Thursday, August 23, 2007

Arellano Deportado!

Just days ago Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) finally did its job and deported the convicted felon, social security fraudster, and illegal alien known as Elvira Arellano! Ms. Arellano -- a law-absconder branded an immigrant rights "activist" by the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times -- first came to the United States illegally in 1997. She then returned illegally once again and was working illegally at the Chicago-O'Hare airport when arrested by ICE in 2002. Shortly thereafter, she found a church willing to let her escape authorities and she has been evading the rule of law ever since. Although it was a decade in the making, the open border Tribune called her deportation "lightning-swift." No joke.

Well, her trip out of hiding to Los Angeles for a pro-amnesty rally finally did her in. She's been deported back to Mexico -- again -- where she's joining forces with the Mexican government to destroy the rule of law in the United States. Apparently, the Mexican Senate hopes that the corruption and lawlessness that defines Mexico will spread further al Norte. In fact, the Mexican Senate passed a bill demanding that President Felipe Calderon protest the White House. One Mexican senator said: "
We cannot remain quiet in view of this injustice and must ask for firm action from our authorities!" Apparently, being forced to live in Mexico is an injustice.

Highlighting the ignorance was a press event where Arellano said, "The United States is the one who broke the law first. By letting people cross over without documents, by letting people pay taxes... But I know I am not alone."

One must ask WHERE this felon got the idea that the United States is "letting" people evade our immigration laws and enter the country illegally. Of course, one must look no further than the White House for an answer to that question. If we actually had a President, there would be a rapid response from the White House explaining to Ms. Arellano and the Mexican Senate that Arelleno certainly is NOT alone and that she should expect about 14 million of her fellow-felons to join her shortly. And if we had a President, the border fence would already be constructed.

In yet another statement clearly crafted by MALDEF, Arellano stated that she is seeking to return to the United States as a "peace and justice" ambassador. She said, "What I'm asking for is a diplomatic visa so that I can be an ambassador for peace and justice because I'm not a terrorist and the United States can't continue treating undocumented migrants as terrorists."

Of course, if we HAD treated Ms. Arellano as a "terrorist" she would be in Guantanamo. Perhaps this would, in fact, be an improvement over Mexico where 50 percent of the population lives at or below the poverty line. However, the United States was overly-generous to Ms. Arellano, taking years and years to finally hold her accountable for her actions. Note to Arellano: We treat illegal aliens as illegal aliens and the result of your decision is deportation.

It's unfortunate that the Mexican Senate is spending time on helping Arellano bash the United States. It's unfortunate that the Mexican Senate isn't working to improve living conditions in Mexico. Considering a fifth of the Mexican population already lives in the United States, the Mexican Senate should take a long, hard look in the mirror.

In the meantime, the United States must fortify all immigration laws, borders, and ports of entry before it's too late. Remember, according to a Zogby poll, 57 percent of Mexicans believe that "Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without U.S. permission."

It's time to send a strong message al sur.

"Celebration time, c'mon!"

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Bush's New Plan for Amnesty

Originally, the Bush White House thought it could use raw power to force an illegal alien amnesty down the taxpayer's throat. But they underestimated the public's opposition to immigration anarchy. They underestimated our willingness to call and fax Capitol Hill 'round the clock.

Today, the Bush White House is trying to take a different path to amnesty. Over the past year, they heard that the People want a serious commitment to law enforcement. They heard that we want an end to illegal immigration through employer sanctions and border security before any discussion of legalization takes place. The thinking from the supporters of law enforcement is that once we make the United States unwelcoming to those wishing to come illegally, the illegal alien population will reduce slowly over time. After about a decade of serious enforcement and the creation of secure borders, then -- and only then -- should we discuss a possible legalization for those remaining in the country.

