measures after sources warned that possibly 60 Afghan and Iraqi terrorists were to be smuggled into the U.S. through underground tunnels with high-powered weapons to attack the Arizona Army base, according to multiple confidential law enforcement documents obtained by The Washington Times.
'A portion of the operatives were in the United States, with the remainder not yet in the United States,' according to one of the documents, an FBI advisory that was distributed to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the CIA, Customs and Border Protection and the Justice Department, among several other law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. 'The Afghanis and Iraqis shaved their beards so as not to appear to be Middle Easterners.'
According to the FBI advisory, each Middle Easterner paid Mexican drug lords $20,000 'or the equivalent in weapons' for the cartel's assistance in smuggling them and their weapons through tunnels along the border into the U.S. The weapons would be sent through tunnels that supposedly ended in Arizona and New Mexico, but the Islamist terrorists would be smuggled through Laredo, Texas, and reclaim the weapons later.
A number of the Afghans and Iraqis are already in a safe house in Texas, the FBI advisory said.
Fort Huachuca, which lies about 20 miles from the Mexican border, has members of all four service branches training in intelligence and secret operations. About 12,000 persons work at the fort and many have their families on base.
Lt. Col. Matthew Garner, spokesman for Fort Huachuca, said details about the current phase of the investigation or security changes on the post 'will not be disclosed.'
'We are always taking precautions to ensure that soldiers, family members and civilians that work and live on Fort Huachuca are safe,' Col. Garner said. 'With this specific threat, we did change some aspects of our security that we did have in place.'
According to the FBI report, some of the weapons associated with the plot have been smuggled through a tunnel from Mexico to the U.S.
The FBI report is based on Drug Enforcement Administration sources, including Mexican nationals with access to 'sub-sources' in the drug cartels. The report's assessment is that the DEA's Mexican contacts have proven reliable in the past but the 'sub-source' is of uncertain reliability.
According to the source who spoke with DEA intelligence agents, the weapons included two Milan anti-tank missiles, Soviet-made surface-to-air missiles, grenade launchers, long guns and handguns.
'FBI Comment: The surface-to-air missiles may in fact be RPGs,' the advisory stated, adding that the weapons stash in Mexico could include two or three more Milan missiles.
The Milan, a French-German portable anti-tank weapon, was developed in the 1970s and widely sold to militaries around the world, including Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Insurgents in Iraq reportedly have used a Milan missile in an attack on a British tank. Iraqi guerrillas also have shot down U.S. helicopters using RPGs, or rocket-propelled grenades.
FBI spokesman Paul Bresson would not elaborate on the current investigation regarding the threat, but said that many times the initial reports are based on 'raw, uncorroborated information that has not been completely vetted.' He added that this report shows the extent to which all law enforcement and intelligence agencies cooperate in terror investigations.
'If nothing else, it provides a good look at the inner working of the law-enforcement and intelligence community and how they work together on a daily basis to share and deal with threat information,' Mr. Bresson said. 'It also demonstrates the cross-pollination that frequently exists between criminal and terrorist groups.'
The connections between criminal enterprises, such as powerful drug cartels, and terrorist organizations have become a serious concern for intelligence agencies monitoring the U.S.-Mexico border.
'Based upon the information provided by the DEA handling agent, the DEA has classified the source as credible,' stated a Department of Homeland Security document, regarding the possibility of an attack on Fort Huachuca. 'The identity of the sub-source has been established; however, none of the information provided by the sub-source in the past has been corroborated.'
The FBI advisory stated the 'sub-source' for the information 'is a member of the Zetas,' the military arm of one of Mexico's most dangerous drug-trafficking organizations, the Gulf Cartel. The Gulf Cartel controls the movement of narcotics from Nuevo Laredo, Mexico, into the U.S. along the Laredo corridor.
However, the sub-source 'for this information is of unknown reliability,' the FBI advisory stated.
According to the DEA, the sub-source identified Mexico's Sinaloa cartel as the drug lords who would assist the terrorists in their plot.
This led the DEA to caution the FBI that its information may be a Gulf Cartel plant to bring the U.S. military in against its main rival. The Sinaloa and Gulf cartels have fought bloody battles along the border for control of shipping routes into the U.S.
'It doesn't mean that there isn't truth to some of what this source delivered to U.S. agents,' said one law-enforcement intelligence agent, on the condition of anonymity. 'The cartels have no loyalty to any nation or person. It isn't surprising that for the right price they would assist terrorists, knowingly or unknowingly.'
---------------------------------------------------
This isn't new news, just news which proves the report I have been sharing is correct, and Tancredo knows what he is talking about.
What is it going to take for the citizens of this nation to wake up and take national security seriously? A nuke at the Mall of America? Small pox released at the Super Bowl? How about active wars in the streets of LA, oh wait, we have that already.
I am afraid of what it will take to awaken Americans. Perhaps until the power goes out and the phones quit working no one will notice.
The Democrats want you to forget the past and truth...
“You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence.” - Charles Austin Beard
------------------------------------------------------------
If this is true, I suggest that everyone needs to go out and read as much of our Founding Fathers words which started this awesome experiment of self government.
Do you know why someone would be afraid of our founding fathers? Because they supported the rule of the People for the People, not the Government for the Elite. I truly do not care which party someone belongs to, if they violate what was intended for us and created for us by the Founding Fathers, it is our duty and right to TEAR them down. It is something described and explained to us in the Declaration of Independence.
Did you know that? We are told to destroy our Government if it becomes something other than what was created. Check this out.
The Declaration of Independence
The Want, Will, and Hopes of the People
(This is the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
Why would someone not want you to know these things? I can find quotes like these all over the writings of our Founding Fathers, and in truth, more of them were afraid of creating something which would become despotic therefore spoke at length of how We The People should and must hold our government to account in all forms and practices.
This is quite honestly the intent of the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution. If you doubt this, please research Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Tse Tung and how before killing millions disarmed the populace.
Lets look as some of the quotes of our Founding Fathers to see if I am right or wrong:
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, February 22, 1787
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query 12, 1782
John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
Samuel Adams, 1779
Man, I love that last quote. Apply that one to our country and culture today. I do not believe that I am wrong that our government has decided to know set laws in place which determine the Virtues we must follow and carry out in our daily lives, even if it is counter to your religion and beliefs.
I thought laws were originally set below the accepted moral and ethical levels of The People? Oh, they were, but now we have interesting events happening which have changed that.
What am I talking about? How about the removal and banning of the Christian Bible from Schools and Government. Heck, you can be sued for speaking about your faith now a days. But what is the Bible? Rules of living and behavior as set forth by God himself? I believe as much. Do you not find it interesting that these are the same rules set forth for all of us in the basis of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity?
Our original laws set forth for us were based upon Judao-Christian values. Notice how as that value is lost in our nation that we suffer from more crime and wrong doing?
Do you own research, study our true history, and learn the truthes that our nation was built upon. After doing such, examine the intent of those running for office or already in office.
Turn off your TV. Go and read up on our past and history. You will be amazed at what you find. I warn you however. You will find things which our media and polititions have bent so much it will make you want to go out and beat them.
Where to begin? I suggest reading our entire Declaration of Indepenence followed by our Constitution. After that, read the words written by the signers. I also suggest the Federalist Papers.
Do Not Take Anything At Face Value! You are being played by confidence games daily. Go find the truth. Make your own choices and do not base them on anything but what you take from it, not even me.
------------------------------------------------------------
If this is true, I suggest that everyone needs to go out and read as much of our Founding Fathers words which started this awesome experiment of self government.
Do you know why someone would be afraid of our founding fathers? Because they supported the rule of the People for the People, not the Government for the Elite. I truly do not care which party someone belongs to, if they violate what was intended for us and created for us by the Founding Fathers, it is our duty and right to TEAR them down. It is something described and explained to us in the Declaration of Independence.
Did you know that? We are told to destroy our Government if it becomes something other than what was created. Check this out.
The Declaration of Independence
The Want, Will, and Hopes of the People
(This is the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence)
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
Why would someone not want you to know these things? I can find quotes like these all over the writings of our Founding Fathers, and in truth, more of them were afraid of creating something which would become despotic therefore spoke at length of how We The People should and must hold our government to account in all forms and practices.
This is quite honestly the intent of the 2nd Amendment of our Constitution. If you doubt this, please research Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Tse Tung and how before killing millions disarmed the populace.
Lets look as some of the quotes of our Founding Fathers to see if I am right or wrong:
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions,
that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong,
but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and
then. It is like a storm in the atmosphere.
Thomas Jefferson, letter to Abigail Adams, February 22, 1787
On every unauthoritative exercise of power by the legislature must the
people rise in rebellion or their silence be construed into a surrender of that
power to them? If so, how many rebellions should we have had already?
Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, Query 12, 1782
Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a
passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and
miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political
institution which is founded on it.
John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety,
prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private
interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone
have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute
government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their
protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.
John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
"A general dissolution of principles and manners will more surely overthrow the
liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy. While the people
are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then
will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal
invader."
Samuel Adams, 1779
Man, I love that last quote. Apply that one to our country and culture today. I do not believe that I am wrong that our government has decided to know set laws in place which determine the Virtues we must follow and carry out in our daily lives, even if it is counter to your religion and beliefs.
I thought laws were originally set below the accepted moral and ethical levels of The People? Oh, they were, but now we have interesting events happening which have changed that.
What am I talking about? How about the removal and banning of the Christian Bible from Schools and Government. Heck, you can be sued for speaking about your faith now a days. But what is the Bible? Rules of living and behavior as set forth by God himself? I believe as much. Do you not find it interesting that these are the same rules set forth for all of us in the basis of Islam, Judaism, and Christianity?
Our original laws set forth for us were based upon Judao-Christian values. Notice how as that value is lost in our nation that we suffer from more crime and wrong doing?
Do you own research, study our true history, and learn the truthes that our nation was built upon. After doing such, examine the intent of those running for office or already in office.
Turn off your TV. Go and read up on our past and history. You will be amazed at what you find. I warn you however. You will find things which our media and polititions have bent so much it will make you want to go out and beat them.
Where to begin? I suggest reading our entire Declaration of Indepenence followed by our Constitution. After that, read the words written by the signers. I also suggest the Federalist Papers.
Do Not Take Anything At Face Value! You are being played by confidence games daily. Go find the truth. Make your own choices and do not base them on anything but what you take from it, not even me.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
They are shooting at us...
I keep posting this report in hopes that more and more people read it and share it. I am going to follow this with a video which shows what happens to our Border Patrol and Minutemen which will never see the light of day on any national media service.
A Line in the Sand:
Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border
PREPARED BY THE MAJORITY STAFF OF THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Chairman
http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf
A Line in the Sand:
Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border
PREPARED BY THE MAJORITY STAFF OF THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Chairman
http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf
How to hire Illegals 101
Immigration attorneys from Cohen & Grigsby explains how they assist employers in running classified ads with the goal of NOT finding any qualified applicants, and the steps they go through to disqualify even the most qualified Americans in order to secure green cards for H-1b workers. See what Bush and Congress really mean by a "shortage of skilled U.S. workers." Microsoft, Oracle, Hewlett-Packard, and thousands of other companies are running fake ads in Sunday newspapers across the country each week.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Bill would end 'sanctuary' for illegals
I truly truly pray that this is made a law. Why do these people enjoy a level of privilege that is meant for the citizens of our nation?
Please tell me any other nation in this world of ours which is so kind to those not of their own citizenship. I truly want to know.
Why do we have sanctuary for these criminals?
Apply this to any other crime in our nation and you would see how absurd it really is. Perhaps we should have sanctuary cities for murderers where they are released under a "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy. Or perhaps a city where rapists are released because we could not ask or tell about their crime. Maybe drunk driving should have a sanctuary city also. How about theft, fraud, kidnapping, burglary, or slavery?
Seriously, lets just throw in the towel and give up on all of our laws. Who are they protecting anyways? Good people, law abiding people, people who vote, people that are citizens, or just no one?
What does the rule of law do for you? Anything?
-------------------------------------------------
Bill would end 'sanctuary' for illegals
By Precious Petty
The Express Times (Easton, PA),
November 20, 2007
http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-14/119553521794050.xml&coll=2
Bethlehem, PA -- U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent has introduced a bill that would prevent illegal immigrants charged with felony offenses from being released on bail.
The law would require local police to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials whenever an illegal immigrant is arrested on state felony charges, he said.
Federal detention of such suspects would be mandatory under the law, even if bail is posted on the state charges, Dent explained during a news conference Monday at his city office.
He said the Aug. 4 shooting deaths of three college students in a Newark schoolyard led him to introduce House Bill 4201. Jose Carranza, the first suspect arrested in the case, was free on bail stemming from felony aggravated assault and child abuse charges when the shootings occurred.
Newark police did not inquire about Carranza's immigration status during his earlier arrests because the city employed a 'don't ask don't tell' policy, said Dent, R-Pa.
Many of the nation's big cities have adopted these so-called 'sanctuary' policies, where police are discouraged from notifying ICE when an illegal immigrant is in custody, he said.
His bill would put an end to that practice, Dent said. 'We cannot have an interior enforcement policy of catch and release.'
The congressman said he hasn't yet discussed his proposal with party leaders but remains confident it will garner bipartisan support.
Several Democrats co-sponsor the bill, including U.S. Reps. Jim Marshall of Florida and Tim Holden of Pennsylvania. U.S. Rep. Jim Saxton of New Jersey is also a co-sponsor.
--------------------------------------------
Do we next allow sanctuary cities in our nation for child porn to be available on every corner, or do we allow a city to ignore child rape?
What are you willing to allow? Would you allow this in your own home? How would you feel if your local police let your daughters rapist out the same day because they allowed such to be ignored?
I bet your tune would change if it was you that was the victim, or the parent of a victim.
Do any of you remember Dru Sjodin from Grand Forks, North Dakota? Perhaps that town should be a sanctuary for kidnapping, raping, murdering criminals. No punishment, no rules.
Please tell me any other nation in this world of ours which is so kind to those not of their own citizenship. I truly want to know.
Why do we have sanctuary for these criminals?
Apply this to any other crime in our nation and you would see how absurd it really is. Perhaps we should have sanctuary cities for murderers where they are released under a "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy. Or perhaps a city where rapists are released because we could not ask or tell about their crime. Maybe drunk driving should have a sanctuary city also. How about theft, fraud, kidnapping, burglary, or slavery?
Seriously, lets just throw in the towel and give up on all of our laws. Who are they protecting anyways? Good people, law abiding people, people who vote, people that are citizens, or just no one?
What does the rule of law do for you? Anything?
-------------------------------------------------
Bill would end 'sanctuary' for illegals
By Precious Petty
The Express Times (Easton, PA),
November 20, 2007
http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-14/119553521794050.xml&coll=2
Bethlehem, PA -- U.S. Rep. Charlie Dent has introduced a bill that would prevent illegal immigrants charged with felony offenses from being released on bail.
The law would require local police to notify U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials whenever an illegal immigrant is arrested on state felony charges, he said.
