Buenas Noches, America

You won't believe what Mexican President Felipe Calderon recently said, Pat Buchanan has the whole scoop here.

Hat tip: Roman Catholic Blog

Defeat Amnesty

View more.

Immigration Humor

The Amnesty Fraud

By Thomas Sowell

Whose problem is the immigration bill in Congress supposed to solve? The country's problem with dangerously porous borders? The illegal immigrants' problem? Or politicians' problems?

It has been painfully clear for years that the country's problem with insecure borders and floods of foreigners who remain a foreign -- and growing -- part of the American population has the lowest priority of the three.

Virtually every step -- even token steps -- that Congress and the administration have taken toward securing the border has been backed into under pressure from the voters.

The National Guardsmen who were sent to the border but not assigned to guard the border, the 700-mile fence on paper that has become the two-mile fence in practice, and the existing "tough" penalties for the crime of crossing the border illegally that in practice mean turning the illegal border crossers loose so that they can try, try again -- such actions speak louder than words.

The new immigration bill that supposedly secures the borders first, before starting the process of legalizing the illegal immigrants, in fact does nothing of the sort.

It sets up various programs and procedures -- but does not wait to see if they in fact reduce the flow of illegal immigrants before taking the irrevocable step of making American citizenship available to 12 million people who came here illegally.

This solves the problem of those illegal immigrants who want to get citizenship. The steps that they have to go through allow politicians to say that this is not amnesty because these are "tough" requirements.

But, whether these requirements are "tough" or not, and regardless of how they are enforced or not, there is nothing to say that the 12 million people here illegally have to start the process of becoming citizens.

Those who do not choose to become citizens -- which may well be the majority of illegal immigrants -- face no more prospect of being punished for the crime of entering the country illegally than they do now.

With the focus now shifted to the process of getting citizenship, those illegal immigrants who just want to stay and make some money without being bothered to become part of American society can be forgotten, along with their crime.

This bill gets the issue off the table and out of the political spotlight. That solves the problem of politicians who want to mollify American voters in general without risking the loss of the Hispanic vote.

The Hispanic vote can be expected to become larger and larger as the new de facto amnesty can be expected to increase the number of illegal border crossers, just as the previous -- and honestly labeled -- amnesty bill of 1986 led to a quadrupling of the number of illegals.

The larger the Hispanic vote becomes, the less seriously are the restrictive features of the immigration bill likely to be enforced.

The growth of the illegal population is irreversible but the means of controlling the growth of illegals are quite reversible, both de facto through the watering down of the enforcement of "tough" requirements and de jure through later repeals of requirements deemed too "tough."

One of the remarkable aspects of the proposed immigration "reform" is its provisions for cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. Employers are to be punished for not detecting and excluding illegal immigrants, when the government itself is derelict in doing so.

Employers not only lack expertise in law enforcement, they can be sued for "discrimination" by any of the armies of lawyers who make such lawsuits their lucrative specialty.

But no penalties are likely to be enforced against state and local politicians who openly declare "sanctuary" for illegal immigrants. Officials sworn to uphold the law instead forbid the police to report the illegal status of immigrants to federal officials when these illegals are arrested for other crimes.

This is perfectly consistent for a bill that seeks above all to solve politicians' problems, not the country's.

Becoming An Illegal Alien

This is great! I'm thinking of actually mailing it in myself!

Dear Elected Official,

As a native Coloradoan and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.

My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stem from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.

Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year. Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as "in-state" tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.

Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent, (and hopefully an illegal one)

Immigration Analogy

Here's a great take on the illegal immigration debate, it certainly puts things a little more in perspective.

Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.

Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests...
Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hardworking and honest (except for when I broke into your house).

According to the protesters:
You are Required to let me stay in your house
You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan
You are Required to Educate my kids
You are Required to Provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do all of your yard work because he is also hardworking and honest, except for that breaking in part).

If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be there.

It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm a hardworking and honest person, except for well, you know, I did break into your house.

And what a deal it is for me! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior.

Oh yeah, I DEMAND that you learn MY LANGUAGE! so you can communicate with me.

Only in America today would this rational fly. Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?

Teddy Roosevelt & Immigration

"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. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

-Theodore Roosevelt 1907

American Fascism!

This video has got to be the most shocking thing I haver ever watched. I feel as though I've been betrayed by everything I've ever believed in. Maybe I'm over reacting, I certainly hope so. But this sure makes a lot of sense considering the state of world affairs right now.

website

Immigration And Citizenship

The debate about illegal immigration is never ending. The majority consensus is that we have to lock down the border in order to curb the massive influx from Mexico. That's all good and well, but what do we do with the 18 million illegals that are already here?

