Posts Tagged ‘illegal immigrants’
Written on May 26th, 2010 by JoStepno shouts
“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American…There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all…Theodore Roosevelt 1907
The Three Amigos, Obama, Pelosi and Reid, allowed Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon to appear before Congress and hypocritically lecture us on how we should treat illegal immigrants. Listening to this browbeating while VP Joe “Plugs” Biden and “Nanny” Pelosi sat motionless in the background (and I don’t think it was just Nancy’s Botox this time), I thought we had been invaded by Mexico and that our government was surrendering a ceremonial sword in defeat. I have long feared Mexico could stage a 200,000-man invasion of the U.S. (300,000 if they can round up three more utility vans).
Mexico’s immigration laws are archaic, Draconian, and much tougher than ours. You have to prove you can pay your own way and support your family to move there— basically, just the opposite of what it takes to be a Democrat here.
It does not matter what Mexico’s immigration laws are anyway. They are unevenly applied and designed only to extort money or to intimidate political adversaries. Hey, Wall Street, AMA, and the Cambridge Police Department – sound familiar?
Obama lashed out against Arizona’s new immigration law, which basically says the state can do what the federal government is unwilling to do: round up illegals and deport them. His Attorney General indicated he would sue Arizona over the 16-page law, which he later admitted he had not read. You know, the same way Congress passed health care.
Might I suggest some summer beach reading for the Attorney General—the Constitution of the United States?
From what I can tell, Obama opposes Arizona’s law mainly in hopes of gaining more victim-class votes from the growing Hispanic community. With his agenda, to get reelected he must manufacture votes and voters–like he did with ACORN. Obama says this law is racist because it will round up Mexicans. Wrong – it will round up illegal Guatemalans too.
It has gotten bad in Arizona. I think the last straw was when citizens called the cable company for information and had to “press dos for English.” And when the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona businesses, Arizona responded by saying it would cut off the 25% of the power it supplies to LA. It turns out, upon further review, that the only product L.A. exports is arrogance.
The Arizona law is so popular (70% national approval rating) that Senator John McCain finds himself in a tough re-election battle because of his seemingly “Inside the Beltway” indifference on illegal immigration. In fairness to McCain, he might not understand the problem. When he was first elected, the only immigrants were white Protestants getting off the Mayflower. Things have changed; now we cannot even find a Protestant on the Supreme Court.
If the Arizona police suspect you of being illegal, they give you a simple test. They ask you to identify the last three winners of “America Idol” and the contents of a supersized McDonald’s meal.
As I have long said, I am all for legal immigrants who want to come here and be productive citizens. This law is about illegal aliens, not legal ones.
Arizona’s immigration bill might serve all concerned well if it drives moocher illegal immigrants out of Arizona and back to their native California. We already have enough freeloaders in this country: 53% of the population, based on the November 2008 election. It seems we need to be reminded every twelve years or so why liberals cannot govern.
With Obama’s regulations and union thuggery on the rise in the USA, Mexicans need not worry about employment. They can just go back to Mexico if they want jobs from all the American companies that will soon be moving there.
Read the original article Daily Caller
Written on May 1st, 2010 by joone shout
BOB CHRISTIE
PHOENIX (AP) — Authorities have captured 17 suspected illegal immigrants in southern Arizona as they continued their manhunt Saturday for smugglers who they say shot and wounded a sheriff’s deputy in a remote desert area 50 miles south of Phoenix.
Three of those captured overnight Friday matched descriptions from the wounded Pinal County deputy and were being questioned Saturday, sheriff’s Lt. Tamatha Villar said. The deputy was released from the hospital, and was recovering at home.
The shooting came amid a growing national debate over the state’s new law cracking down on illegal immigration. A backlash over the law has erupted, with civil rights activists, concerned it will lead to racial profiling, calling for protests and boycotts.
Criticism of the law was sure to figure prominently at dozens of immigrants rights marches and rallies planned for Saturday across the nation, including one set for the grounds of the Arizona state Capitol.
The new law’s passage came amid increasing anger in Arizona about violence, drug smugglers and illegal immigration drop houses. The issue gained renewed attention a month ago when a southern Arizona rancher was shot and killed by a suspected illegal border crosser.
Arizona politicians called Friday’s shooting an outrage and urged the federal government to do more to secure the U.S.-Mexico border.
The violence “should show the rest of the country what we Arizonans have known for too long — the unsecured border poses a very real and very immediate danger,” said U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, a Democrat whose district includes part of Pinal County.