The White House interprets this "attrition" policy as an opportunity for amnesty. In an announcement from the loudest amnesty advocates -- Bush, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, and DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff -- it was promised this morning that the White House would actually do its job of enforcing immigration laws. What they don't realize is that they come across as dishonest con artists; it's pretty much impossible to believe any of them. Their promised enforcement is available in English -- and Spanish -- on the White House website, here.

The transcript from the press conference is most revealing. It is clear that they are begrudgingly enforcing the law with the goal of amnesty. It also appears their plan is to haphazardly enforce our immigration laws and create as much fear, confusion, and economic strife so that in six months the White House can announce: "See, enforcement-only is a failure; we need an amnesty now!" Look for this announcement Spring 2008.

Multiple times during the conference, Chertoff lamented the failure of the amnesty bill and basically foreshadowed its return:

We're obviously disappointed in the fact, as is the President, that Congress has not chosen to act on our comprehensive solution... Our hope is that the key elements of the Senate bill will see the light of day at some point."


"Now, let me make it clear that under the Senate bill, which did not pass, we would have actually made enrollment in E-Verify mandatory for employers..."


"Of course, because Congress didn't pass the comprehensive immigration measure, we don't have all the tools we'd like to have..."

Open-border Gutierrez echoed Chertoff's sadness:

"...we had hoped to get comprehensive reform passed on Capitol Hill..."


"Ultimately - ultimately, Congress will have to pass comprehensive immigration reform. Without reform, we're going to end up with a patchwork of laws nationwide."


"This issue is not going to go away; Congress needs to act."

THEN, these two amnesty advocates showed their true plan: make the enforcement-only approach appear to fail by creating fear and confusion via "the sky is falling" statements:

They claim they will "clamp down on employers" and "come down on them like a ton of bricks."

They claim that "there's going to be an economic consequence to tough law enforcement," which must mean complete economic failure, of course.

Apparently, "Without reform, we will also see many of our agricultural products coming from overseas. And without reform, small businesses and farmers are going to go out of business."

Considering how difficult is it to buy "Made in America" produce already, I don't think an amnesty is going to make much of a difference.

Chertoff then threatened Congress, claiming it would be their fault when the United States falls apart: " the end of the day, the enforcement of the law is going to have some consequences. The one thing I think we've tried to do from the very beginning is to be really up front and transparent about what the consequences of these decisions are. We don't get a vote in Congress. We can't make Congress pass it. But we can be very sure that we let Congress understand the consequences of the choices that Congress makes."

Then Gutierrez repeated these tired lines: "We do not have the workers our economy needs to keep growing each year" and, "comprehensive immigration essential for our nation's future security and prosperity."

The true goal of this proposal, of course, is to provide pro-slavery businesses and open-border advocacy groups with talking points while encouraging them to scream and yell and cry so that Bush can claim that enforcing our laws is impossible. A secondary goal is to prepare the media to craft sob stories.

One can already predict the type of articles the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post will be publishing over the next six months from the questions that were asked at the press conference:

"The AFL-CIO is saying that they're afraid that legal immigrants may suffer discrimination because of this. And the Chamber of Commerce is saying we're afraid businesses are going to get sued because of that; they're both talking about challenging these regulations in court. Your reaction?"

and... "How about the likelihood here that you're going to drive a lot of employers and employees underground?"

and... "Where are [the workers] going to come from?"

and... "Won't this be disruptive to agriculture?"

The Bush White House has already proven that it useless when it comes to immigration enforcement. Bush is simply gearing up for another shot at amnesty in early 2008. We must prevent it once again and hope that the next inhabitant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue will listen to the People. The next White House is our only hope.

FOLLOW UP: On September 12th, be prepared for a White House photo-op as celebrity illegal alien Elvira Arellano comes out of hiding to demand amnesty in Washington, D.C. You might recall she was working illegally at the Chicago-O'Hare airport when arrested by ICE in 2002. Shortly thereafter, she found sanctuary in a church and has been evading the rule of law ever since. The Washington Post reports that Arellano "knows she could be arrested during next month's planned trip," but that if ICE comes to arrest her, they'll "find [her] praying." The Bush White House must be elated. Both Bush and the Post understand that this will be a PERFECT photo-op to discredit law enforcement. Bush could have directed ICE to deport her any time over the past five years; but now, she can be used to create even more sob stories which Bush hopes will soften the public's stance on deportation. But he is miscalculating as most people will likely applaud her deportation.