Federal detention of such suspects would be mandatory under the law, even if bail is posted on the state charges, Dent explained during a news conference Monday at his city office.
He said the Aug. 4 shooting deaths of three college students in a Newark schoolyard led him to introduce House Bill 4201. Jose Carranza, the first suspect arrested in the case, was free on bail stemming from felony aggravated assault and child abuse charges when the shootings occurred.
Newark police did not inquire about Carranza's immigration status during his earlier arrests because the city employed a 'don't ask don't tell' policy, said Dent, R-Pa.
Many of the nation's big cities have adopted these so-called 'sanctuary' policies, where police are discouraged from notifying ICE when an illegal immigrant is in custody, he said.
His bill would put an end to that practice, Dent said. 'We cannot have an interior enforcement policy of catch and release.'
The congressman said he hasn't yet discussed his proposal with party leaders but remains confident it will garner bipartisan support.
Several Democrats co-sponsor the bill, including U.S. Reps. Jim Marshall of Florida and Tim Holden of Pennsylvania. U.S. Rep. Jim Saxton of New Jersey is also a co-sponsor.
--------------------------------------------
Do we next allow sanctuary cities in our nation for child porn to be available on every corner, or do we allow a city to ignore child rape?
What are you willing to allow? Would you allow this in your own home? How would you feel if your local police let your daughters rapist out the same day because they allowed such to be ignored?
I bet your tune would change if it was you that was the victim, or the parent of a victim.
Do any of you remember Dru Sjodin from Grand Forks, North Dakota? Perhaps that town should be a sanctuary for kidnapping, raping, murdering criminals. No punishment, no rules.
We still need true Enforcement, but this is a nice start.
Since this is a recent and new turn of events, I am not completely sure this will stick. I hope that this will become permanent, but until that time, this is a dog and pony show.
Our local labor market is still overrun with Illegal Immigrants. However an interesting event recently happened. Our local major employers were unable to bring in any H2B Visa workers. Since that had happened, many there screamed that they were not going to fill the jobs and all hell would break loose. It didn't happen, as a matter of fact, they got swamped with applicants who all were locals. In addition to that, the jobs which only paid $8.00 an hour now has gone up to $10.00 an hour, and is rumored to rise as high as $12.00 an hour.
So, in the absence of the non-citizens, the wages have climbed and many citizens now have jobs. Another interesting aspect of this is that H2B Visa workers are supposed to be paid the prevailing wages of the jobs they are doing (which they were not) and only brought in to fill jobs which there were no, I repeat, NO citizens which would take the jobs.
I am amazed by the fact Americans are fighting to get these jobs that many in the media and or government say Americans "Will Not Do!"
So where is the truth? I think it is what I have seen with my own eyes. We have been lied to. Point blank and boldfaced LIES.
It really is this simple, if we remove Illegal Immigrants and their cheap labor, the same would happen nationwide. Wages would rise, jobs would get filled, and the American People would see the benefit and truth of true Immigration Enforcement. We all would be doing better.
Here is the story which got me going on this.
----------------------------------------------
Border Patrol goes zero tolerance End of 'catch and release' strains courts and jails, but proponents applaud effort
By James Pinkerton
The Houston Chronicle,
November 20, 2007 http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/5315873.html
Laredo -- After pleading guilty to entering the country illegally, the Mexican immigrant from Veracruz told a federal judge here last week he came to the U.S. to earn money to pay for his mother's funeral.
''It doesn't matter if you're trying to pay off funeral expenses, or take care of a sick family member,' explained U.S. Magistrate Diana Saldaña, referring to the plight of another immigrant. ''When you cross the Rio Grande, you're going to be spending time in prison if the Border Patrol finds you — that's the bottom line.'
The frank courtroom exchange has become a daily occurrence since Oct. 30, when the Border Patrol launched Operation Streamline-Laredo, a zero-tolerance campaign that prosecutes, jails and deports nearly every adult illegal immigrant that border agents catch.
The controversial operation has jammed local jails to capacity, strained the staff of the federal public defender's office and sparked charges that immigrants' due process rights are being violated. But it has been applauded by those favoring strict enforcement of immigration laws.
Before the crackdown, agents with the Laredo patrol sector routinely allowed illegal immigrants from Mexico to return home voluntarily. And a lack of detention space resulted in a ''catch-and-release' policy that allowed non-Mexican illegal immigrants to post bond pending a hearing, but few showed up for their court dates.
But at the Laredo federal courthouse last week, a mere two weeks after the program began, scores of ordinary people shared the halls where crooked officials, drug kingpins and human traffickers are brought to justice. They included bricklayers, construction workers, dishwashers and waitresses, all snared by agents after crossing the Rio Grande illegally.
The immigrants, in the same rumpled clothing they wore when arrested, were escorted up to the judge's bench in groups of 18 or 20. After a Border Patrol officer read a charge that applied to the entire group, each immigrant called out ''Culpable' — the Spanish word for guilty.
Limited legal resources
The judge repeatedly warned the immigrants — some of whom had been detained up to 10 times but not charged — that an arrest for a second offense could result in a more serious felony charge and a longer jail sentence.
''This whole thing about them catching you and sending you back isn't going to happen anymore,' the magistrate warned.
During one morning session, it took about three hours for 79 immigrants to make their first appearance before the magistrate, plead guilty and receive sentences ranging from time served to 45 days in jail. Most of them pleaded to illegal entry, a misdemeanor.
''If you ask me, they don't come over here to commit crimes,' said Francisco Valcarcel, an assistant federal public defender who represented most of the immigrants in the session. ''I don't think this should be an enforcement priority. Families are being torn apart.'
The immigrants are being detained crossing the border or are caught elsewhere in the Laredo area.
At the U.S. District Clerk's office in Laredo, deputy clerk Ben Mendoza said the magistrate's docket has doubled since Streamline began. ''I'm getting calls constantly from families about where their relatives are being held,' Mendoza said.
Arthur Thomas, deputy U.S. marshal in Laredo, said beds in Laredo jails are full, forcing immigrants to be sent as far away as Waco and East Texas.
Kathleen Walker, an El Paso immigration attorney and president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the zero-tolerance operation and the limited legal representation available to immigrants denies them due process, especially those with potential claims of asylum or U.S. citizenship.
''We are throwing away the Constitution for expediency, and we're reducing our security by not prosecuting crimes that deserve more attention, felonies like narcotic and human trafficking,' she said, referring to the crowded magistrate's docket.
But many applaud the new emphasis on enforcement at the nation's busiest inland port.
''We're pleased because basically they're enforcing the law,' said Louise Whiteford, president of the Houston-based Texans For Immigration Reform. ''It's long overdue.'
Border Patrol officials in Laredo say it is too early to gauge the operation's effectiveness and declined a request for conviction statistics.
Laredo is the third Border Patrol sector on the Southwest border to implement zero-tolerance, and so far it is under way only in the metropolitan areas of Laredo.
Ramon Rivera, an assistant Border Patrol Chief at agency headquarters in Washington D.C., said the program will be assessed in a couple of months after the number of apprehensions is compared to the same period last year.
In the Yuma sector in Arizona, Operation Streamline eventually resulted in a 68 percent reduction in apprehensions between fiscal years 2006 and 2007, and during the same period the Del Rio sector registered a 46 percent decline, Rivera said.
Hoping word spreads
During a tour of the river front last week, the challenges of enforcement were evident. Squads of Border Patrol agents, guided by surveillance cameras on observation towers, played a cat-and-mouse game with small groups of immigrants crossing the Rio Grande. After reaching the Texas side, the immigrants hid in impenetrable stands of cane lining the riverbank for miles, waiting to walk into adjoining neighborhoods and jump into a smuggler's car.
''If you were going to completely shut it down, you'd have to establish some kind of buffer, 100 or 200 yards from the river, and clear it all,' said Border Patrol supervisor Jesus Chan. ''But that's not going to happen.'
Instead, they hope immigrants like Sylvia Licona Garcia will warn their friends about the new mandatory jail time. She was one of 70 immigrants, some from as far away as Kosovo and Sri Lanka, who were in holding cells last week at the Border Patrol's north Laredo station.
Heard, but didn't believe it
Licona, a 21-year-old Veracruz native, said she heard about the operation before arranging for human traffickers to transport her to Houston. The price was $1,500, and another $1,000 for a flight from Houston to Washington state where she planned to rejoin her husband.
''I heard about it, but I didn't believe it,' said Licona, as she awaited deportation at the detention area inside the station. ''But now, after being locked up in jail for two days, I believe it.'
After swimming the Rio Grande, she and two friends were picked up by smugglers. They left Laredo and drove toward San Antonio. They were quickly stopped, but the smugglers jumped from the moving car, which crashed.
In the same holding area was Jaime Pinto Aguilar, a 38-year-old Nuevo Laredo man who waded the Rio Grande on Nov. 11. Pinto, who has a college degree in international commerce, said he had been unable to find a job for the past four months.
''I told my wife I had to go,' he said. 'Christmas is coming, and I'm not going to leave my children without anything, and there were bills.'
Instead of finding a job washing dishes in a Laredo restaurant relatives told him about, Pinto spent four days in jail.
''I will not come back illegally, not for anything in the world,' Pinto said. ''I was in jail with a bunch of felons.'
Pinto's wife, his mother and sister Anna Maria Pinto watched him receive his sentence in court.
They were elated when he returned home Thursday, and predicted news of the crackdown will spread in Mexico. But they were not sure of its effect on the flow of illegal immigration.
''People will hear of these cases, but in this community every day people are crossing,' said Anna Maria Pinto. ''Immigrants are trying to get across to live the American dream, to find a job, to build a better life. But the consequences are very grave.'
---------------------------------------------
Why do they always say "They are tearing families apart"? We didn't bring them here and then decide to keep part of a family. This is a self imposed sentence. Their actions earned it.
Try this, if I robbed a bank with my family and my son was shot, could I complain that it wasn't fair? Or would it be all my fault to begin with because of my original act? In criminal law they have what they call Felony Murder. This is a murder which happened because of someones criminal act. If you robbed a store and shot the clerk and they died, that would be felony murder. Another example is if you and a friend commit robbery and a guard shot your friend and he dies, you would be charged with felony murder.
What I am trying to show and explain here is that if these Illegal Immigrants suffer punishment or another loss due to their original crime, why is any of it our fault? It isn't. No more is it your fault that someone robs your bank where you put your money. If you do believe it is our fault that Illegal Immigration exists I am betting you believe women get raped for wearing sexy clothes.
Another recent story I heard is about a Visa Overstay which is now getting deported. Many are upset, but do not know the law. If this nurse had left the United States and went home, she and her family could have renewed their Visa's, but instead ignored the law and stayed here Illegally. I am not sorry for people who do not play by the rules. I am seeing this as the same as hiding in a movie theatre to see the next show free. As a matter of fact, the Visa Overstay is far worse than cheating a movie theatre, for they cheat all of us citizens.
Our local labor market is still overrun with Illegal Immigrants. However an interesting event recently happened. Our local major employers were unable to bring in any H2B Visa workers. Since that had happened, many there screamed that they were not going to fill the jobs and all hell would break loose. It didn't happen, as a matter of fact, they got swamped with applicants who all were locals. In addition to that, the jobs which only paid $8.00 an hour now has gone up to $10.00 an hour, and is rumored to rise as high as $12.00 an hour.
So, in the absence of the non-citizens, the wages have climbed and many citizens now have jobs. Another interesting aspect of this is that H2B Visa workers are supposed to be paid the prevailing wages of the jobs they are doing (which they were not) and only brought in to fill jobs which there were no, I repeat, NO citizens which would take the jobs.
I am amazed by the fact Americans are fighting to get these jobs that many in the media and or government say Americans "Will Not Do!"
So where is the truth? I think it is what I have seen with my own eyes. We have been lied to. Point blank and boldfaced LIES.
It really is this simple, if we remove Illegal Immigrants and their cheap labor, the same would happen nationwide. Wages would rise, jobs would get filled, and the American People would see the benefit and truth of true Immigration Enforcement. We all would be doing better.
Here is the story which got me going on this.
----------------------------------------------
Border Patrol goes zero tolerance End of 'catch and release' strains courts and jails, but proponents applaud effort
By James Pinkerton
The Houston Chronicle,
November 20, 2007 http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/5315873.html
Laredo -- After pleading guilty to entering the country illegally, the Mexican immigrant from Veracruz told a federal judge here last week he came to the U.S. to earn money to pay for his mother's funeral.
''It doesn't matter if you're trying to pay off funeral expenses, or take care of a sick family member,' explained U.S. Magistrate Diana Saldaña, referring to the plight of another immigrant. ''When you cross the Rio Grande, you're going to be spending time in prison if the Border Patrol finds you — that's the bottom line.'
The frank courtroom exchange has become a daily occurrence since Oct. 30, when the Border Patrol launched Operation Streamline-Laredo, a zero-tolerance campaign that prosecutes, jails and deports nearly every adult illegal immigrant that border agents catch.
The controversial operation has jammed local jails to capacity, strained the staff of the federal public defender's office and sparked charges that immigrants' due process rights are being violated. But it has been applauded by those favoring strict enforcement of immigration laws.
Before the crackdown, agents with the Laredo patrol sector routinely allowed illegal immigrants from Mexico to return home voluntarily. And a lack of detention space resulted in a ''catch-and-release' policy that allowed non-Mexican illegal immigrants to post bond pending a hearing, but few showed up for their court dates.
But at the Laredo federal courthouse last week, a mere two weeks after the program began, scores of ordinary people shared the halls where crooked officials, drug kingpins and human traffickers are brought to justice. They included bricklayers, construction workers, dishwashers and waitresses, all snared by agents after crossing the Rio Grande illegally.
The immigrants, in the same rumpled clothing they wore when arrested, were escorted up to the judge's bench in groups of 18 or 20. After a Border Patrol officer read a charge that applied to the entire group, each immigrant called out ''Culpable' — the Spanish word for guilty.
Limited legal resources
The judge repeatedly warned the immigrants — some of whom had been detained up to 10 times but not charged — that an arrest for a second offense could result in a more serious felony charge and a longer jail sentence.
''This whole thing about them catching you and sending you back isn't going to happen anymore,' the magistrate warned.
During one morning session, it took about three hours for 79 immigrants to make their first appearance before the magistrate, plead guilty and receive sentences ranging from time served to 45 days in jail. Most of them pleaded to illegal entry, a misdemeanor.
''If you ask me, they don't come over here to commit crimes,' said Francisco Valcarcel, an assistant federal public defender who represented most of the immigrants in the session. ''I don't think this should be an enforcement priority. Families are being torn apart.'
The immigrants are being detained crossing the border or are caught elsewhere in the Laredo area.
At the U.S. District Clerk's office in Laredo, deputy clerk Ben Mendoza said the magistrate's docket has doubled since Streamline began. ''I'm getting calls constantly from families about where their relatives are being held,' Mendoza said.
Arthur Thomas, deputy U.S. marshal in Laredo, said beds in Laredo jails are full, forcing immigrants to be sent as far away as Waco and East Texas.