On Friday afternoon, Deputy Louie Puroll, 53, was patrolling near Interstate 8 when he came upon a stash of marijuana bales and five suspected smugglers. At least one of the suspects opened fire on him, tearing a chunk of skin from his back.
Puroll radioed in that he was shot, setting off a frantic hourlong search for the deputy in the remote desert, Villar said.
The area is a well-known smuggling corridor for drugs and illegal immigrants headed from Mexico to Phoenix and the U.S. interior.
State and federal law enforcement agencies deployed helicopters and scores of officers to search a 100-square-mile zone for the suspects. The Arizona Republic reported that officials said more than one of the choppers came under fire during the manhunt on Friday.
Puroll, a 15-year department veteran, had been on the lookout for smugglers when he discovered the suspected smugglers, two armed with rifles, authorities said.
Read the original article Daily Caller
Full Story »
Filed under illegal immigrants
Tags:Arizona, Arizona rancher, Deputy Louie Puroll, drug smugglers, illegal immigrants, illegal immigration drop houses, Inthru, manhunt, Pinal County deputy, racial profiling, U.S. Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick, U.S.-Mexico border
Written on March 28th, 2010 by jo7 shouts
RUSSELL GOLDMAN
A bill empowering police to arrest illegal immigrants and charge them with trespassing for simply being in the state of Arizona, is likely just weeks away from becoming the toughest law of its kind anywhere in the country.
Already passed by the state’s Senate and currently being reconciled with a similar version in the House, the bill would essentially criminalize the presence of the 460,000 illegal immigrants living in the state.
The measure allows police to detain people on the suspicion that they are illegal immigrants, outlaws citizens from employing day laborers, and makes it illegal for anyone to transport an illegal immigrant, even a family member, anywhere in the state.
The bill’s supporters say a local crackdown has become a necessity because the federal government has failed to adequately seal the borders or actively enforce its laws. They blame Arizona’s spiraling crime and unemployment rates on its large population of illegal immigrants.
Read the original article & see video ABCNews
Written on November 23rd, 2009 by jono shouts
By Michael Barone
Is Congress, behind on Barack Obama’s deadlines on health care and cap-and-trade legislation, and flummoxed by the failure of the stimulus package to hold unemployment below 10.2 percent, prepared to address the immigration issue next year?
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says it better be. The current situation, she told the Center for American Progress on Nov. 13, “is simply unacceptable.” We need a “three-legged stool,” with provisions to strengthen enforcement, legalize some illegal immigrants and improve “legal flows for families and workers.”
This sounds a lot like the comprehensive legislation, backed by the Bush administration, that never came to a vote in the Republican House in 2006 and was rejected by the Democratic Senate in 2007. But, as Napolitano correctly noted, the facts on the ground have changed in the last two years.
Ironically, the push for legalization in 2006-07 resulted instead in stronger enforcement measures. Some 600 miles of border fence have been built, the Border Patrol has been vastly expanded, and the e-Verify system for determining whether job applicants are legally in the country has shown its worth.
It’s probably not a coincidence that Arizona, where e-Verify is most widely used and where Napolitano used to be governor, had a statistically significant drop in its foreign-born population percentage in 2007-08. The Obama administration may be skinning back on some enforcement procedures. But states and localities are moving forward, and the momentum seems to be toward stricter enforcement of existing law.
Even more important, the flow of immigrants into the United States is slowing dramatically and may be reversing. The Pew Hispanic Center notes that the number of immigrants from Mexico in 2008-09 is down three-quarters from four years before. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that the number of illegals in the U.S. declined by 1.7 million, or 14 percent, in 2007-08. Government figures show that border apprehensions, a statistic that is often taken as a proxy for illegal crossings, fell 23 percent in 2008-09 from the previous year and was only one-third the number in the peak period of 2000-01.
Those numbers obviously reflect a response to deep recession as well as the effects of tougher enforcement. They suggest a much smaller immigration flow and significant reverse migration back to countries of origin in the years ahead.
The 2006 and 2007 comprehensive immigration packages were premised on different facts. An approach more in line with current realities comes from a bipartisan panel assembled by the Brookings Institution and Duke University’s Kenan Institute.
The Brookings/Kenan panel would provide for legalization of less than half of current illegals, with stringent requirements and only after stepped-up workplace enforcement provisions reach stated levels of use and effectiveness. Technology should allow programs like e-Verify to screen job applicants for legal status in a way that was promised but never delivered by previous immigration laws.