"We now believe in security (wink, wink)..."

Monday, August 6, 2007

On the Border: Giuliani = Bush

There is no reason to believe a President Rudy Giuliani would be any different than our current President when it comes to border security. Recall that moments after Bush signed the "border fence bill" -- which mandates about 700 miles of an actual double-wall between the United States and Mexico -- he immediately began talking about "virtual fences" and a "technological" fence. Those in the know fully understand that Bush will never enforce the border bill.

And now Giuliani is following in Bush's footsteps. Read closely the following statement:

"I hope President Bush puts his energy now into building the fence...building a technological fence, increasing the size of the Border Patrol and creating order at the border..." (available here)

Giuliani has NEVER stated that he supports an actual, real, physically-existent double-fence along the border. Yet, for some reason, conservative pundits and newscasts have taken the bait, hook, line, and sinker.

When it comes to the "debates," it's time for some real answers and real questions. When will the open-border FoxNews/CNN cabal ask the following question: "Do you support the completion of the double-border fence?"

And let's not forget that while Mayor of New York, Guiliani presided over an illegal alien sanctuary city -- a fact that he is now somehow denying.

At this point, if you want more Bush-style, open-border neo-conservativism, Guiliani is your man.


Less than 24 hours after posting the discussion above, Guiliani proudly flashed his open-border credentials once again by endorsing pro-amnesty, pro-lawlessness, anti-fence advocate John McCain. At a campaign stop, Guiliani said the following:

"I happen to be a very big admirer of Senator McCain. And I can tell you quite honestly: if I weren't running for president, I would be here supporting him. If I for some reason had made a decision not to run, he'd be my candidate. And I really admire the man tremendously." Available, here.

What about McCain's rapid plunge in the polls on account of the McCain-Kennedy illegal alien amnesty, Rudy? Or are you in complete agreement?


Now the Associated Press is reporting that Giuliani has "
vowed to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the United States." Specifically, Giuliani said, "We can end illegal immigration. I promise you, we can end illegal immigration." Of course, the notion of deportation doesn't seem to be on Rudy's radar. The article reports that Giuliani "would allow a pathway to citizenship only for illegal immigrants who identify themselves as illegal, who learn English and who go to the back of the line to apply." In other words: amnesty. Unless the back of the line is in the illegal alien's homeland, this is amnesty. Giuliani's proposal is the equivalent of ending the running of red lights in New York by removing red lights. It's only going to make matters worse. No, Rudy, we need to enforce the laws.

In the same article, multi-multi-billionaire Michael Bloomberg, speaking about illegal aliens and New York's status as a sanctuary city said: "let 'em come." This, of course, is expected from a person who lives in a gated community and will never have to compete with illegal aliens for a job.


The Associated Press has finally made it clear as of November 19, 2007, that Giuliani wants an open border with "virtual" fences. In speaking against actual fencing, Giuliani just said:

And frankly, the virtual fence is more valuable because it alerts you to people approaching the border, it alerts you to people coming over the border..."

True, "virtual fences" will alert us to people coming over the border, but an actual fence will PREVENT people from coming over the border. That's what we want, Rudy. People must be funneled through a port of entry. Your plan makes you no different than Bush, McCain, or Hillary for that matter.


Now, the New York Times is reporting that Giuliani has been pushing an electronic (pretend) border fence for the past year because he was "partner in a company trying to market such technology." In other words, his support for a "virtual fence" was at least partially based on personal finances. Maybe now that his relationship with this company he'll start supporting "actual" fencing along the southern border? Don't hold your breath.

"I'm not quite what I seem..."