Kathleen Walker, an El Paso immigration attorney and president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the zero-tolerance operation and the limited legal representation available to immigrants denies them due process, especially those with potential claims of asylum or U.S. citizenship.
''We are throwing away the Constitution for expediency, and we're reducing our security by not prosecuting crimes that deserve more attention, felonies like narcotic and human trafficking,' she said, referring to the crowded magistrate's docket.
But many applaud the new emphasis on enforcement at the nation's busiest inland port.
''We're pleased because basically they're enforcing the law,' said Louise Whiteford, president of the Houston-based Texans For Immigration Reform. ''It's long overdue.'
Border Patrol officials in Laredo say it is too early to gauge the operation's effectiveness and declined a request for conviction statistics.
Laredo is the third Border Patrol sector on the Southwest border to implement zero-tolerance, and so far it is under way only in the metropolitan areas of Laredo.
Ramon Rivera, an assistant Border Patrol Chief at agency headquarters in Washington D.C., said the program will be assessed in a couple of months after the number of apprehensions is compared to the same period last year.
In the Yuma sector in Arizona, Operation Streamline eventually resulted in a 68 percent reduction in apprehensions between fiscal years 2006 and 2007, and during the same period the Del Rio sector registered a 46 percent decline, Rivera said.
Hoping word spreads
During a tour of the river front last week, the challenges of enforcement were evident. Squads of Border Patrol agents, guided by surveillance cameras on observation towers, played a cat-and-mouse game with small groups of immigrants crossing the Rio Grande. After reaching the Texas side, the immigrants hid in impenetrable stands of cane lining the riverbank for miles, waiting to walk into adjoining neighborhoods and jump into a smuggler's car.
''If you were going to completely shut it down, you'd have to establish some kind of buffer, 100 or 200 yards from the river, and clear it all,' said Border Patrol supervisor Jesus Chan. ''But that's not going to happen.'
Instead, they hope immigrants like Sylvia Licona Garcia will warn their friends about the new mandatory jail time. She was one of 70 immigrants, some from as far away as Kosovo and Sri Lanka, who were in holding cells last week at the Border Patrol's north Laredo station.
Heard, but didn't believe it
Licona, a 21-year-old Veracruz native, said she heard about the operation before arranging for human traffickers to transport her to Houston. The price was $1,500, and another $1,000 for a flight from Houston to Washington state where she planned to rejoin her husband.
''I heard about it, but I didn't believe it,' said Licona, as she awaited deportation at the detention area inside the station. ''But now, after being locked up in jail for two days, I believe it.'
After swimming the Rio Grande, she and two friends were picked up by smugglers. They left Laredo and drove toward San Antonio. They were quickly stopped, but the smugglers jumped from the moving car, which crashed.
In the same holding area was Jaime Pinto Aguilar, a 38-year-old Nuevo Laredo man who waded the Rio Grande on Nov. 11. Pinto, who has a college degree in international commerce, said he had been unable to find a job for the past four months.
''I told my wife I had to go,' he said. 'Christmas is coming, and I'm not going to leave my children without anything, and there were bills.'
Instead of finding a job washing dishes in a Laredo restaurant relatives told him about, Pinto spent four days in jail.
''I will not come back illegally, not for anything in the world,' Pinto said. ''I was in jail with a bunch of felons.'
Pinto's wife, his mother and sister Anna Maria Pinto watched him receive his sentence in court.
They were elated when he returned home Thursday, and predicted news of the crackdown will spread in Mexico. But they were not sure of its effect on the flow of illegal immigration.
''People will hear of these cases, but in this community every day people are crossing,' said Anna Maria Pinto. ''Immigrants are trying to get across to live the American dream, to find a job, to build a better life. But the consequences are very grave.'
---------------------------------------------
Why do they always say "They are tearing families apart"? We didn't bring them here and then decide to keep part of a family. This is a self imposed sentence. Their actions earned it.
Try this, if I robbed a bank with my family and my son was shot, could I complain that it wasn't fair? Or would it be all my fault to begin with because of my original act? In criminal law they have what they call Felony Murder. This is a murder which happened because of someones criminal act. If you robbed a store and shot the clerk and they died, that would be felony murder. Another example is if you and a friend commit robbery and a guard shot your friend and he dies, you would be charged with felony murder.
What I am trying to show and explain here is that if these Illegal Immigrants suffer punishment or another loss due to their original crime, why is any of it our fault? It isn't. No more is it your fault that someone robs your bank where you put your money. If you do believe it is our fault that Illegal Immigration exists I am betting you believe women get raped for wearing sexy clothes.
Another recent story I heard is about a Visa Overstay which is now getting deported. Many are upset, but do not know the law. If this nurse had left the United States and went home, she and her family could have renewed their Visa's, but instead ignored the law and stayed here Illegally. I am not sorry for people who do not play by the rules. I am seeing this as the same as hiding in a movie theatre to see the next show free. As a matter of fact, the Visa Overstay is far worse than cheating a movie theatre, for they cheat all of us citizens.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Why do we not arm our teachers and school workers?
Arm and Protect our Schools!
If you have read my remarks here, you know I am a supporter of Self Defense and the 2nd Amendment. I believe what we can do to counter school shootings at all schools is to begin training and arming teachers. In Colleges, allow students whom have their Concealed Weapons Permits to carry their arms should they choose to.
We already believe in these people enough to trust them with our children 5 days a week. Do we have so little faith in these people to not allow them the option of protecting our children beyond locking the doors to their classrooms and turning off the lights?
I admit this shouldn't be a Cart Blanche arming of people. I have no problem having additional standards set to qualify a teacher or school staff. Maybe psychological evaluation, meeting a set period of time in the position, and extensive training.
We have schools all over the United States which train our Law Enforcement, Military, and Federal Agents which could quickly create a program to suit our schools.
Now, I know most people see all college students as being extras in the background of movies like Animal House. The truth of the matter is those students which go out to pursue a Concealed Weapons Permit are already outside of your norm. In many states, the age requirements already make it so only SOTA's (Students Older Than Average) are even able to get their permits. Many of these students are former military. Others have already been working in the real world and have shown they are not criminals. They have, if they found it necessary, experimented with whatever vices that most students are only now discovering.
We have to remember that a vigorous background check is performed on all applicants. Since I was 14, I have been having different background checks run on me. Many jobs I had when younger required passing the background check before an offer of employment could even be extended. Between many state agencies, the federal government, and private groups, my background has been checked regularly. I am sure that I am not alone in that. Many of my friends also have done this. Some even have such high levels of secret clearance that the DSS and Secret Service have done their backgrounds. Why would our Military and Government trust these people on such a protected level that a college would see them as untrustworthy?
The whole fact of the matter is that once you remove these Gun Free Zone laws, or as I refer to them, Murder Freely Zones, that knowledge alone will make a criminal shooter think twice before going to a school and attempting killings. Criminals seek easy targets. If this wasn't true, why do they seek out seniors to rob? If force wasn't a deterrent, Fort Knox would have been overrun and emptied years ago.
Do we need more shootings like Virgina Tech, Bailey Colorado, Red Lake Minnesota, and Columbine Colorado to learn this lesson?
Do the right thing. Arm our teachers. If you want a real time case study on this, look to Utah. They allow their teachers to carry, and on colleges, students with permits. When was the last time you heard of a school shooting there?
If you have read my remarks here, you know I am a supporter of Self Defense and the 2nd Amendment. I believe what we can do to counter school shootings at all schools is to begin training and arming teachers. In Colleges, allow students whom have their Concealed Weapons Permits to carry their arms should they choose to.
We already believe in these people enough to trust them with our children 5 days a week. Do we have so little faith in these people to not allow them the option of protecting our children beyond locking the doors to their classrooms and turning off the lights?
I admit this shouldn't be a Cart Blanche arming of people. I have no problem having additional standards set to qualify a teacher or school staff. Maybe psychological evaluation, meeting a set period of time in the position, and extensive training.
We have schools all over the United States which train our Law Enforcement, Military, and Federal Agents which could quickly create a program to suit our schools.
Now, I know most people see all college students as being extras in the background of movies like Animal House. The truth of the matter is those students which go out to pursue a Concealed Weapons Permit are already outside of your norm. In many states, the age requirements already make it so only SOTA's (Students Older Than Average) are even able to get their permits. Many of these students are former military. Others have already been working in the real world and have shown they are not criminals. They have, if they found it necessary, experimented with whatever vices that most students are only now discovering.
We have to remember that a vigorous background check is performed on all applicants. Since I was 14, I have been having different background checks run on me. Many jobs I had when younger required passing the background check before an offer of employment could even be extended. Between many state agencies, the federal government, and private groups, my background has been checked regularly. I am sure that I am not alone in that. Many of my friends also have done this. Some even have such high levels of secret clearance that the DSS and Secret Service have done their backgrounds. Why would our Military and Government trust these people on such a protected level that a college would see them as untrustworthy?
The whole fact of the matter is that once you remove these Gun Free Zone laws, or as I refer to them, Murder Freely Zones, that knowledge alone will make a criminal shooter think twice before going to a school and attempting killings. Criminals seek easy targets. If this wasn't true, why do they seek out seniors to rob? If force wasn't a deterrent, Fort Knox would have been overrun and emptied years ago.
Do we need more shootings like Virgina Tech, Bailey Colorado, Red Lake Minnesota, and Columbine Colorado to learn this lesson?
Do the right thing. Arm our teachers. If you want a real time case study on this, look to Utah. They allow their teachers to carry, and on colleges, students with permits. When was the last time you heard of a school shooting there?
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Someone sees Tom Tancredo for what he is...
Tancredo's Raw Truth About Terrorism
By Diana West
Friday, November 16, 2007
Somehow, it isn't fair that with illegal immigration now a defining issue of American politics, the one politician more than any other who has taught Americans to re-imagine their land as a nation with controllable borders is trailing in the GOP presidential polls. I refer, of course, to Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, whose congressional career has been guided by a once-seemingly impossible goal: to convince Americans that we had an illegal immigration problem.
This was something many Americans -- from the business community, with its addiction to cheap labor, to the great middle class, with its addiction to cheap childcare and household help -- all too readily denied.
If convincing people we had an illegal immigration crisis wasn't hard enough, he also had to persuade people there was a solution to this problem of porous borders that 10 or 20 million mainly Spanish-speaking illegal aliens had crossed -- and are still crossing. What are you gonna do, his detractors would say, build a fence?
Well, yes. That was one idea. And while that fence has yet to be built, it has been voted into law and signed by the president (despite his open-border self). In the course of the debate, Tancredo has helped many Americans once again think of the United States as a sovereign nation, not a honey pot -- a worthy testament to a congressional career that he will be bringing to an end by not seeking re-election.
But what about Tancredo's presidential campaign? This week, he debuted a new TV commercial challenging voters, as well as his fellow candidates, to link the illegal alien issue to the national security threat of jihadist terrorism. And despite this being the age of jihadist terrorism, Tancredo's TV spot is a first. It highlights the fact that our borders are open to more than just cheap labor by depicting the ease with which a terrorist enters a shopping mall -- like other terrorists entered the London Underground, the Spanish trains, a school in Russia -- to deposit a backpack-bomb that explodes at the end of the commercial. The message is refreshingly direct: "Tancredo. Before it's too late."
Yes, there is something surreal about the commercial, but not because of the content. What is surreal is the hysteria that has greeted it. After 9/11, 3/11, 7/7, Amman, Amsterdam, Baghdad, Bali, Beslan, Davao, Hadera, Haifa, Jakarta, Jerusalem, Nairobi, New Dehli, Sharm al-Sheik, Tel Aviv, Tunisia and more, what dolt doesn't wonder if and when jihadist cowards will attack our own trains, markets, hotels and restaurants? Tom Tancredo has only taken the mature and responsible course -- not coincidentally, also the politically incorrect course -- by raising this deadly serious issue with the American people. But for this he is castigated as a "fear-monger."
Indeed, as if on cue, the Tancredo-hostile Denver Post editorialized: "New Tancredo ad is a sad case of fear-mongering," adding that Tancredo had "reached a new low -- if that's possible."
"Is Tom Tancredo Too `Tough on Terror'?" blogged the Washington Post. Conclusion to reach: Way too tough.
The Los Angeles Times quoted one Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, who described the Tancredo commercial as "an incredibly fear-based kind of advertisement that some might say is trying to terrorize people into supporting his view." This is rich. Acknowledging terrorism as act of terrorism: Professor, grade yourself an "F."
Meanwhile, the Rocky Mountain News didn't claim even a shred of impartial coverage, sub-heading its report on the Tancredo commercial: "Expert says terrorism images are so blatant commercial won't work." The "expert" here was Bruce Gronbeck, a communications professor at the University of Iowa who teaches a course on politics on the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (heaven help his students). He said: "This is just blatant, raw fear images, and they've never worked in the United States, period."
"Fear-mongering." "Terrorizing people." "Blatant, raw fear images." The way the "experts" talk, they make it sound as if Tancredo is subjecting citizens to sick "Saw" dismemberment fantasies -- not the plain, awful reality of our tragically jihad-diminished day. Yes, our shopping malls are targets. And yes, our borders are porous. Ignoring this makes it easier to live in a world of pretend, but that's not traditionally where our best presidents have come from. Indeed, how does any credible, responsible presidential candidate ignore the potential connection between shopping-mall targets and porous borders?
Answer: At this nation's politically correct peril.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DianaWest/2007/11/16/tancredos_raw_truth_about_terrorism
By Diana West
Friday, November 16, 2007
Somehow, it isn't fair that with illegal immigration now a defining issue of American politics, the one politician more than any other who has taught Americans to re-imagine their land as a nation with controllable borders is trailing in the GOP presidential polls. I refer, of course, to Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, whose congressional career has been guided by a once-seemingly impossible goal: to convince Americans that we had an illegal immigration problem.
This was something many Americans -- from the business community, with its addiction to cheap labor, to the great middle class, with its addiction to cheap childcare and household help -- all too readily denied.
If convincing people we had an illegal immigration crisis wasn't hard enough, he also had to persuade people there was a solution to this problem of porous borders that 10 or 20 million mainly Spanish-speaking illegal aliens had crossed -- and are still crossing. What are you gonna do, his detractors would say, build a fence?
Well, yes. That was one idea. And while that fence has yet to be built, it has been voted into law and signed by the president (despite his open-border self). In the course of the debate, Tancredo has helped many Americans once again think of the United States as a sovereign nation, not a honey pot -- a worthy testament to a congressional career that he will be bringing to an end by not seeking re-election.
But what about Tancredo's presidential campaign? This week, he debuted a new TV commercial challenging voters, as well as his fellow candidates, to link the illegal alien issue to the national security threat of jihadist terrorism. And despite this being the age of jihadist terrorism, Tancredo's TV spot is a first. It highlights the fact that our borders are open to more than just cheap labor by depicting the ease with which a terrorist enters a shopping mall -- like other terrorists entered the London Underground, the Spanish trains, a school in Russia -- to deposit a backpack-bomb that explodes at the end of the commercial. The message is refreshingly direct: "Tancredo. Before it's too late."