In addition, the Brookings/Kenan panel urges a sharp reduction in the number of green cards for relatives beyond the nuclear family of current legal residents and a sizable increase in admissions of high-skill immigrants. This is the approach taken, with good results, by Canada and Australia, which liberalized their immigration laws after our 1965 law opened the floodgates.
These proposals address the political reality that any new immigration bill must have bipartisan support, because the issue poses dangers for both Democrats and Republicans.
Conditioning legalization on more effective enforcement procedures could give Democrats cover from attacks for supporting amnesty. They could argue, accurately, that enforcement has become more effective and that they voted to make it even tougher.
Changing admissions requirements from favoring extended family members to favoring high-skill immigrants could give Republicans cover from charges that they are anti-immigrant. They could argue that, in a time of high and extended unemployment, it makes sense to switch from admitting job seekers to admitting job creators.
The 1965 and 1986 laws resulted in a large illegal immigrant population because they promised things that proved beyond the capacity of government to deliver. Now that a combination of public indignation and high-tech ingenuity have increased government’s enforcement capacity, and while the inflow of immigrants is slowing and an outflow of illegals may be accelerating, we may have reached a point when we can put in place immigration laws with enforceable limits and that encourage an influx of the kind of immigrants we need most. Can Congress act?
Read the original article on RealClearPolitics
Full Story »
Filed under illegal immigrants
Tags:Arizona, Barack Obama, Border Patrol, Center for Immigration Studies, e-Verify system, homeland security, illegal immigrants, Inthrutheoutdoor, Pew Hispanic Center, Secretary Janet Napolitano, stimulus package, unemployment
Written on October 14th, 2009 by Jono shouts
By: Rebecca Larsen
The man who likes to call himself “America’s toughest sheriff,” Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz., is planning a Friday showdown with the feds.
The sheriff has announced he will defy the U.S. Department of Homeland Security by doing a street sweep for illegal immigrants one day after the expiration of the agreement that has permitted him to conduct such operations for the past three years. The sheriff has said he expects the deal not to be extended, though federal officials have remained publicly noncommittal.
Deputies, and Sheriff Arpaio, will stake out an intersection somewhere in the Phoenix metro area to stop cars for traffic violations – everything from speeding to broken taillights to driving while intoxicated. Both drivers and passengers will be held if deputies determine that they are illegal immigrants – regardless of how minor was the initial infraction.
Sheriff Arpaio is charging ahead because he claims he has jurisdiction under a 1996 federal law allowing police to detain someone briefly if that person could be in the country illegally.
”We will call Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] to see if they will take them from us,” Sheriff Arpaio told The Washington Times. “And if they tell me to let them go, I guess I’ll have to transport them myself to the border [about 175 miles] and turn them over to the Border Patrol.”
Sheriff Arpaio, 77 but looking 10 years younger, has been shaking up Maricopa County for 17 years, and he’s not ready to quiet down: “I just got re-elected last year, but I’m going to run again, and I’ve already raised a lot of money. They’ll have to put up with me for another seven years.”
With customary bravado, he will announce on his Web site the Friday sweep’s location shortly before it happens, enough time so protesters can show up: “The same ones who are out in front of my building every day calling me Hitler and a Nazi. I’m the poster boy for the open borders crowd.”
”We’re doing it the day after Oct. 15, in order to play a little game with them,” Sheriff Arpaio said. He said he expects to use a “new secret weapon,” but declined to say what it is.
Oct. 15 is the day he expects to find out whether federal officials will approve his pending application for a renewal of the contract with ICE to detain illegal immigrants. In the past few weeks, the sheriff has been loudly complaining that the contract will no longer allow street sweeps of the kind he plans Friday, potentially angering federal authorities, who still have the power not to extend the agreement at all.
For the past three years, Sheriff Arpaio has been working under what is known as a 287(g) contract, named for the section of a federal immigration-reform law that established the program in 1996.
That law allows for partnerships that permit local law-enforcement agencies to perform immigration functions traditionally reserved for the federal government – such as holding all illegal immigrants when arrested and bringing them to jail until they can be turned over to ICE for deportation. If immigrants are convicted, they serve their time and are then deported. If they are acquitted or charges are dropped, they are held until they can be deported.
Read the rest of this great article At NewsMax
Recent Comments