Judge: Arizona law enforcement can ask for papers when stopping folks for unrelated violations. (no article)

The incompetence we see in this Administration is both intentional and structural. No better example exists than Obama's failing immigration policies.

You,  the reader,  should know that in a May 4th report, Inspector General Roth reveals that the Department of Homeland Security “does not gather and analyze prosecutorial discretion data.”

The significance of this fact is found in the amnesty defense of this perverse Administration before the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals,  as it tries to reverse a District Court's injunction against Obama's executive ordered amnesty,  an order placed on hold by the District Court in February.  Understand that the Administration is telling the Appeals Court that the justification for the amnesty order,  is a thing called "prosecutorial discretion."  Obama is insisting that his order is in line with existing law while it places a priority on the illegal alien population.  The Administration argues that it cannot supervise the larger alien population according to existing law,  and is using the amnesty order to simply realign priorities within the law    . . . . . .    turns out,  this is an argue based on an intentional effort to deceive the Court.  In other words,  it is a lie.  

Per the Inspector General's revelations,  (all federal agencies and programs have an inspector general assigned for the purpose of oversight),  Homeland Security does not have the ability “to fully assess its current immigration enforcement activities and to develop future policy.” Because the Department of Homeland Security is not collecting this data and “does not have a mechanism to continuously monitor its use of prosecutorial discretion,” it lacks the ability to “improve future policy.”

Because of this institutional/structural failure (no doubt intentional on the part of the Administration),  it may be "missing opportunities to strengthen its ability to remove aliens who pose a threat to national security and public safety,”  according to Roth.  

Understand that Obama is a no-borders,  Utopian Marxist of the first order.  He simply does not believe in borders,  and has the European Union as his prime example. 

Besides the failure to monitor his amnesty program for efficiency, he cannot monitor the program against convicted foreign felons.  According to ICE,  they have released into the US population,  36,000 convicted foreign felons in 2013 and 30,500 alien felons in 2014.     

You should know by now,  after nearly 7 years of abject failure,  that Obama's perceived "incompetence,"  is more an issue of failed ideology wrapped in a disdain for this country's historicity and founding documents.  

Simply put,  he and his wife,  do not like America as it is, or,  how it got to its present state   . . . . .   but more on that in a latter post.  

On hold: Obama's wild-eyed idea about open borders and his version of immigration fairness.

If you haven’t been keeping up,  you  should know that a “land mark” course of action,  by Hussein Obama,  the seriously flawed, Saul Alinsky wannabe in our White House,  was put on hold, last February 16.  Obama’s executive action effecting some 5 million  (I believe that number will be as many as 9 million,  initially, per snopes.com, here) .   

U.S. District Court Judge,  Andrew Hansen,  issued the “stop order” in a 125 page decision.    And that should have been the end of the matter,  temporarily.  But it wasn't.  Instead,  Our imperial minded reform,  decided to ignore the courts, and issued 108,000 new green cards using an earlier executive order,  one he wrote in 2012   . . . . . . . .   and that bit of legal trickery has gotten the Administration in,  what appears to be,  serious legal trouble.  

As it turns out,  our rogue president,  [as just mentioned]  allowed his program to continue,  using an executive order issued back in 2012,  an order that we know as “The Dream Act," protecting thousands of minor aged immigrants,  with parents already in the states, from being deported.  
  
On Thursday,  March 19,  Judge sharply scolded a Justice Department (this is Eric Holders bunch of radicals)  attorney at a hearing on President Obama's immigration executive actions, suggesting that the Administration misled him on a key part of the program -- and that he fell for it, "like an idiot."
 As a result of this bit of insubordination,  the judge suggested he could order sanctions against the administration if he finds they indeed misrepresented the facts.

To be clear:  At issue is whether the DOJ misled the judge into believing that a plank of the Obama program -- giving deportation reprieves to thousands of young illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as children -- would not go forward before he made a ruling on a request to halt it, when, In fact, federal officials have given more than 108,000 people three-year reprieves since the order to "cease and diseased" on February 16. 

At issue is the question of whether Obama can rewrite immigration law via Executive Memo or Executive Order  (he has used both,  to rewrite federal law,  including ObamaCare).  