Yes, there is something surreal about the commercial, but not because of the content. What is surreal is the hysteria that has greeted it. After 9/11, 3/11, 7/7, Amman, Amsterdam, Baghdad, Bali, Beslan, Davao, Hadera, Haifa, Jakarta, Jerusalem, Nairobi, New Dehli, Sharm al-Sheik, Tel Aviv, Tunisia and more, what dolt doesn't wonder if and when jihadist cowards will attack our own trains, markets, hotels and restaurants? Tom Tancredo has only taken the mature and responsible course -- not coincidentally, also the politically incorrect course -- by raising this deadly serious issue with the American people. But for this he is castigated as a "fear-monger."
Indeed, as if on cue, the Tancredo-hostile Denver Post editorialized: "New Tancredo ad is a sad case of fear-mongering," adding that Tancredo had "reached a new low -- if that's possible."
"Is Tom Tancredo Too `Tough on Terror'?" blogged the Washington Post. Conclusion to reach: Way too tough.
The Los Angeles Times quoted one Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, who described the Tancredo commercial as "an incredibly fear-based kind of advertisement that some might say is trying to terrorize people into supporting his view." This is rich. Acknowledging terrorism as act of terrorism: Professor, grade yourself an "F."
Meanwhile, the Rocky Mountain News didn't claim even a shred of impartial coverage, sub-heading its report on the Tancredo commercial: "Expert says terrorism images are so blatant commercial won't work." The "expert" here was Bruce Gronbeck, a communications professor at the University of Iowa who teaches a course on politics on the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (heaven help his students). He said: "This is just blatant, raw fear images, and they've never worked in the United States, period."
"Fear-mongering." "Terrorizing people." "Blatant, raw fear images." The way the "experts" talk, they make it sound as if Tancredo is subjecting citizens to sick "Saw" dismemberment fantasies -- not the plain, awful reality of our tragically jihad-diminished day. Yes, our shopping malls are targets. And yes, our borders are porous. Ignoring this makes it easier to live in a world of pretend, but that's not traditionally where our best presidents have come from. Indeed, how does any credible, responsible presidential candidate ignore the potential connection between shopping-mall targets and porous borders?
Answer: At this nation's politically correct peril.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/DianaWest/2007/11/16/tancredos_raw_truth_about_terrorism
But they are good people trying to improve their life...
If this suprises you, read prior story in this blog and also go to http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf
It isn't a question of whether or not Illegal Immigration is bad for our National Security because the proof is already here. Unless we control this and remove Illegals NOW, we will have a massive Fifth Column Group or groups within our borders which cares nothing about our way of life, our government, or you and your family.
-----------------------------------------------------
Lawmen under siege along Mexico border
By Jerry Seper
The Washington Times,
November 15, 2007
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071115/NATION/111150077/1002
Alien and drug smugglers along the U.S.-Mexico border have spawned a rise in violence against federal, state and local law-enforcement authorities, who say they are outmanned and outgunned.
'They've got weapons, high-tech radios, computers, cell phones, Global Positioning Systems, spotters and can react faster than we are able to,' said Shawn P. Moran, a 10-year U.S. Border Patrol veteran who serves as vice president of the National Border Patrol Council Local 1613 in San Diego.
'And they have no hesitancy to attack the agents on the line, with anything from assault rifles and improvised Molotov cocktails to rocks, concrete slabs and bottles,' he said. 'There are so many agent 'rockings' that few are even reported anymore. If we wrote them all up, that's all we would be doing.'
Assaults against Border Patrol agents have more than doubled over the past two years, many by Mexico-based alien and drug gangs more inclined than ever to use violence as a means of ensuring success in the smuggling of people and contraband.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff acknowledges that although the department has begun to make progress against 'the criminals and thugs' operating along the U.S.-Mexico border, 'we are beginning to see more violence in some border communities and against our Border Patrol agents as these traffickers ... seek to protect their turf.
'We must provide the manpower and resources they need to carry out their duties, and we are working hard to make sure they get them,' Mr. Chertoff said during a speech in Houston this month.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the investigative arm of Homeland Security, stated in a report earlier this year that border gangs were becoming increasingly ruthless — targeting rivals, along with federal, state and local police. ICE described violence on the border as rising dramatically over the past three years in what it called 'an unprecedented surge.'
But many agents think they are viewed as 'expendable' by the managers within Homeland Security and the Border Patrol. They say that while the number of agents overall has increased dramatically over the past year, the actual number of line agents has not seen a corresponding jump.
Several noted that one six-mile section of border near San Diego, regarded as one of the most dangerous alien- and drug-smuggling corridors in the country, previously was assigned as many as 50 agents, but has been expanded to 13 miles and has one agent posted for each mile.
'That kind of situation is becoming increasingly common,' Mr. Moran said. 'The status quo is unacceptable. Agents are being assaulted four to five times per shift. Ironically, the region has often been touted as the cornerstone of Operation Gatekeeper. Well, the cornerstone is crumbling and if changes don't happen soon, we will lose an agent.'
Operation Gatekeeper was a Clinton-era security initiative that put 300 agents on the U.S.-Mexico border near San Diego, along with more fencing and lighting. It was based on a similar program in El Paso, Texas, where agents were stationed within sight of one another at main crossing points in order to form a human wall.
'Where are all these new agents they say they're hiring?' Mr. Moran asked. 'It's hard to believe that Mr. Chertoff means it when he says his job is to provide the manpower and resources the agents need to carry out their duties, to give them the means to protect themselves against violence from criminal traffickers.'
Mr. Moran noted that many agents are being assigned to 'non-border activities,' including jobs at Border Patrol headquarters in Washington. He said the agency's headquarters soon may be the largest regional office in the entire Border Patrol, 'assigned the task of telling the public what a good job we're doing.'
Several agents noted that many of the alien- and drug-smuggling gangs targeting law-enforcement authorities are doing so with sophisticated weaponry. They noted that in February, an ICE-led task force seized two completed improvised explosive devices, materials for making 33 more devices, 300 primers, 1,280 rounds of ammunition, five grenades, nine pipes with end caps, 26 grenade triggers, 31 grenade spoons, 40 grenade pins, 19 black powder casings, a silencer and cash during raids in Laredo, Texas.
'Keeping explosives and other high-powered weaponry out of the hands of violent criminal organizations is a central focus of the new Border Enforcement Security Task Force in Laredo,' Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Julie L. Myers, who heads ICE, said in announcing the seizures. 'ICE is working day and night with its task force partners to stem the tide of violence that has been ravaging border communities in south Texas.'
--------------------------------------------
So, watch this story and realize that until many Border Patrol, ICE, and our other Law Enforcement Officers are killed will any Liberal Left Media pick this story up, and I will bet they blame this on not making Mexico a State.
Close the border, arm our guys with better firepower and the option to shoot first.
It isn't a question of whether or not Illegal Immigration is bad for our National Security because the proof is already here. Unless we control this and remove Illegals NOW, we will have a massive Fifth Column Group or groups within our borders which cares nothing about our way of life, our government, or you and your family.
-----------------------------------------------------
Lawmen under siege along Mexico border
By Jerry Seper
The Washington Times,
November 15, 2007
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071115/NATION/111150077/1002
Alien and drug smugglers along the U.S.-Mexico border have spawned a rise in violence against federal, state and local law-enforcement authorities, who say they are outmanned and outgunned.
'They've got weapons, high-tech radios, computers, cell phones, Global Positioning Systems, spotters and can react faster than we are able to,' said Shawn P. Moran, a 10-year U.S. Border Patrol veteran who serves as vice president of the National Border Patrol Council Local 1613 in San Diego.
'And they have no hesitancy to attack the agents on the line, with anything from assault rifles and improvised Molotov cocktails to rocks, concrete slabs and bottles,' he said. 'There are so many agent 'rockings' that few are even reported anymore. If we wrote them all up, that's all we would be doing.'
Assaults against Border Patrol agents have more than doubled over the past two years, many by Mexico-based alien and drug gangs more inclined than ever to use violence as a means of ensuring success in the smuggling of people and contraband.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff acknowledges that although the department has begun to make progress against 'the criminals and thugs' operating along the U.S.-Mexico border, 'we are beginning to see more violence in some border communities and against our Border Patrol agents as these traffickers ... seek to protect their turf.
'We must provide the manpower and resources they need to carry out their duties, and we are working hard to make sure they get them,' Mr. Chertoff said during a speech in Houston this month.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the investigative arm of Homeland Security, stated in a report earlier this year that border gangs were becoming increasingly ruthless — targeting rivals, along with federal, state and local police. ICE described violence on the border as rising dramatically over the past three years in what it called 'an unprecedented surge.'
But many agents think they are viewed as 'expendable' by the managers within Homeland Security and the Border Patrol. They say that while the number of agents overall has increased dramatically over the past year, the actual number of line agents has not seen a corresponding jump.
Several noted that one six-mile section of border near San Diego, regarded as one of the most dangerous alien- and drug-smuggling corridors in the country, previously was assigned as many as 50 agents, but has been expanded to 13 miles and has one agent posted for each mile.
'That kind of situation is becoming increasingly common,' Mr. Moran said. 'The status quo is unacceptable. Agents are being assaulted four to five times per shift. Ironically, the region has often been touted as the cornerstone of Operation Gatekeeper. Well, the cornerstone is crumbling and if changes don't happen soon, we will lose an agent.'
Operation Gatekeeper was a Clinton-era security initiative that put 300 agents on the U.S.-Mexico border near San Diego, along with more fencing and lighting. It was based on a similar program in El Paso, Texas, where agents were stationed within sight of one another at main crossing points in order to form a human wall.
'Where are all these new agents they say they're hiring?' Mr. Moran asked. 'It's hard to believe that Mr. Chertoff means it when he says his job is to provide the manpower and resources the agents need to carry out their duties, to give them the means to protect themselves against violence from criminal traffickers.'
Mr. Moran noted that many agents are being assigned to 'non-border activities,' including jobs at Border Patrol headquarters in Washington. He said the agency's headquarters soon may be the largest regional office in the entire Border Patrol, 'assigned the task of telling the public what a good job we're doing.'
Several agents noted that many of the alien- and drug-smuggling gangs targeting law-enforcement authorities are doing so with sophisticated weaponry. They noted that in February, an ICE-led task force seized two completed improvised explosive devices, materials for making 33 more devices, 300 primers, 1,280 rounds of ammunition, five grenades, nine pipes with end caps, 26 grenade triggers, 31 grenade spoons, 40 grenade pins, 19 black powder casings, a silencer and cash during raids in Laredo, Texas.
'Keeping explosives and other high-powered weaponry out of the hands of violent criminal organizations is a central focus of the new Border Enforcement Security Task Force in Laredo,' Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Julie L. Myers, who heads ICE, said in announcing the seizures. 'ICE is working day and night with its task force partners to stem the tide of violence that has been ravaging border communities in south Texas.'
--------------------------------------------
So, watch this story and realize that until many Border Patrol, ICE, and our other Law Enforcement Officers are killed will any Liberal Left Media pick this story up, and I will bet they blame this on not making Mexico a State.
Close the border, arm our guys with better firepower and the option to shoot first.
But the Democrats said it first?!?!?
So as you read the following article, you will see the L.A. Times decry Tom Tancredo for saying we have Muslim Radicals in our country, but I will show you where he got his information, and it was from the Democrats.
Maybe someday the Liberal Left Media will actually report the truth...
-----------------------------------------------------
Tancredo campaign ad sets off bomb
By James Rainey
Los Angeles Times,
November 13, 2007
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-tancredo13nov13,1,4500509.story
Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo on Monday unveiled a television ad depicting a hooded terrorist detonating a bomb inside a shopping mall, a message the Colorado congressman said he hoped would vault illegal immigration to its rightful place at the center of the campaign.
Critics accused Tancredo of fear-mongering.
The 30-second spot, which began airing on cable television in Iowa, casts Tancredo as the only candidate brave enough to buck political convention and discuss the true threat of immigration -- terrorists crossing into the U.S. To view the ad, click here. http://teamtancredo.org/
It ends with the image of a backpack abandoned in a crowded mall, a black screen and the sound of a loud explosion. An on-screen message declares: 'Tancredo . . . before it's too late.'
Tancredo, who has lagged in a large primary field, introduced the ad and an accompanying radio spot in Des Moines. Iowa is to hold its first-in-the-nation caucuses Jan. 3.
'The consequences of uncontrolled immigration are far more serious than our leaders want us to believe,' the candidate said in a prepared statement. 'The safety of Americans and the security of our way of life are on the line.'
Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, called the Tancredo spot 'an incredibly fear-based kind of advertisement that some might say is trying to terrorize people into supporting his view.'
Goldford said the commercial's culminating explosion evoked memories of a 1964 ad by President Johnson that used a little girl plucking petals from a daisy and a mushroom cloud to suggest that Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, the Republican presidential candidate, would set off a nuclear war. To see the famous daisy ad and an archive of presidential campaign ads from the beginning of television, click here. http://livingroomcandidate.movingimage.us/index.php
The new ad says Tancredo would protect Americans from 'jihadists who froth with hate.' An immigration activist says it's Tancredo 'frothing with hate.'
'I think this is political pandering at its worst,' said spokeswoman Clarissa Martinez of the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which backed a congressional compromise that would have allowed some illegal immigrants to gain citizenship. 'Unfortunately, we may see more ads like this in 2008.'
Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, declined to comment on the ad because the nonprofit is not supposed to engage in political advocacy. But his organization has voiced some of the same concerns as Tancredo. 'FAIR has been saying for a long time you can't have the border open only to allow gardeners and busboys into this country and not expect terrorists to take advantage,' Mehlman said Monday.
The Tancredo ad begins with the image of a gloved hand jamming a bomb into a backpack. Then it follows a hooded figure, whose face cannot be seen, strolling through a mall as a narrator decries '20 million aliens who have come to take our jobs' and 'Islamic terrorists [who] now freely roam U.S. soil.'
Footage of bombed-out trains and a boy bloodied in an overseas terrorist attack follow, then pictures of shoppers and a woman pushing a stroller through an airy mall. As the hooded figure leaves the backpack beside a bench and walks away, the narrator announces: 'The price we pay for spineless politicians who refuse to defend our borders against those who come to kill.' Then the explosion sounds.
The ad appears to play off a report last week that Al Qaeda might target shopping malls in Los Angeles and Chicago this holiday season. Counter-terrorism officials have downplayed the warning, saying it was based on an uncorroborated report from a foreign intelligence source.
Tancredo spokesman Alan Moore said the ad will air next in New Hampshire and then nationally, although he did not provide details on how widely the cash-strapped campaign can afford to place the spots.
When candidates last reported on their finances at the end of September, Tancredo had $110,079 on hand. That would seem to limit use of the ad, titled 'Tough on Terror.'
In an accompanying radio spot, the congressman promises to 'prosecute those who provide sanctuary to anyone who would harm us, deport all those who do not belong here, and put the military on the border if necessary.'