Those on the left seem to be in favor of complete amnesty, allowing those already here to become citizens, or to at least accelerate the process. President Bush seems to think that a guest worker program is the solution, allowing those already here to perform jobs that (supposedly) most American's won't do and to have a quicker path to citizenship. Those on the far right think that every last person who is here illegally should be charged with a felony and then deported. The reality is that there is no easy answer to this dilemma.

Amnesty is not an option. We can't reward those who have broken the law with automatic citizenship. What does this say to all those who are trying to come in to our country legally? A guest worker program might help curb the flow of illegals, but those jobs Americans supposedly don't want are actually being filled by Americans after the illegals are busted in the workplace. Automatic felony convictions and deportation is completely unrealistic. The cost to the American tax payer would be astronomical, and trying to round up and deport 18 million people, many of whom have been here for years would be a practical impossibility.

So what is the solution? There is no perfect answer to this question. One of the major complaints about the hispanic influx is that they are not acclimating to American culture and society, they are trying to maintain their own cultural identity and bypassing the melting pot.

Here's my idea for the problem. Allow those illegals to gain citizenship automatically if they will volunteer for military duty for a period of two years or more. This would serve a three fold purpose.

A. They would have to learn English and become acclimatized to American culture, proving that they do want to become citizens and not just migrant workers.
B. It would teach disciple and responsibility.
C. It would help to build up our armed forces and increase the security of our country.

With this plan the immediate dependents of the newly enlisted already in America would gain some type of visitor or worker card, and an accelerated path to citizenship. All those found who refuse to participate would be deported.

I know it's not a perfect plan, there's probably numerous holes in it that I have not thought of yet. However, at least it's a plan that would not grant undeserved amnesty, it's not automatic deportation to everyone here illegally, and it takes into account the many families who are here and have nothing to go back home to.

I'd love to hear some feedback on this, pros, cons, alternative ideas, etc.

The Destroy America Plan

I Have A Plan To Destroy America
by: Richard D. Lamm

I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, lets destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizen’s think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that "an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide." Here is my plan:

I. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way:

"The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon-all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans."

II. I would then invent "multiculturalism" and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the black and hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.

III. We can make the United States a "Hispanic Quebec" without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:

"...The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together."

I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than Americans, emphasizing their similarities.

IV. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated - I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.

V. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority - I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.

VI. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would "celebrate diversity." "Diversity" is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other, that is, when they are not killing each other. a diverse," peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf's world history tells us:

"The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games in honor of Zeus and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors...(local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions...)

"E. Pluribus Unum" - From many, one. If we can put the emphasis on the "Pluribus," instead of the "Unum," we can Balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.

VII. Then I would place all these subjects off limits - make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to "heretic" in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like "racist", "xenophobe" that halts argument and conversation.

Having made America a bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of "victimology", I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra - "that because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good." I would make very individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact.

VIII. Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis’s book Mexifornia - this book is dangerous - it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please - if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed - please, please - don't buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.

"the smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." -Noam Chomsky, American linguist and us media and foreign policy critic.

The Price Of Tortilla's in Mexico

The price of tortillas in Mexico has more than tripled since last summer. Why? Because rising international corn prices, driven up by demand for ethanol which is produced from corn, has caused the price of Mexico's favorite food to skyrocket. Since the average Mexican daily wage is only $4.60, this rise in food price is playing a substantial role in the cause of illegal immigration. WaPo has the story here.

SOTU - My Thoughts

Everyone and his brother has been talking/commenting/submitting their views about President Bush's state of the union address so I might as well give my two cents worth on the shebang.

The beginning of the speech was a complete bore. I totally do not agree with his portrayal of the No Child Left Behind act which he says has been such a huge success. Every teacher I've spoken with has said they have been forced to dumb down their tests so those students who are lacking can move ahead, rather than have the entire class stay behind because a few students can't meet the standards. GPA's may be up, but ACT & SAT scores are down.

Bush's health care plan will for sure get shot down by the Dems. The system needs to be overhauled so that those insured people who are in good health are not paying for the unhealthy and uninsured through their own premiums and deductibles. The first step in doing this would be to ween the masses off of the overabundance of prescription drugs being taken for every ache, pain, and discomfort. The focus should be on wellness, and not on sickness. The pharmaceutical and insurance companies are to blame for this one.