What is most disturbing is the fact that Obama simply does not care what the voters think,  what the international community things (i.e. his Middle East alliance with Iran),  or what the Courts think.  Truly a rogue president, all in the spirit of a lone wolf,  community organization.  

Guaranteed,  it will be a long day in hell before anyone with a "community organizing" background gets elected to the presidency, again.  

So, we wait to find out if the Courts are as inept at stopping this Moron as is our Congress  (on both sides of the aisle). 
_____________________

Related articles:

Snopes:  http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/greencards.asp

Fox News:  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/20/judge-sanctions-possible-in-obama-immigration-court-case/


                                                                                 

Hopes are high that the courts will side with those who oppose Obama's executive excesses and his own first opinion.

As reported in Breitbart: Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R), who as the state’s Attorney General filed the lawsuit against the president’s executive action predicted the suit would ultimately succeed because “Barack Obama is our star witness” on Tuesday’s “Hannity” on the Fox News Channel.
 “I think we will win [the 26 state lawsuit to stop Obama's illegal immigration by executive memo ~ editor] all the way for one simple reason, and that is, the man you just had on the screen, Barack Obama, is our star witness. 22 times Barack Obama said he did not have the authority to implement this type of measure. And then the day after he signed this into law, he said, quote, ‘I just changed the law.’ 

"The exact wording was “I just took an action to change the law,” per Abbott   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     "those words alone show that he violated the Constitution, and violated federal law” Abbott stated.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    This is [is not prosecutorial  discretion] but   an abandonment of the law by the Obama administration, and then re-writing and making it up. That violates the Constitution.”

Only 25% of those eligible under the Dream Act (an executive order) actually applied. Immigration lawyers believe the same percentages are in order, as to Obama's "amnesty" order. Instead of 5 million, we may only see 1.5 million or less. Here is why:

Ever heard of a "nothing burger?"  Well,  that is what Obama's executive order is,  a nothing burger.  And in exchange for "nothing,"  he has infuriated a Congress he needs to work with,  for our sakes ~blog editor.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) By Julia Edwards - U.S. President Barack Obama's executive action easing the threat of deportation for 4.7 million undocumented immigrants is unlikely to cover many of those eligible because of practical hurdles, immigration lawyers said.

High application costs, extensive documentation requirements and lengthy waiting periods for approval sharply reduced participation in a 2012 executive action aimed at undocumented immigrants brought to the United States by their parents as children, and the process is expected to be even more arduous this time around, the lawyers said.

Only 44 percent of the 1.2 million eligible immigrants under the 2012 order [the Dream Act ~ blog editor]  had been approved after two years, according to the Migration Policy Institute. And 55 percent of those eligible never completed the application process, according to the nonpartisan, Washington-based think tank.

A $465 filing fee, waiting lists of more than a year and applications requiring biometric screenings and proof of U.S. residency dating to 2007 contributed to the low application rates then, advocates said.

Similar requirements are expected under the new order, and it could be worse this time around as the larger pool of eligible participants is likely to create bigger backlogs and deter a higher percentage of people.

"We're concerned that with all the different kinds of challenges, the number of people who are eligible won't step forward," said Greg Chen, director of advocacy at the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Obama's order, like all executive actions, does not provide additional funding that could pay for hiring more staff to process the applications, potentially prolonging the wait times.

Though application fees help fund the program, it is difficult to staff up in preparation, said a person who helped the agency get ready for the 2012 program. Adult applicants will not be able to apply until mid 2015. Even then, Chen said eligible applicants could expect to wait more than a year after filing to be approved   . . . . .   (read the full article,  here).  

Blacks critical of Obama's executive order and many of these folks are Black Activists at Project 21 (kind of the opposite of folks in the Tea Party).

For Release: November 20, 2014
Contact: Judy Kent at (703) 759-7476 orjkent@nationalcenter.org or David Almasi at (202) 543-4110 x11 or (703) 568-4727 (text-enabled cell) ordalmasi@nationalcenter.org

Obama's Amnesty Order Harms Jobs, Schools, Health and Simple Fairness, Black Activists Say

Washington, D.C. - Activists with the Project 21 black leadership network are critical of just-announced executive action by President Barack Obama to grant amnesty to non-citizens illegally in the United States.