+++
Tancredo Ad Links Immigration to Terrorism
The Wall Street Journal Blogs,
November 13, 2007
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/11/13/tancredo-ad-links-immigration-to-terrorism/
--------------------------------------------------
Ok, here is where this information originally came from.
A Line in the Sand:Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border
PREPARED BY THE MAJORITY STAFF OF THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Chairman
http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf
I highly recommend that everyone reads this, and then shares it with everyone they know. Tom Tancredo was not the first to say this. The Majority Staff (Democrats) wrote this report.
Maybe someday the Liberal Left Media will actually report the truth...
-----------------------------------------------------
Tancredo campaign ad sets off bomb
By James Rainey
Los Angeles Times,
November 13, 2007
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-tancredo13nov13,1,4500509.story
Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo on Monday unveiled a television ad depicting a hooded terrorist detonating a bomb inside a shopping mall, a message the Colorado congressman said he hoped would vault illegal immigration to its rightful place at the center of the campaign.
Critics accused Tancredo of fear-mongering.
The 30-second spot, which began airing on cable television in Iowa, casts Tancredo as the only candidate brave enough to buck political convention and discuss the true threat of immigration -- terrorists crossing into the U.S. To view the ad, click here. http://teamtancredo.org/
It ends with the image of a backpack abandoned in a crowded mall, a black screen and the sound of a loud explosion. An on-screen message declares: 'Tancredo . . . before it's too late.'
Tancredo, who has lagged in a large primary field, introduced the ad and an accompanying radio spot in Des Moines. Iowa is to hold its first-in-the-nation caucuses Jan. 3.
'The consequences of uncontrolled immigration are far more serious than our leaders want us to believe,' the candidate said in a prepared statement. 'The safety of Americans and the security of our way of life are on the line.'
Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, called the Tancredo spot 'an incredibly fear-based kind of advertisement that some might say is trying to terrorize people into supporting his view.'
Goldford said the commercial's culminating explosion evoked memories of a 1964 ad by President Johnson that used a little girl plucking petals from a daisy and a mushroom cloud to suggest that Arizona Sen. Barry Goldwater, the Republican presidential candidate, would set off a nuclear war. To see the famous daisy ad and an archive of presidential campaign ads from the beginning of television, click here. http://livingroomcandidate.movingimage.us/index.php
The new ad says Tancredo would protect Americans from 'jihadists who froth with hate.' An immigration activist says it's Tancredo 'frothing with hate.'
'I think this is political pandering at its worst,' said spokeswoman Clarissa Martinez of the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, which backed a congressional compromise that would have allowed some illegal immigrants to gain citizenship. 'Unfortunately, we may see more ads like this in 2008.'
Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, declined to comment on the ad because the nonprofit is not supposed to engage in political advocacy. But his organization has voiced some of the same concerns as Tancredo. 'FAIR has been saying for a long time you can't have the border open only to allow gardeners and busboys into this country and not expect terrorists to take advantage,' Mehlman said Monday.
The Tancredo ad begins with the image of a gloved hand jamming a bomb into a backpack. Then it follows a hooded figure, whose face cannot be seen, strolling through a mall as a narrator decries '20 million aliens who have come to take our jobs' and 'Islamic terrorists [who] now freely roam U.S. soil.'
Footage of bombed-out trains and a boy bloodied in an overseas terrorist attack follow, then pictures of shoppers and a woman pushing a stroller through an airy mall. As the hooded figure leaves the backpack beside a bench and walks away, the narrator announces: 'The price we pay for spineless politicians who refuse to defend our borders against those who come to kill.' Then the explosion sounds.
The ad appears to play off a report last week that Al Qaeda might target shopping malls in Los Angeles and Chicago this holiday season. Counter-terrorism officials have downplayed the warning, saying it was based on an uncorroborated report from a foreign intelligence source.
Tancredo spokesman Alan Moore said the ad will air next in New Hampshire and then nationally, although he did not provide details on how widely the cash-strapped campaign can afford to place the spots.
When candidates last reported on their finances at the end of September, Tancredo had $110,079 on hand. That would seem to limit use of the ad, titled 'Tough on Terror.'
In an accompanying radio spot, the congressman promises to 'prosecute those who provide sanctuary to anyone who would harm us, deport all those who do not belong here, and put the military on the border if necessary.'
+++
Tancredo Ad Links Immigration to Terrorism
The Wall Street Journal Blogs,
November 13, 2007
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/11/13/tancredo-ad-links-immigration-to-terrorism/
--------------------------------------------------
Ok, here is where this information originally came from.
A Line in the Sand:Confronting the Threat at the Southwest Border
PREPARED BY THE MAJORITY STAFF OF THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Chairman
http://www.house.gov/mccaul/pdf/Investigaions-Border-Report.pdf
I highly recommend that everyone reads this, and then shares it with everyone they know. Tom Tancredo was not the first to say this. The Majority Staff (Democrats) wrote this report.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Were they speaking English when on the floor?
I hope they pass this. An English Only law in the United States levels the field for the majority of Americans.
--------------------------------------
House Anger Over English-Only Policies Boils Over
By David Rogers
The Wall Street Journal Blogs,
November 9, 2007
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/11/09/house-anger-over-english-only-policies-boils-over/
Frustration among members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus broke into the open this morning in a rare twist: Democrats supporting a motion to adjourn the chamber their party controls.
California Rep. Joe Baca, a leader in the House caucus, set off the fireworks in protest of the Democratic leadership’s handling of a vote Thursday night related to English-only practices in the workplace. The adjournment motion failed narrowly, 204-184, with some of the protesters backing down. But the incident reflects real anger in the caucus given what many perceive as the current anti-immigrant political climate in Congress.
The collapse of immigration overhaul legislation in the Senate this summer has all but doomed efforts to address the millions of undocumented workers in the U.S. The so-called “Dream Act” to help the children of illegal aliens establish themselves in the U.S. has stalled. At the same time, there has been a steady drumbeat of proposals to increase border security funding or require greater proof of legal residency to qualify for federally supported healthcare programs.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has complained, especially of the impasse in the Senate blocking the Dream Act. But among some factions in her own party, there has been some sympathy for English-only policies that have angered Hispanic lawmakers.
At issue Thursday night was a Republican nonbinding motion supportive of language that would bar Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from taking civil action against any organization which requires its employees to speak English at work. The Senate has adopted similar language as part of a budget bill funding the EEOC, and by a 218-186 margin, with 36 Democrats joining Republicans, the House voted to instruct its negotiators to accept the Senate amendment.
Baca complained that the leadership hadn’t adequately anticipated the motion. Fourteen Democrats were absent and others, who voted with the Republicans against the EEOC, were unaware of the motion’s import. “We need better intelligence” he said.
“English-only is the only issue that unites all Hispanics,” said Rep. Jose Serrano (D., N.Y.).
-----------------------
Why is it only the Hispanics we hear from? Where are all of the other Illegals in this?
The majority of America Citizens support this and increased enforcement. It is Big Business and those who profit from the use of Illegal Labor who are supporting Illegal Immigration.
The rest of people supporting Illegal Immigration are too blind to see the truths behind the issue. If they really looked past the media spin from the left to the meat of the matter, they would want to beat those fighting for Amnesty.
Do not get me wrong, it is not just the Left which helped cause this problem. The Right is responsible too. However it is now most of the Right and some of the Left which is truly listening to their voters and taking action.
This isn't about race, unless you support Illegal Immigration. In that case all against it are racist even though my issue with all of this is the ILLEGAL issue, not skin color or anything else.
Do your research. Listen to what is actually said, what they write, and look for the truths. I admit there is some against all immigration due to racism, but I am not part of that, nor are the majority of people against illegal immigration.
It is a matter of answering this one question: Should we reward criminals for their crimes?
--------------------------------------
House Anger Over English-Only Policies Boils Over
By David Rogers
The Wall Street Journal Blogs,
November 9, 2007
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/11/09/house-anger-over-english-only-policies-boils-over/
Frustration among members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus broke into the open this morning in a rare twist: Democrats supporting a motion to adjourn the chamber their party controls.
California Rep. Joe Baca, a leader in the House caucus, set off the fireworks in protest of the Democratic leadership’s handling of a vote Thursday night related to English-only practices in the workplace. The adjournment motion failed narrowly, 204-184, with some of the protesters backing down. But the incident reflects real anger in the caucus given what many perceive as the current anti-immigrant political climate in Congress.
The collapse of immigration overhaul legislation in the Senate this summer has all but doomed efforts to address the millions of undocumented workers in the U.S. The so-called “Dream Act” to help the children of illegal aliens establish themselves in the U.S. has stalled. At the same time, there has been a steady drumbeat of proposals to increase border security funding or require greater proof of legal residency to qualify for federally supported healthcare programs.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has complained, especially of the impasse in the Senate blocking the Dream Act. But among some factions in her own party, there has been some sympathy for English-only policies that have angered Hispanic lawmakers.
At issue Thursday night was a Republican nonbinding motion supportive of language that would bar Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from taking civil action against any organization which requires its employees to speak English at work. The Senate has adopted similar language as part of a budget bill funding the EEOC, and by a 218-186 margin, with 36 Democrats joining Republicans, the House voted to instruct its negotiators to accept the Senate amendment.
Baca complained that the leadership hadn’t adequately anticipated the motion. Fourteen Democrats were absent and others, who voted with the Republicans against the EEOC, were unaware of the motion’s import. “We need better intelligence” he said.
“English-only is the only issue that unites all Hispanics,” said Rep. Jose Serrano (D., N.Y.).
-----------------------
Why is it only the Hispanics we hear from? Where are all of the other Illegals in this?
The majority of America Citizens support this and increased enforcement. It is Big Business and those who profit from the use of Illegal Labor who are supporting Illegal Immigration.
The rest of people supporting Illegal Immigration are too blind to see the truths behind the issue. If they really looked past the media spin from the left to the meat of the matter, they would want to beat those fighting for Amnesty.
Do not get me wrong, it is not just the Left which helped cause this problem. The Right is responsible too. However it is now most of the Right and some of the Left which is truly listening to their voters and taking action.
This isn't about race, unless you support Illegal Immigration. In that case all against it are racist even though my issue with all of this is the ILLEGAL issue, not skin color or anything else.
Do your research. Listen to what is actually said, what they write, and look for the truths. I admit there is some against all immigration due to racism, but I am not part of that, nor are the majority of people against illegal immigration.
It is a matter of answering this one question: Should we reward criminals for their crimes?
Doug Giles from Clash Radio
This video is property of Doug Giles and Clash Radio.
I just love what he has to say and agree, so I hope they do not mind me posting it here.
Goto www.ClashRadio.com for more from Doug.
I just love what he has to say and agree, so I hope they do not mind me posting it here.
Goto www.ClashRadio.com for more from Doug.
P.S. Doug Giles rocks!
Someone missed a turn on the Mountain
They said they were chasing a beer, opps, a bear. I guess they were going to follow him down the creek. Enjoy!
No, I do not think so.
I will have my comments at the end of this article.
-------------------------------
Cisneros: GOP stand on immigration risky
By Robert T Garrett
The Dallas Morning News, November 13, 2007 http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/DN-cisneros_13tex.ART.State.Edition1.41c1015.html#
Austin -- While many GOP presidential hopefuls are quick to deplore illegal immigration, they should be careful, former U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros warned Monday.
They risk driving Hispanic voters into Democrats' arms for years to come, he said.
Mr. Cisneros, in an interview before he spoke to the Hispanic Scholarship Consortium in Austin, said that though the Republicans use immigration to fire up their base, they may wind up deeply angering Hispanics.
'Those who have simply focused on security at the border and not on the other humane aspects' of the immigration issue offend Hispanics, he said.
Mr. Cisneros predicted Hispanic voters would respond by voting more heavily for Democrats, as has happened in California since the mid-1990s. There, he said, many Hispanic voters have memories of Republican Gov. Pete Wilson's scary TV ads about immigration, which he used to successfully revive his re-election bid in 1994.
Speaking of Republicans running for president, Mr. Cisneros said, 'The harder the Republican line on immigration, the more Latino votes are likely to be lost, and not just for the short run.'
Mr. Cisneros, a staunch Democrat and former San Antonio mayor, said that the Democrats seeking the White House should have 'a little bit easier' time staking out a position on immigration.
He said they can support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, coupled with border security improvements and a guest worker program, because business leaders and President Bush have endorsed such items in a comprehensive immigration overhaul bill.
While the bill stalled in Congress, Democratic candidates can 'be in the mainstream' by demanding tough enforcement and yet a recognition of the economic contributions of illegal immigrants, Mr. Cisneros said.
While he served in the Clinton administration and is 'highly impressed' with Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Cisneros said he supports New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson for his party's presidential nomination.
He cast Mr. Richardson's candidacy, even if unsuccessful, as crucial to the eventual election of a president who is Hispanic.
Mr. Cisneros said that next year, 'just the sheer numbers' of Hispanics in potential battleground states will make the Hispanic vote 'more important than it has ever been.'
While it's hard to predict turnout and Hispanic voters' sympathies until the two parties decide on their tickets, Mr. Cisneros said Democrats should keep in mind that there is a large, possibly crucial Hispanic vote in swing states such as Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona.
'Obviously, a Bill Richardson presence on the ticket somewhere could be very helpful,' Mr. Cisneros said.
Of the Republicans running for president, only John McCain 'has any potential to woo Latino votes,' Mr. Cisneros said.
He said the Arizona senator has been 'very responsible on immigration. ... It has cost him votes among Republicans that he's been so courageous and balanced.'
Mrs. Clinton's recent debate flub on an immigration-related question won't hurt her, Mr. Cisneros predicted.
Mrs. Clinton hedged on whether she backed an effort in New York to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. She said she understood why governors are forced to take such steps but didn't necessarily agree.
---------------------------------------
OK, my issue is right here where he said "they can support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants".
What? We should reward illegals with citizenship? Why? Should we also reward bank robbers with a free car, or a rapist with a free house?
They are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, so why should we roll out the red carpet for them? I notice that he made this a racial issue by saying Hispanics. The last time I looked at the meaning of Illegal, it wasn't related to any race. What about the Illegals from China, or Europe, or the Middle East? I highlighted every racial group mentioned here. Do you see multiple groups? Go look back and count the highlighted groups mentioned.
Do you see this? He only mentioned one group.
Did he do this because he is bigoted against non-hispanics? Or is he the racist? Perhaps he just overlooked this error in his thinking without malice.
This issue does not deal with only one group, unless you look at the Illegal part. Illegals are male, female, white, black, red, yellow, brown, and shades of all the aforementioned. How did he fail to mention all of the other Illegals?
If you watch Democrats, you will see that they want special treatment for a special group and usually no-one calls them on it, but Dear God if a Republican called for special treatment for a special group because they would be smeared through out every media venue in our nation.
When I see the complete list of crimes we are going to reward people for, I will have to see which crime I want to commit to get special treatment. Oh, wait, we do have special treatment for criminals that regular citizens do not get. Jail and Prison.