Oh immigration. Of course we all want secure borders and some type of immigration reform. However, granting those who are here illegally a temporary workers permit is not that answer. It may not be straight up amnesty, but it is definitely giving an unfair advantage to those who have broken our laws to begin with. Plus, Bush didn't even touch on the fact that the entire immigration system is so over-worked and under-staffed that many people with criminal backgrounds and ties to terrorism are falling through the cracks.

Bush's push for energy independence through alternatives is a great idea, however, it's still easier said than done. Of course, the system will never change unless its economically feasible for the auto and energy companies to develop alternatives. Here's an idea that might solve the problem, but could at least help with our dependence upon the middle east.

Great idea about electing the impartial, qualified judges. Of course they still have to go through the approval of the Senate. Good luck with that one.

Terrorism. This is where Bush sounded like the man of principle we elected. He sounded more confident and determined about this part of the speech than any other. The additional troops being sent to Iraq should help clean up Baghdad, however, we should've had this surge a long time ago, not as a last ditch effort. The Civilian Reserve Corps is a great idea, as is the increase in active duty military.

I don't agree with the president's HIV/AIDS relief plan. Although he did not mention the specifics of it, generally the idea of AIDS relief is to give them all condoms, thinking that will help stop the spread of disease. We all know how high the failure rate of condoms is so how is this going to work? Teach them to control themselves, don't give them a reason to be more self indulgent.

Everything being said, it wasn't the president's best speech ever, but he certainly came out with a lot more firepower than I was expecting.

On Imigration

"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 man's becoming in very fact 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. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

-Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Arizona State & 'North Americanists'

According to their website, Arizona State University is advocating for a borderless North America, even calling for a common currency and a unified military. World Net Daily has the entire scoop here.

The Fraud of Ancher Babies

THE FRAUD OF ANCHOR BABIES

By: Dr. Jack Wheeler

The myth of Birthright Citizenship is one of the more extraordinary frauds committed in America today. Liberals insist that the "Citizenship Clause" of the 14th Amendment - which states "All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside" - means that children of illegal aliens born on US soil automatically are US citizens.

The 14th Amendment means no such thing. When it was ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of native-born Black Americans, whose rights were being denied as recently-freed slaves, the Citizenship Clause's author, Senator Jacob Howard, made it explicitly clear that the clause did not apply to "persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States."

The key phrase of the clause is "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." The primary author of the entire 14th Amendment, Senator John Bingham, stated, "I find no fault with the introductory (Citizenship) Clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen."

This meaning was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Elk v. Wilkins (1884), which determined that the phrase "subject to its jurisdiction" explicitly excluded "citizens of foreign states born within the United States."

In other words, an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby. Illegal aliens from Mexico do not owe allegiance to America. Their children, if born in the US, thus have no constitutional right to US citizenship.

These children are known as "anchor babies," as under the 1965 Immigration Act, they act as an anchor that pulls the illegal alien mother and eventually a host of other relatives into permanent U.S. residency. They are thus a major contributor to the flood of illegal invasion into America.

Current estimates are that 300,000 anchor babies are born in the United States every year now to illegal alien mothers. The cost of providing government services such as health and education for them at taxpayer expense is in the billions each year.

To help stop this invasion, to stop this misinterpretation of the Constitution, Congressman Nathan Deal (R-GA), along with 84 co-sponsors, has introduced HR 698 into Congress: The Citizenship Reform Act. Its purpose is to "deny automatic citizenship at birth to children born in the United States to parents who are not citizens or permanent resident aliens."

The 85 Congressional sponsors of the Citizenship Reform Act, after thorough legal consultation, are convinced the problem of anchor babies can be solved legislatively, and does not require a constitutional amendment.

Democrats do not want the bill passed, as the more anchor babies, the more illegal relatives enter the US, the more welfare programs are needed to take care of them, the more government workers hired to administer the programs, all resulting in more Democrat voters.

"Moderate" Republicans are afraid the bill will "alienate" certain voters. Being spineless, their fear controls them.

Yet a growing number of people in Congress are heeding the demands of the great majority of American citizens to end the outrage of birthright citizenship. The prospects of passage for HR 698 are thus growing with them.

As Congressman Deal explains:

The Supreme Court has never gone so far as to suggest that a foreign national with no lawful connection to our nation ought to be able to confer citizenship on their child on the basis of a decision to violate our immigration laws. Someone with no legal equities or any legal duties to the United States is in no position to lay claim to the ultimate prize of citizenship on behalf of their offspring.

You might consider calling your Congressman's local district office and asking if he or she is a co-sponsor of HR 698, and that you won't vote for them if they are not.