"What President Obama did is reward those who broke our laws. This will only embitter and endanger the citizenry and legal immigrants who are similarly looking for work, just scraping by and worried about their economic future," said Project 21 Archbishop Council Nedd II of St. Alban's Anglican Church. "God has blessed America with abundance, and I cannot fault those seeking a better life here. But the unregulated surge of people across our borders is problematic, unsustainable and in violation of carefully-crafted rules."

"By himself, and against the protests of congressional leaders, President Obama is giving the illegal alien community absolution for its law-breaking. Obama's action effectively rewards the intentions of these illegals to exploit a broken immigration system and lay claim to the American way of life at the expense of its citizens and legal immigrants who obeyed our laws," said Project 21's Derryck Green, a southern California resident. "Our nation will undoubtedly suffer from further and a likely intensified strain on our infrastructure as well as resources that are already limited in supply due to a poor economic recovery."

"What we are now witnessing with Obama's amnesty plan is a complete destruction of our constitutional republic. We no longer seem to live under a system of checks and balances or separation of powers," said Project 21'sShelby Emmett, a lawyer and former congressional staff member who dealt with immigration issues. "We the people apparently have no more say in our representation or our form of government."

Project 21 has issued six "DataReleases" on immigration in recent weeks, covering the following major policy areas:

• Jobs: Jobless Black Americans are demographically similar to illegal immigrants and amnesty means they encounter substantially increased head-to-head competition for jobs. Illegal immigrant migration to urban centers exacerbates challenges for black jobseekers. The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights concluded that illegal immigrants "depress both wages and employment rates for low-skilled American citizens, a disproportionate number of whom are black men."
  
• Fairness: Carefully-crafted rules to manage immigration into the United States with an eye toward health, financial sustainability and clean legal records are discarded by mass amnesty, which also is unfair to those who immigrated after waiting in line. Obama-backed immigration policy changes would eliminate the method by which a quarter of all African immigrants, who historically have emigrated legally, are allowed residency in the United States while millions of Latin Americans who arrived illegally are granted amnesty. 
  
• Health: Health providers along the U.S-Mexico border are dealing with flu, tuberculosis, chicken pox, scabies and other illnesses brought into the U.S. by illegal aliens. The legal immigration process contains health screening, but the massive influx of Latin American children in 2014 in particular led the Obama Administration to rely on inferior screening processes and a resettlement strategy that dispersed them across the country. 
  
• Public schools: Attorney General Eric Holder told public school administrators they have an "obligation to enroll students regardless of immigration status." This influx expands class sizes and stretches school budgets. 
  
• Refugees: Designating Latin American illegal aliens as "refugees" from gangs and drug lords to justify an executive action blocking them from deportation would disrupt rules and limits for accepting refugees into the United States and put refugee candidates from other parts of the world at a severe disadvantage. 
  
• History: Immigration surges historically have tended to hurt the employment prospects of black Americans.

This year, Project 21 members have been interviewed and published hundreds of times on immigration, including an op-ed in the Orlando Sentinel by Project 21's Joe Hicks, a former executive director of the Greater Los Angeles chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

Project 21, a leading voice of black conservatives for over two decades, is sponsored by the National Center for Public Policy Research (http://www.nationalcenter.org).

Contributions to the National Center are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated .

-30-

Home | Donate | Subscribe | Search | About Us | What's New | Blog |Twitter

Don't want to believe that Obama was not being fully truthful, in his Thursday speech? Would you believe the Left leaning Associated Press?

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama made some notable omissions Thursday night in his remarks about the unilateral actions he's taking on immigration.

A look at his statements and how they compare with the facts:

OBAMA: "It does not grant citizenship, or the right to stay here permanently, or offer the same benefits that citizens receive - only Congress can do that. All we're saying is we're not going to deport you."

THE FACTS: He's saying, and doing, more than that. The changes also will make those covered eligible for work permits, allowing them to be employed in the country legally and compete with citizens and legal residents for better-paying jobs.

___

OBAMA: "Although this summer, there was a brief spike in unaccompanied children being apprehended at our border, the number of such children is now actually lower than it's been in nearly two years."

THE FACTS: The numbers certainly surged this year, but it was more than a "brief spike." The number of unaccompanied children apprehended at the border has been on the rise since the 2011 budget year. That year about 16,000 children were found crossing the border alone. In 2012, the Border Patrol reported more than 24,000 children, followed by more than 38,800 in 2013. In the last budget year, more than 68,361 children were apprehended.