Now explain to me why these criminals should be given the right to vote. Dear God, isn't that the most protected right we have in our nation? The right for citizens to vote for citizens to do what is needed to help citizens. If we give that away to anyone who comes to our nation legally or not, you might as well declare all people in this WORLD Americans and send them ballots.
I see no other country in the world doing this, and I do not believe we should be the first. Actually, I do not believe we should ever be part of anything like that. If you want to see what would happen search for the things the United Nations has done, and show me which ones actually helped the people, not the select few, but the people. Look to "Food For Oil" program to learn more and see all of the corruption there. At least here while we have home rule, if we catch someone commiting a crime, we can punish them. Who is serving prison out of the UN for what they did? Anyone? I thought not....
-------------------------------
Cisneros: GOP stand on immigration risky
By Robert T Garrett
The Dallas Morning News, November 13, 2007 http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/DN-cisneros_13tex.ART.State.Edition1.41c1015.html#
Austin -- While many GOP presidential hopefuls are quick to deplore illegal immigration, they should be careful, former U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros warned Monday.
They risk driving Hispanic voters into Democrats' arms for years to come, he said.
Mr. Cisneros, in an interview before he spoke to the Hispanic Scholarship Consortium in Austin, said that though the Republicans use immigration to fire up their base, they may wind up deeply angering Hispanics.
'Those who have simply focused on security at the border and not on the other humane aspects' of the immigration issue offend Hispanics, he said.
Mr. Cisneros predicted Hispanic voters would respond by voting more heavily for Democrats, as has happened in California since the mid-1990s. There, he said, many Hispanic voters have memories of Republican Gov. Pete Wilson's scary TV ads about immigration, which he used to successfully revive his re-election bid in 1994.
Speaking of Republicans running for president, Mr. Cisneros said, 'The harder the Republican line on immigration, the more Latino votes are likely to be lost, and not just for the short run.'
Mr. Cisneros, a staunch Democrat and former San Antonio mayor, said that the Democrats seeking the White House should have 'a little bit easier' time staking out a position on immigration.
He said they can support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, coupled with border security improvements and a guest worker program, because business leaders and President Bush have endorsed such items in a comprehensive immigration overhaul bill.
While the bill stalled in Congress, Democratic candidates can 'be in the mainstream' by demanding tough enforcement and yet a recognition of the economic contributions of illegal immigrants, Mr. Cisneros said.
While he served in the Clinton administration and is 'highly impressed' with Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mr. Cisneros said he supports New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson for his party's presidential nomination.
He cast Mr. Richardson's candidacy, even if unsuccessful, as crucial to the eventual election of a president who is Hispanic.
Mr. Cisneros said that next year, 'just the sheer numbers' of Hispanics in potential battleground states will make the Hispanic vote 'more important than it has ever been.'
While it's hard to predict turnout and Hispanic voters' sympathies until the two parties decide on their tickets, Mr. Cisneros said Democrats should keep in mind that there is a large, possibly crucial Hispanic vote in swing states such as Florida, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada and Arizona.
'Obviously, a Bill Richardson presence on the ticket somewhere could be very helpful,' Mr. Cisneros said.
Of the Republicans running for president, only John McCain 'has any potential to woo Latino votes,' Mr. Cisneros said.
He said the Arizona senator has been 'very responsible on immigration. ... It has cost him votes among Republicans that he's been so courageous and balanced.'
Mrs. Clinton's recent debate flub on an immigration-related question won't hurt her, Mr. Cisneros predicted.
Mrs. Clinton hedged on whether she backed an effort in New York to grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. She said she understood why governors are forced to take such steps but didn't necessarily agree.
---------------------------------------
OK, my issue is right here where he said "they can support a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants".
What? We should reward illegals with citizenship? Why? Should we also reward bank robbers with a free car, or a rapist with a free house?
They are ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, so why should we roll out the red carpet for them? I notice that he made this a racial issue by saying Hispanics. The last time I looked at the meaning of Illegal, it wasn't related to any race. What about the Illegals from China, or Europe, or the Middle East? I highlighted every racial group mentioned here. Do you see multiple groups? Go look back and count the highlighted groups mentioned.
Do you see this? He only mentioned one group.
Did he do this because he is bigoted against non-hispanics? Or is he the racist? Perhaps he just overlooked this error in his thinking without malice.
This issue does not deal with only one group, unless you look at the Illegal part. Illegals are male, female, white, black, red, yellow, brown, and shades of all the aforementioned. How did he fail to mention all of the other Illegals?
If you watch Democrats, you will see that they want special treatment for a special group and usually no-one calls them on it, but Dear God if a Republican called for special treatment for a special group because they would be smeared through out every media venue in our nation.
When I see the complete list of crimes we are going to reward people for, I will have to see which crime I want to commit to get special treatment. Oh, wait, we do have special treatment for criminals that regular citizens do not get. Jail and Prison.
Now explain to me why these criminals should be given the right to vote. Dear God, isn't that the most protected right we have in our nation? The right for citizens to vote for citizens to do what is needed to help citizens. If we give that away to anyone who comes to our nation legally or not, you might as well declare all people in this WORLD Americans and send them ballots.
I see no other country in the world doing this, and I do not believe we should be the first. Actually, I do not believe we should ever be part of anything like that. If you want to see what would happen search for the things the United Nations has done, and show me which ones actually helped the people, not the select few, but the people. Look to "Food For Oil" program to learn more and see all of the corruption there. At least here while we have home rule, if we catch someone commiting a crime, we can punish them. Who is serving prison out of the UN for what they did? Anyone? I thought not....
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Immigration Amnesty in Any Form is Wrong
Now I love it when Mike discusses illegal immigration because it blows holes in the whole racism aspect of the debate. Add to this groups like "You Don't Speak For Me" and many others, you quickly realize that illegal immigration supporters use terms like Racist, Bigot, Nazi, and many others to scare off the sheeple from entering this debate.
If illegal immigration was a good thing and not wrong, it wouldn't be called illegal. Unregulated immigration, uncontrolled borders, and carte blanche citizenship hurts those who are the true citizens of that nation. If you have your citizenship legally whether you were born here or became a legal citizen, it is not fair to you or others to allow illegal immigrants to come and take those rights and liberties via theft.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Immigration Amnesty in Any Form is Wrong
By Michael Steele
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichaelSteele/2007/11/13/immigration_amnesty_in_any_form_is_wrong
New York looks to play an important role in the upcoming presidential elections in more ways than one. Not only could we see an "all New York" presidential line-up (Rudy vs. Hillary) but Democrat Governor Elliott Spitzer has managed to focus the attention of the entire nation on New York by announcing his plan to grant driver’s licenses to illegal aliens.
Governor Spitzer obviously has no clear understanding of the far-reaching and crippling effects on our Nation’s security such a measure would have. By equating providing state-issued legal driver's licenses to the purchase of a MetroCard ("I don't think it is a privilege any more than buying a MetroCard is a privilege," Spitzer said on New York 1 News of his three-tiered license plan. "When we walk down into the subway system to buy a MetroCard, no one says, 'Prove you are a citizen'; no one says, 'Where did you grow up?'"), the Governor insults the intelligence of most Americans who fundamentally understand the difference. I wish the Governor did.
Unlike a MetroCard, a New York driver’s license provides a valid form of state-issued identification, which itself gives the holder a number of state and national benefits. For example, individuals with a valid driver’s license may use that license to apply for a job or to board a plane in any airport in this country. What Governor Spitzer has so irresponsibly proposed is a plan to provide this legal form of identification to persons who are in this country illegally; and as such, his plan would further weaken the social and security systems of our states and nation.
But there is more. One other not so insignificant impact of such a measure is that it would allow illegal immigrants to use this license to register to vote. New York Board of Elections Spokesman Lee Daghlian admits, “It would be [tough to catch] if someone wanted to …. get a number of people registered [to vote] who aren’t citizens and went ahead and got them driver’s licenses”. Once again, Governor Spitzer’s ill-conceived plan would compromise the integrity of our electoral system and make more vulnerable an electoral process that a growing number of Americans are already suspicious of.
Like so many politicians on both sides of the aisle, Governor Spitzer is not listening to New Yorkers. While 70% of the legal citizens of New York oppose this plan, Governor Spitzer stands firm in his resolve to enact this irresponsible and dangerous measure.
Let's be clear: the safety and security of Americans should not be subject to the whims of a "PC" mindset or feel good legislation. Americans are expecting thoughtful and responsible leadership that will not only clearly define the threats we face, but understand what they are in the first place.
Governor Spitzer's plan is not a cause for celebration by the left or by the right; it is just plain bad public policy. When grappling with the important issues, Americans want elected leadership to put aside partisan politics and just make the right decision. The non-partisan public outcry that has accompanied attempts by politicians to grant some form of amnesty to illegal immigrants supports this fact. The Spitzer plan is no different because for many of us, citizenship is a terrible thing to waste.
Michael Steele is a former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland.
If illegal immigration was a good thing and not wrong, it wouldn't be called illegal. Unregulated immigration, uncontrolled borders, and carte blanche citizenship hurts those who are the true citizens of that nation. If you have your citizenship legally whether you were born here or became a legal citizen, it is not fair to you or others to allow illegal immigrants to come and take those rights and liberties via theft.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Immigration Amnesty in Any Form is Wrong
By Michael Steele
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MichaelSteele/2007/11/13/immigration_amnesty_in_any_form_is_wrong
New York looks to play an important role in the upcoming presidential elections in more ways than one. Not only could we see an "all New York" presidential line-up (Rudy vs. Hillary) but Democrat Governor Elliott Spitzer has managed to focus the attention of the entire nation on New York by announcing his plan to grant driver’s licenses to illegal aliens.
Governor Spitzer obviously has no clear understanding of the far-reaching and crippling effects on our Nation’s security such a measure would have. By equating providing state-issued legal driver's licenses to the purchase of a MetroCard ("I don't think it is a privilege any more than buying a MetroCard is a privilege," Spitzer said on New York 1 News of his three-tiered license plan. "When we walk down into the subway system to buy a MetroCard, no one says, 'Prove you are a citizen'; no one says, 'Where did you grow up?'"), the Governor insults the intelligence of most Americans who fundamentally understand the difference. I wish the Governor did.
Unlike a MetroCard, a New York driver’s license provides a valid form of state-issued identification, which itself gives the holder a number of state and national benefits. For example, individuals with a valid driver’s license may use that license to apply for a job or to board a plane in any airport in this country. What Governor Spitzer has so irresponsibly proposed is a plan to provide this legal form of identification to persons who are in this country illegally; and as such, his plan would further weaken the social and security systems of our states and nation.
But there is more. One other not so insignificant impact of such a measure is that it would allow illegal immigrants to use this license to register to vote. New York Board of Elections Spokesman Lee Daghlian admits, “It would be [tough to catch] if someone wanted to …. get a number of people registered [to vote] who aren’t citizens and went ahead and got them driver’s licenses”. Once again, Governor Spitzer’s ill-conceived plan would compromise the integrity of our electoral system and make more vulnerable an electoral process that a growing number of Americans are already suspicious of.
Like so many politicians on both sides of the aisle, Governor Spitzer is not listening to New Yorkers. While 70% of the legal citizens of New York oppose this plan, Governor Spitzer stands firm in his resolve to enact this irresponsible and dangerous measure.
Let's be clear: the safety and security of Americans should not be subject to the whims of a "PC" mindset or feel good legislation. Americans are expecting thoughtful and responsible leadership that will not only clearly define the threats we face, but understand what they are in the first place.
Governor Spitzer's plan is not a cause for celebration by the left or by the right; it is just plain bad public policy. When grappling with the important issues, Americans want elected leadership to put aside partisan politics and just make the right decision. The non-partisan public outcry that has accompanied attempts by politicians to grant some form of amnesty to illegal immigrants supports this fact. The Spitzer plan is no different because for many of us, citizenship is a terrible thing to waste.
Michael Steele is a former Lieutenant Governor of Maryland.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
What I am doing...
So if any of you wonder what I am up to with my freetime until ski season starts, here it is. I have been out hunting as much as I possibly can. I have been doing what I moved here for finally.
Currently I am shooting a Remington 30.06 ADL with a Tasco 3/9 40mm scope using Remington Accelerator 55 grain .224 Sabot round. Combined with a shooting sling and a Harris bipod, it is more of a limit of my optics currently.
If you have time and get bored, come to Colorado and bring your rifle. Between Coyotes, Prairedogs, and other critters I can keep you busy.
Man, I wish my mom sent me this in school.
Stripper Mistakenly Sent to School, Whips Teen
Thursday, November 08, 2007
FoxNews.com
Officials at a U.K. high school were aghast after a stripper visited a student during class and whipped him in front of other students and a horrified teacher, Sky News reported Thursday.
A booking error is to blame after a mother arranged to send a "gorilla gram" to her son on his 16th birthday, an arrangement she cleared with Nottingham's Arnold Hill School and Technology College. Instead, the agency sent a stripper clad in a policewoman costume, Sky reported.
After whipping the teen, the stripper placed a collar around his neck and led him around the classroom with a leash, telling him he had been a "bad boy" for not doing his homework. She then put on a Britney Spears tune and stripped for the shocked class, witnesses told Sky.
The police were not called and no one was suspended from the school in the incident, and officials said they were investigating.
Original and Complete Story from SKY NEWS HERE
------------------------------------------------
Man, I wish my mother would have sent strippers for me when I was a teen.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
FoxNews.com
Officials at a U.K. high school were aghast after a stripper visited a student during class and whipped him in front of other students and a horrified teacher, Sky News reported Thursday.
A booking error is to blame after a mother arranged to send a "gorilla gram" to her son on his 16th birthday, an arrangement she cleared with Nottingham's Arnold Hill School and Technology College. Instead, the agency sent a stripper clad in a policewoman costume, Sky reported.
After whipping the teen, the stripper placed a collar around his neck and led him around the classroom with a leash, telling him he had been a "bad boy" for not doing his homework. She then put on a Britney Spears tune and stripped for the shocked class, witnesses told Sky.
The police were not called and no one was suspended from the school in the incident, and officials said they were investigating.
Original and Complete Story from SKY NEWS HERE
------------------------------------------------
Man, I wish my mother would have sent strippers for me when I was a teen.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Now this is scary!
Two Dozen Illegal Immigrants Arrested Using Fake Badges to Work at O'Hare International Airport
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
AP
CHICAGO — Nearly two dozen illegal immigrants were arrested Wednesday, accused of using fake security badges to work in critical areas of O'Hare International Airport, including the tarmac, authorities said.
The 23 illegal workers were employed by Ideal Staffing Solutions Inc., whose corporate secretary and office manager also were arrested after an eight-month investigation that involved federal, state and Chicago authorities.
The company contracted work for carriers including United Airlines, KLM and Qantas, said Elissa A. Brown, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent.
"The investigation identifies a vulnerability that could compromise national security, while bringing criminal charges against individuals who built an illegal work force into their business practice," Brown said.
Ideal Staffing officials did not return a telephone message left after business hours Wednesday by The Associated Press.
Much of the investigation centered on the airport security badges issued by the Department of Aviation, said U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald. Agents found that 110 of the 134 badges issued to Ideal Staffing workers did not match the individuals who carried them, he said.
The discrepancies were first noted in March by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection inspector, Fitzgerald said.
"If we are to ensure public safety, we must know who has access to the secure areas of airports," Fitzgerald said. "A fundamental component of airport safety is preventing the use of false identification badges, and punishing those who commit or enable such violations."
Mary Gurin, 36, of Carpentersville, and Norinye Benitez, 24, of Franklin Park, were each charged with one federal count of harboring illegal immigrants for gain and one federal count of misuse of Social Security numbers. They were scheduled for a preliminary appearance later Wednesday in U.S. District Court, Brown said.
Benitez is believed to be an illegal immigrant from Mexico, and Gurin employed her and signed her airport badge application while knowing her illegal status, Brown said.
The workers arrested, 21 from Mexico and two from Guatemala, were being held in the Cook County jail. They face state criminal charges and deportation, Brown said.
According to affidavits in a complaint against Gurin and Benitez unsealed Wednesday in U.S. District Court, the applications for the 110 bogus badges listed Social Security numbers that either did not exist or belonged to other individuals, some of whom were dead.
One affidavit from a temporary worker who cooperated with authorities said Benitez told him to look through a box containing about 20 airport security badges and to pick one with a picture that resembled his own face.
The affidavits allege that Ideal Staffing told workers they needed to have identification, but that the documents did not have to be legitimate, and also accused the company of supplying some workers with deactivated badges issued in other names.
Brown, Fitzgerald and other officials declined to answer questions about how workers could use deactivated badges to enter secure areas of the airport, saying that the investigation continued and that not all details could be revealed.
Cook County State's Attorney Richard A. Devine said his office has issued more than 100 arrest warrants in the case.
---------------------------------------
Has anyone ever heard of OPSEC? Operatioal Security...
Now, quite honestly it should BLOW YOUR MIND that this is even possible since September 11 2001. Or have we forgoten aleady? A quick refresher.
The Box Cutters used by the Terrorists were ALREADY ON THE PLANES planted by others.
Hmmm, and this is what we offer our citizens as protection since then. Fake badges offered to illegal aliens.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
AP
CHICAGO — Nearly two dozen illegal immigrants were arrested Wednesday, accused of using fake security badges to work in critical areas of O'Hare International Airport, including the tarmac, authorities said.
The 23 illegal workers were employed by Ideal Staffing Solutions Inc., whose corporate secretary and office manager also were arrested after an eight-month investigation that involved federal, state and Chicago authorities.
The company contracted work for carriers including United Airlines, KLM and Qantas, said Elissa A. Brown, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent.
"The investigation identifies a vulnerability that could compromise national security, while bringing criminal charges against individuals who built an illegal work force into their business practice," Brown said.
Ideal Staffing officials did not return a telephone message left after business hours Wednesday by The Associated Press.
Much of the investigation centered on the airport security badges issued by the Department of Aviation, said U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald. Agents found that 110 of the 134 badges issued to Ideal Staffing workers did not match the individuals who carried them, he said.
The discrepancies were first noted in March by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection inspector, Fitzgerald said.
"If we are to ensure public safety, we must know who has access to the secure areas of airports," Fitzgerald said. "A fundamental component of airport safety is preventing the use of false identification badges, and punishing those who commit or enable such violations."
Mary Gurin, 36, of Carpentersville, and Norinye Benitez, 24, of Franklin Park, were each charged with one federal count of harboring illegal immigrants for gain and one federal count of misuse of Social Security numbers. They were scheduled for a preliminary appearance later Wednesday in U.S. District Court, Brown said.
Benitez is believed to be an illegal immigrant from Mexico, and Gurin employed her and signed her airport badge application while knowing her illegal status, Brown said.
The workers arrested, 21 from Mexico and two from Guatemala, were being held in the Cook County jail. They face state criminal charges and deportation, Brown said.
According to affidavits in a complaint against Gurin and Benitez unsealed Wednesday in U.S. District Court, the applications for the 110 bogus badges listed Social Security numbers that either did not exist or belonged to other individuals, some of whom were dead.
One affidavit from a temporary worker who cooperated with authorities said Benitez told him to look through a box containing about 20 airport security badges and to pick one with a picture that resembled his own face.
The affidavits allege that Ideal Staffing told workers they needed to have identification, but that the documents did not have to be legitimate, and also accused the company of supplying some workers with deactivated badges issued in other names.
Brown, Fitzgerald and other officials declined to answer questions about how workers could use deactivated badges to enter secure areas of the airport, saying that the investigation continued and that not all details could be revealed.
Cook County State's Attorney Richard A. Devine said his office has issued more than 100 arrest warrants in the case.
---------------------------------------
Has anyone ever heard of OPSEC? Operatioal Security...
Now, quite honestly it should BLOW YOUR MIND that this is even possible since September 11 2001. Or have we forgoten aleady? A quick refresher.
The Box Cutters used by the Terrorists were ALREADY ON THE PLANES planted by others.
Hmmm, and this is what we offer our citizens as protection since then. Fake badges offered to illegal aliens.
Border Fence report
This is only good news if they actually increase border agents and interior enforcement, otherwise it is a waste of money. Let us hope and continue to contact our Congress to make all parts of immigration control complete.
----------------------------------------
Border Fence Update
By Amanda Carpenter
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
To date, there have been 270 miles of pedestrian and vehicle fencing constructed along the Southwest border, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a Tuesday briefing to reporters about progress being made to secure the border.
By the end of 2008 Chertoff said he expects to have 670 miles of border barriers erected, as long as Congress continues to appropriate money for construction.
“I sometimes get asked, why does it take so long to build fencing?” Chertoff said. “There's a reason for that: You don't build fence a mile at a time.” He listed preparation work like surveying and grading land that must be done before installing fence. Chertoff said, “Only at the end do you see an escalation towards the goal that we reached in the last fiscal year. And that is, in fact, what you're going to see as we go forward.”
Since border fence construction began, DHS has been challenged by environmental groups, like Lawyers for Defending Wildlife and the Sierra Club, that claim barriers hurt wildlife and wetlands. Chertoff has used waiver authority granted to him by Congress to trumps local environmental laws in order to install fences in Arizona and California. In some cases, Chertoff said DHS erected temporary river barriers that could be removed during flood season or special gates that “do not permit the spread of invasive weeds or result in storm water pollution” to appease environmentalists.
He has not yet been forced to use his waiver authority in Texas, but said he would not hesitate to do so.
“The bottom line is this,” Chertoff said. “We will continue to use the authority that Congress gave this department in a way that’s sensitive to local concerns, that is mindful of the need to protect the environment, but that does not allow the process of securing the border to get bogged down in endless litigation or procedural wrangling that will result in years going by before we complete the mission.”
Amanda Carpenter is National Political Reporter for Townhall.com.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2007/11/07/border_fence_update
----------------------------------------
Border Fence Update
By Amanda Carpenter
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
To date, there have been 270 miles of pedestrian and vehicle fencing constructed along the Southwest border, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a Tuesday briefing to reporters about progress being made to secure the border.
By the end of 2008 Chertoff said he expects to have 670 miles of border barriers erected, as long as Congress continues to appropriate money for construction.
“I sometimes get asked, why does it take so long to build fencing?” Chertoff said. “There's a reason for that: You don't build fence a mile at a time.” He listed preparation work like surveying and grading land that must be done before installing fence. Chertoff said, “Only at the end do you see an escalation towards the goal that we reached in the last fiscal year. And that is, in fact, what you're going to see as we go forward.”
Since border fence construction began, DHS has been challenged by environmental groups, like Lawyers for Defending Wildlife and the Sierra Club, that claim barriers hurt wildlife and wetlands. Chertoff has used waiver authority granted to him by Congress to trumps local environmental laws in order to install fences in Arizona and California. In some cases, Chertoff said DHS erected temporary river barriers that could be removed during flood season or special gates that “do not permit the spread of invasive weeds or result in storm water pollution” to appease environmentalists.
He has not yet been forced to use his waiver authority in Texas, but said he would not hesitate to do so.
“The bottom line is this,” Chertoff said. “We will continue to use the authority that Congress gave this department in a way that’s sensitive to local concerns, that is mindful of the need to protect the environment, but that does not allow the process of securing the border to get bogged down in endless litigation or procedural wrangling that will result in years going by before we complete the mission.”
Amanda Carpenter is National Political Reporter for Townhall.com.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/AmandaCarpenter/2007/11/07/border_fence_update
Nice Change in Greeley CO.
I hope as time goes by we will continue to see more stories like this one around the state and the country.
------------------------------------
Challenger Clark wins Greeley mayoral race
By Monte Whaley
The Denver Post,
November 7, 2007
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_7389151
Greeley -- Challenger Ed Clark ousted incumbent Mayor Tom Selders handily Tuesday night in an election overshadowed by issues of illegal immigration.
Clark, a school security guard and former Greeley police officer, bested Selders by 7,858 votes to 5,015. Selders, a longtime fixture in city government and a two-term mayor, couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday night.
Selders earned the ire of many conservatives in Greeley for traveling to Washington, D.C., earlier this year to complain that raids by Immigration Customs and Enforcement agents at Swift meatpacking plants were disruptive to families.
At least two outside groups targeted Selders for his stance, saying he was soft on illegal immigrants. One group — Alliance for a Better Greeley — distributed a mailer showing a group characterized as gangsters flashing gang signs under text that read 'Tom Selders is Good for Business.'
Clark said he had nothing to do with the campaign against Selders. Clark — a former officer in Greeley's gang unit — said he wanted to add at least 20 new officers to the Greeley force and get the city more involved in after-school programs for kids.
Clark drew criticism for pulling a weapon on an intruder at University Schools, where he works. School officials backed Clark's use of the gun.
-------------------------------------------------
The fact that this man is a former Gang Officer leads me to believe he has a much better grasp of what is going on regarding illegal aliens then most anyone else has.
Since people in charge ignore the advice and information which is available regarding the increase in gang activity, drug smuggling, and other crimes violent or not, we need to put those who do know in power.
If we do not, we are going to lose our country.
------------------------------------
Challenger Clark wins Greeley mayoral race
By Monte Whaley
The Denver Post,
November 7, 2007
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_7389151
Greeley -- Challenger Ed Clark ousted incumbent Mayor Tom Selders handily Tuesday night in an election overshadowed by issues of illegal immigration.
Clark, a school security guard and former Greeley police officer, bested Selders by 7,858 votes to 5,015. Selders, a longtime fixture in city government and a two-term mayor, couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday night.
Selders earned the ire of many conservatives in Greeley for traveling to Washington, D.C., earlier this year to complain that raids by Immigration Customs and Enforcement agents at Swift meatpacking plants were disruptive to families.
At least two outside groups targeted Selders for his stance, saying he was soft on illegal immigrants. One group — Alliance for a Better Greeley — distributed a mailer showing a group characterized as gangsters flashing gang signs under text that read 'Tom Selders is Good for Business.'
Clark said he had nothing to do with the campaign against Selders. Clark — a former officer in Greeley's gang unit — said he wanted to add at least 20 new officers to the Greeley force and get the city more involved in after-school programs for kids.
Clark drew criticism for pulling a weapon on an intruder at University Schools, where he works. School officials backed Clark's use of the gun.
-------------------------------------------------
The fact that this man is a former Gang Officer leads me to believe he has a much better grasp of what is going on regarding illegal aliens then most anyone else has.
Since people in charge ignore the advice and information which is available regarding the increase in gang activity, drug smuggling, and other crimes violent or not, we need to put those who do know in power.
If we do not, we are going to lose our country.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Good Job Police/Border Patrol
Arizona Family Deported After Son Found With Pot at School
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
AP
TUCSON, Ariz. — A Tucson high school student and his family were deported after the teen was found with marijuana at school and police called the U.S. Border Patrol after learning he and his family were illegal immigrants.
The incident raised concern among immigrants rights activists, but Tucson police said the officer acted appropriately by calling immigration agents.
Police were called to Catalina High Magnet School Thursday after school officials found a small amount of marijuana in the backpack of a ninth-grader who appeared to be under the influence, said Chyrl Hill Lander, a spokeswoman for the Tucson Unified School District.
Police then asked the boy's parents to come to the school, and once they arrived an officer asked to see their driver's licenses. The parents told officers they had been living illegally in the U.S. for six years, along with the ninth-grader and their 17- and 12-year-old sons, assistant police chief Roberto Villasenor said Monday.
The officer called the Border Patrol and agents were sent to the school, said Richard DeWitt, Tucson Sector spokesman. They took the boy and his parents into custody, then went to a middle school and picked up the 12-year-old.
The mother and two boys were taken to the Mexican border in a procedure called voluntary return. The father was held for formal deportation because he had been apprehended various times by the agency, DeWitt said. Their names were not released.
Police officials said the officer handled the case correctly. The boy had committed a crime, and department policy allows officers to call the Border Patrol when they suspect someone is here illegally, Villasenor said.
"We can't lose track of the fact that an administrator came across a juvenile who was violating the law, in possession of marijuana," Villasenor said. "That is a crime in this country, whether you are here illegally or not."
An immigrants rights proponent said allowing immigration agents into schools could create more mistrust and fear in the immigrant community.
"Now you have people who are afraid to call the police when they have been robbed because they are afraid the police will come and instead of investigating the crime will ask them about their immigration status," said Jennifer Allen, director of Tucson-based Border Action Network.
Lander said she was unaware of other immigration-related arrests at Tucson schools, and said the district would have preferred that police called the Border Patrol once they left campus.
A Tucson police policy lets officers who have already stopped a person on suspicion of committing a crime to ask immigration agents to respond to determine if the person is in the country legally.
Villasenor said the Police Department doesn't want crime victims or witnesses who are here illegally to fear coming forward because they might be deported, and doesn't want its officers to become immigration agents. But they will call federal agents when they believe they are required.
"While we don't want to put a chilling effect on anyone calling us, we are also obligated to do our job," Villasenor said.
-----------------------------------------------
Good job. In fact most illegal immigrants are found while commiting other crimes. It is just like how most drug arrests happen after someone is pulled over for speeding or other traffic violation.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
AP
TUCSON, Ariz. — A Tucson high school student and his family were deported after the teen was found with marijuana at school and police called the U.S. Border Patrol after learning he and his family were illegal immigrants.
The incident raised concern among immigrants rights activists, but Tucson police said the officer acted appropriately by calling immigration agents.
Police were called to Catalina High Magnet School Thursday after school officials found a small amount of marijuana in the backpack of a ninth-grader who appeared to be under the influence, said Chyrl Hill Lander, a spokeswoman for the Tucson Unified School District.
Police then asked the boy's parents to come to the school, and once they arrived an officer asked to see their driver's licenses. The parents told officers they had been living illegally in the U.S. for six years, along with the ninth-grader and their 17- and 12-year-old sons, assistant police chief Roberto Villasenor said Monday.
The officer called the Border Patrol and agents were sent to the school, said Richard DeWitt, Tucson Sector spokesman. They took the boy and his parents into custody, then went to a middle school and picked up the 12-year-old.