___

OBAMA: "Overall, the number of people trying to cross our border illegally is at its lowest level since the 1970s. Those are the facts."

THE FACTS: Indeed, in the 2014 budget year the Border Patrol made 486,651 arrests of border crossers, among the fewest since the early 1970s. But border arrests have been on the rise since 2011.

The decline in crossings is not purely, or perhaps even primarily, due to the Obama administration. The deep economic recession early in his presidency and the shaky aftermath made the U.S. a less attractive place to come for work. The increase in arrests since 2011 also can be traced in part to the economy — as the recovery improved, more people came in search of opportunity.

___

OBAMA: "When I took office, I committed to fixing this broken immigration system. And I began by doing what I could to secure our borders."

THE FACTS: He overlooked the fact that he promised as a candidate for president in 2008 to have an immigration bill during his first year in office and move forward on it quickly. He never kept that promise to the Latino community.

___

Associated Press writers Calvin Woodward and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.

Is it true that the House sat on Senate immigration legislation for a year?

In his 15 minute speech,  Thursday night,  Obama mentioned that the House has sat on Senate approved legislation for over a year,  and did nothing.  

In defense of the House inaction,  we have this:   

Understand that the CBO (Congressional Budget Office),  which is responsible for "scoring" a proposed bill's claims, did an analysis of the Senate bill and found that the bill did not secure the border,  as claimed.  In fact,  the CBO found that no more than 30% of illegal traffic coming across the border would be prevented with the ratification the Senate bill . . . . .   not good enough for anyone with an ounce of commonsense.  After all,  the point of new "comprehensive immigration legislation" includes closing the southern border, or,  at least,  slowing illegal entry to a respectable or manageable level.  The Senate bill did none of that.  And there was no willingness on the part of the Harry Reid and his do nothing Senate,  to negotiate on this point.   

Exactly what is illegal about cutting deportations and unifying familes?

The question,  itself,  implies that what Obama is doing,  trumps established law and order because his decision to continue ignoring Congress,  has an Utopian value  . . . .   never mind that his actions are illegal and without precedent.   

Questions: 

If he cares so much about the Hispanic people and this immigration problem,  specifically,  why did he not solve the problem,  as promised,  during his first year?  For two years,  the GOP had no legislative voice,  making 2009 and/or 2010 the perfect time(s) to pass this legislation.  

But he chose not to do this.  Why?  Obama and his henchmen,  want you to believe that he,  personally,  was working on ObamaCare and did not have time for anything else.  

He and his "did not have time?"  Seriously?  Think about this:  Congress had time to pass the Lilly Ledbetter Wage Fairness Act (which the Dems now try to pretend did nothing for wage equality).  Congress had time to pass a one billion dollar "stimulus" bill that only paid back Democrat voters and unions and did nothing to prevent the recession. They had time to dream up the "Cash for Clunkers" fiasco that went 3 billion dollars over budget and accomplished nothing.  They had time to pass a 400 million dollar Omnibus bill (late spring of 2009).  They had time to write hundreds of pages of new regulations. They had time to write a 2,000 page financial bill (the Dodd/Frank "Too Big To Fail" bill).   H Obama and his radical wife,  had time to golf,  party at the White House, raise money,  and take 10 multi-week vacations during 2009 and 2010.  

And how is "I was working on ObamaCare,"  an excuse,  anyway?   What in the world were they doing after March 23 of 2010?  That was the day ObamaCare was signed into law.  They had 9 months remaining as to One Party Rule and did nothing about immigration.  Only the most uninformed and gullible believe "they did not have time."    

We conclude,  therefore,  that he could have, and should have,  but didn't,   solve the immigration problem because that issue works better as bait to get out the Hispanic vote in 2012.  the immigration promise worked in 2008;  why not give it another try in 2012?   This is the same type of scam Democrats have pulled on the Blacks each and every election cycle since LBJ,  making promises as to wages and a better life,  only to put those promises on the back burner,  while the Ignorants in that population keep coming back to their plantation owners in the Socialist Democrat Party.  I mean,  they were bought and sold and controlled by Southern Democrats for a 100 years and, just can't move away from the "southern comfort" they have grown accustom to.  Harsh?  You betcha.  True?  More than you can possibly imagine. But sooner or later,  there will be a Black majority that gets tired of the lies.  