The mother and two boys were taken to the Mexican border in a procedure called voluntary return. The father was held for formal deportation because he had been apprehended various times by the agency, DeWitt said. Their names were not released.
Police officials said the officer handled the case correctly. The boy had committed a crime, and department policy allows officers to call the Border Patrol when they suspect someone is here illegally, Villasenor said.
"We can't lose track of the fact that an administrator came across a juvenile who was violating the law, in possession of marijuana," Villasenor said. "That is a crime in this country, whether you are here illegally or not."
An immigrants rights proponent said allowing immigration agents into schools could create more mistrust and fear in the immigrant community.
"Now you have people who are afraid to call the police when they have been robbed because they are afraid the police will come and instead of investigating the crime will ask them about their immigration status," said Jennifer Allen, director of Tucson-based Border Action Network.
Lander said she was unaware of other immigration-related arrests at Tucson schools, and said the district would have preferred that police called the Border Patrol once they left campus.
A Tucson police policy lets officers who have already stopped a person on suspicion of committing a crime to ask immigration agents to respond to determine if the person is in the country legally.
Villasenor said the Police Department doesn't want crime victims or witnesses who are here illegally to fear coming forward because they might be deported, and doesn't want its officers to become immigration agents. But they will call federal agents when they believe they are required.
"While we don't want to put a chilling effect on anyone calling us, we are also obligated to do our job," Villasenor said.
-----------------------------------------------
Good job. In fact most illegal immigrants are found while commiting other crimes. It is just like how most drug arrests happen after someone is pulled over for speeding or other traffic violation.
California 'Repeals' Supreme Court Immigration Ruling
California 'Repeals' Supreme Court Immigration Ruling
By William Perry Pendley
Monday, November 5, 2007
In 1982, Emil Vassileu—born in Pernik, Bulgaria—arrived legally in the United States, a political refugee from Bulgaria’s Communist regime. Because he was a top student, he studied at university; but, there was “no future, no freedom” in Bulgaria. When he reached Cleveland, Ohio, he sought out the Dean of Case Western Reserve University. Although he spoke little English, he so impressed the Dean that he was admitted as a junior. In 1985, he received a B.S. in civil engineering and left for California. In 1986, after working briefly for others, he started a business, Van Elk, Ltd., a welding and steel-working company that bids on private and public works projects. Today, Van Elk, Ltd. has grown to ten full-time employees and has enjoyed over two decades of success.
Over the years, Mr. Vassileu sought to teach his craft to his employees to allow them the same opportunities he enjoyed. His employees always returned the favor; that is, they did, until September 2003, when four former employees sued Van Elk arguing that they had not been paid in accordance with California’s mini-Davis-Bacon law, which sets “prevailing wages” for public works projects. Mr. Vassileu’s first response was that five of the eight projects named by the former employees were not public works projects; instead, they were purely private projects. As to the remaining three claims, they were for off-site work at Van Elk’s shop and were not subject to prevailing wages.
During the course of discovery, Van Elk’s California lawyers learned that the former employees were in the United States illegally and, if a 2002 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court applied, could not file a lawsuit to collect unpaid wages. Thereupon, in July 2004, Van Elk’s lawyers argued that, if the matter went to trial, the facts would show that Van Elk had paid all that was owed the former employees. In the meantime, however, argued Van Elk’s lawyers, the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because of that Supreme Court ruling, which deprived the illegal aliens of their right to sue. In November 2004, the Los Angeles Superior Court agreed, holding that, in accordance with Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 535 U.S. 137 (2002), the former employees could not sue for unpaid prevailing wages because they were illegal aliens.
In Hoffman, the Supreme Court held that federal labor laws did not supersede federal immigration laws by ruling, 5-4, that illegal aliens could not sue to collect backpay. The Court noted that labor laws sought to prevent and remedy unfair labor practices, which required employer penalties and sanctions as well as the ability of wronged employees to sue. At the same time, recognized the Court, granting illegal aliens the rights citizens enjoy would both “trivialize the immigration laws” and violate Congress’s intent to end the unlawful employment of illegal aliens, which Congress called a “magnet . . . attract[ing] aliens here illegally.” Plus, held the Court, “traditional remedies,” including civil and criminal proceedings, are a sufficient “spur and catalyst” to ensure that employers obey the law and do not hire illegal aliens.
Hoffman was too much for California legislators who responded by enacting prevailing wage statutes that provided that, notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hoffman, in determining whether an employee could sue for prevailing wages, his immigration status was “irrelevant.” Therefore, when Van Elk’s former employees appealed, the California Court of Appeal seized upon the language in California’s post-Hoffman statutes and reversed the lower court’s ruling. Likewise, the Court of Appeal rejected Van Elk’s lawyers’ argument that, by overturning Hoffman, the California Legislature violated the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.
On October 22, Van Elk asked the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether Hoffman applies or should be extended to apply to its situation. The real question that the Court needs to determine, however, is who is in charge of immigration policy, Congress or California?
William Perry Pendley is President and Chief Legal Officer at the Mountain States Legal Foundation.
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/WilliamPerryPendley/2007/11/05/california_repeals_supreme_court_immigration_ruling
By William Perry Pendley
Monday, November 5, 2007
In 1982, Emil Vassileu—born in Pernik, Bulgaria—arrived legally in the United States, a political refugee from Bulgaria’s Communist regime. Because he was a top student, he studied at university; but, there was “no future, no freedom” in Bulgaria. When he reached Cleveland, Ohio, he sought out the Dean of Case Western Reserve University. Although he spoke little English, he so impressed the Dean that he was admitted as a junior. In 1985, he received a B.S. in civil engineering and left for California. In 1986, after working briefly for others, he started a business, Van Elk, Ltd., a welding and steel-working company that bids on private and public works projects. Today, Van Elk, Ltd. has grown to ten full-time employees and has enjoyed over two decades of success.
Over the years, Mr. Vassileu sought to teach his craft to his employees to allow them the same opportunities he enjoyed. His employees always returned the favor; that is, they did, until September 2003, when four former employees sued Van Elk arguing that they had not been paid in accordance with California’s mini-Davis-Bacon law, which sets “prevailing wages” for public works projects. Mr. Vassileu’s first response was that five of the eight projects named by the former employees were not public works projects; instead, they were purely private projects. As to the remaining three claims, they were for off-site work at Van Elk’s shop and were not subject to prevailing wages.
During the course of discovery, Van Elk’s California lawyers learned that the former employees were in the United States illegally and, if a 2002 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court applied, could not file a lawsuit to collect unpaid wages. Thereupon, in July 2004, Van Elk’s lawyers argued that, if the matter went to trial, the facts would show that Van Elk had paid all that was owed the former employees. In the meantime, however, argued Van Elk’s lawyers, the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because of that Supreme Court ruling, which deprived the illegal aliens of their right to sue. In November 2004, the Los Angeles Superior Court agreed, holding that, in accordance with Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 535 U.S. 137 (2002), the former employees could not sue for unpaid prevailing wages because they were illegal aliens.
In Hoffman, the Supreme Court held that federal labor laws did not supersede federal immigration laws by ruling, 5-4, that illegal aliens could not sue to collect backpay. The Court noted that labor laws sought to prevent and remedy unfair labor practices, which required employer penalties and sanctions as well as the ability of wronged employees to sue. At the same time, recognized the Court, granting illegal aliens the rights citizens enjoy would both “trivialize the immigration laws” and violate Congress’s intent to end the unlawful employment of illegal aliens, which Congress called a “magnet . . . attract[ing] aliens here illegally.” Plus, held the Court, “traditional remedies,” including civil and criminal proceedings, are a sufficient “spur and catalyst” to ensure that employers obey the law and do not hire illegal aliens.
Hoffman was too much for California legislators who responded by enacting prevailing wage statutes that provided that, notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hoffman, in determining whether an employee could sue for prevailing wages, his immigration status was “irrelevant.” Therefore, when Van Elk’s former employees appealed, the California Court of Appeal seized upon the language in California’s post-Hoffman statutes and reversed the lower court’s ruling. Likewise, the Court of Appeal rejected Van Elk’s lawyers’ argument that, by overturning Hoffman, the California Legislature violated the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.
On October 22, Van Elk asked the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether Hoffman applies or should be extended to apply to its situation. The real question that the Court needs to determine, however, is who is in charge of immigration policy, Congress or California?
William Perry Pendley is President and Chief Legal Officer at the Mountain States Legal Foundation.
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/WilliamPerryPendley/2007/11/05/california_repeals_supreme_court_immigration_ruling
Illegal Aliens Have Already Elected The Next President Of The United States
Illegal Aliens Have Already Elected The Next President Of The United States
By Douglas MacKinnon
Monday, November 5, 2007
You can see it. You can hear it. You can feel its immense power even though it is still a year away.
The “it,” is the perfect storm brewing against the eventual Democratic nominee for president. A storm being fueled by the dual forces of illegal immigration and the war in Iraq.
With regard to illegal immigration, the debacle in New York State caused by Governor Elliot Spitzer’s insistence on giving illegal aliens a driver’s license seems to have been the proverbial straw that has broken the camel’s back. When asked about Spitzer’s plan during the latest Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton eagerly twisted herself into a pandering pretzel as she tried desperately to be all things to all people. The next day inexplicably saw her “clarify” that answer by declaring that she in fact, supported driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. Goodbye, Mrs. Clinton.
With a year to go before the election, it seems as if the entire United States has suddenly woken up to the growing threat posed by illegal aliens streaming across our borders. Not the least of which of those waking up being moderate Democrats and independents. As evidenced by the 72% of New Yorkers who are against Spitzer’s – and now Hillary’s – plan.
City after city, county after county, and state after state, are finally listening to the impassioned pleas of their citizens to forcefully deal with this problem. Talk about incredibly bad news and bad timing for the Democrats.
No matter the Republican or Democratic nominees for president, two things have been made crystal clear to the voters. The Republican will be strongly against amnesty for illegal aliens, while the Democrat will strongly favor amnesty and a path to citizenship for those who entered the country illegally.
For the Democrats running for president and their multitude of liberal supporters in the media, the realization that the country has just flipped on them on illegal immigration has hit them like a lightning bolt. They are panic stricken and you can see it in their eyes, read it in their columns, and watch it on their biased and fawning newscasts. “What do we do now?,” they are screaming behind the scenes.
For the last few years, the Democratic party has predicated its entire presidential “victory” on the “quagmire” of Iraq. Whoops. Seems like they badly judged that issue as well. As Iraq is becoming more and more stable, it is becoming less and less important to the voters of the nation. Despite only being force fed negative news on the subject by the left leaning networks and newspapers, the American people are more than bright enough to realize that Iraq is turning around and that the “unbiased” media has been spinning them for partisan reasons these last number of years.
Realizing that the surge is working and that Iraq is improving, the liberal media – in its continual efforts to smear the Bush administration and soften the ground for the Democrats -- tried to go after Blackwater and other contractors in the hopes of keeping some negative news on the front page and on the evening newscasts. They did so, but quickly found out that the American people were no longer paying attention.
No. As evidenced by the fact that at least 43 states, and over 30 cities and counties have enacted numerous hard hitting immigration-related laws this year, it has become abundantly clear that the American people have chosen to focus on the security of our borders and who is literally, illegally crossing their backyards. For them, that is now an overriding campaign issue for 2008.
The Democrats foolishly put all of their eggs into the “Iraq is bad and illegal immigration is good” basket. A basket that has just been knocked over by illegal aliens and uncensored news. As those eggs break on the faces of the Democratic candidates, they should know one thing: A Republican will be elected president in 2008.
Douglas MacKinnon is a former White House and Pentagon official and author of the novel, America's Last Days .
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/DouglasMacKinnon/2007/11/05/illegal_aliens_have_already_elected_the_next_president_of_the_united_states
By Douglas MacKinnon
Monday, November 5, 2007
You can see it. You can hear it. You can feel its immense power even though it is still a year away.
The “it,” is the perfect storm brewing against the eventual Democratic nominee for president. A storm being fueled by the dual forces of illegal immigration and the war in Iraq.
With regard to illegal immigration, the debacle in New York State caused by Governor Elliot Spitzer’s insistence on giving illegal aliens a driver’s license seems to have been the proverbial straw that has broken the camel’s back. When asked about Spitzer’s plan during the latest Democratic debate, Hillary Clinton eagerly twisted herself into a pandering pretzel as she tried desperately to be all things to all people. The next day inexplicably saw her “clarify” that answer by declaring that she in fact, supported driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. Goodbye, Mrs. Clinton.
With a year to go before the election, it seems as if the entire United States has suddenly woken up to the growing threat posed by illegal aliens streaming across our borders. Not the least of which of those waking up being moderate Democrats and independents. As evidenced by the 72% of New Yorkers who are against Spitzer’s – and now Hillary’s – plan.
City after city, county after county, and state after state, are finally listening to the impassioned pleas of their citizens to forcefully deal with this problem. Talk about incredibly bad news and bad timing for the Democrats.
No matter the Republican or Democratic nominees for president, two things have been made crystal clear to the voters. The Republican will be strongly against amnesty for illegal aliens, while the Democrat will strongly favor amnesty and a path to citizenship for those who entered the country illegally.
For the Democrats running for president and their multitude of liberal supporters in the media, the realization that the country has just flipped on them on illegal immigration has hit them like a lightning bolt. They are panic stricken and you can see it in their eyes, read it in their columns, and watch it on their biased and fawning newscasts. “What do we do now?,” they are screaming behind the scenes.
For the last few years, the Democratic party has predicated its entire presidential “victory” on the “quagmire” of Iraq. Whoops. Seems like they badly judged that issue as well. As Iraq is becoming more and more stable, it is becoming less and less important to the voters of the nation. Despite only being force fed negative news on the subject by the left leaning networks and newspapers, the American people are more than bright enough to realize that Iraq is turning around and that the “unbiased” media has been spinning them for partisan reasons these last number of years.
Realizing that the surge is working and that Iraq is improving, the liberal media – in its continual efforts to smear the Bush administration and soften the ground for the Democrats -- tried to go after Blackwater and other contractors in the hopes of keeping some negative news on the front page and on the evening newscasts. They did so, but quickly found out that the American people were no longer paying attention.
No. As evidenced by the fact that at least 43 states, and over 30 cities and counties have enacted numerous hard hitting immigration-related laws this year, it has become abundantly clear that the American people have chosen to focus on the security of our borders and who is literally, illegally crossing their backyards. For them, that is now an overriding campaign issue for 2008.
The Democrats foolishly put all of their eggs into the “Iraq is bad and illegal immigration is good” basket. A basket that has just been knocked over by illegal aliens and uncensored news. As those eggs break on the faces of the Democratic candidates, they should know one thing: A Republican will be elected president in 2008.
Douglas MacKinnon is a former White House and Pentagon official and author of the novel, America's Last Days .
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/DouglasMacKinnon/2007/11/05/illegal_aliens_have_already_elected_the_next_president_of_the_united_states
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