Back to question:  what is the implicit evil in cutting deportations and keeping families together?  

Answer:  nothing.  Those are [always] noble goals.  But the problem is this,  that is not all that Obama is doing.  He is issuing Social Security numbers and work permits to those who are illegally here.  That is in violation of the law.  He is not simply working around Congress or playing out his discretionary privileges as to the implementation of law.  He is rewriting law in giving work status and issuing Social Security identities to those who are illegally here.  

I live in California.  The nut jobs who run this state,  are going to issue driver's licenses to these folks.  If they have legal status, a Social Securitiy number and a driver's license complete with an established address,  they will be allowed to vote in California although the State has not ruled that they can.  How can this be?  Understand that if they, the illegals,  have a verifiable ID and address,  there is no mechanism in this state that would keep them from voting,  legally or otherwise. 

When I go into the voting station to vote,  I am asked to verify my address and sign a ledger, confirming that I am registered to vote.  If my name is not on the list, my vote is accepted with my signature and submitted address,  and I move on.  

While this is not true for many states in our Union,  it is true in California and any state that now issues driver's licenses.   

Obama can say,  "They do not have the right to vote" until the cows come home.  The fact is, Obama's executive action allows these illegals de facto voting privileges,  and, if states are prevented from requiring voter ID,  the immigrant population,  under Obama,  can change the course of our national elections  beginning in 2016.  

That is what is wrong with all this.  Benefiting the migrant population while disenfranchising the larger and native population is simply wrong.  And,  so,  the battle must continue while the Courts still have a record of commonsense legal decisions on their side. 

Democrat House representatives will say ANYTHING to win the immigration debate, even when their "facts" cannot be true.

<<< She wants an open border.   We do not have enough jobs to support our current population.  More welfare and fewer jobs for our present minority population would be the result   . . . .  and she has to know it.  Why? Because no one can be this stupid.  What we have, here,  is an intentional decision to misinform.  

CNS News  Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) said that “comprehensive immigration reform would add billions and billions to our economy” and “would raise the wages of all workers’ at an event on Capitol Hill on Wednesday.

“We know that comprehensive immigration reform would add billions and billions to our economy, Schakowsky said. “It would raise the wages really of all workers, because right now immigrants are – undocumented immigrants – are exploited and even paid below the minimum wage.”

CNSNews.com asked, “Do you think that allowing illegal aliens to stay in the United States and putting them on a path to citizenship, would that help the unemployed in America?”

“In so many ways it would help our economy, help American, Native American workers, and be a plus for all of us. It’s just another one of those issues where if the bill were called, it would pass. We have the votes. There are enough Republicans who would join Democrats in passing comprehensive immigration reform, and then our country would be more prosperous,” Schakowsky added.

Jeb Bush defends his statements on immigration . . . . . and we tend to agree.

62 share

“To be young and dynamic again we have to be young and dynamic again . . . . . .   immigration reform not as a problem, but as a huge opportunity.”

“This past weekend, I made some statements about immigration reform [that] generated a little more news than I anticipated.   You know, I’ve been saying this for the last three or four years,  I said the exact same thing that I’ve said regularly.   And the simple fact is, there is no conflict between enforcing our laws, believing in the rule of law and having some sensitivity to the immigrant experience, which is part of who we are as a country.”

Editor's notes:  This is not an endorsement of Bush for the GOP nomination,  but,  if his view on a "compassionate immigration solution" includes an aggressive solution as to border security,  he is closer to a conservative solution than many want to give him credit.  

Mexico is a mess as a country, a nation that offers comparatively little in terms of freedom,  job and retirement security,  and safe passage in so many regions of that nation.  It is a dangerous place to live, at times,  and its educational system is a sad commentary of the value placed on its youth as they prepare to live and survive in an increasingly technological world.   

When a man comes to this country to work,  and sends that money back to his family in Mexico, that is an act of love.  When a man brings his family to this country,  legally or in violation of the rules,  that is an act of love, on his part,  as well.  

Love or not,  the growing population of "illegals" is a problem and one that needs resolution that something other than "rounding them up and busing them back to their homeland."  

Something in the neighborhood of 6 million Mexicans are here illegally.  We conservatives do not like this next statement,  but, it is true,  nonetheless:  we,  as a nation,  have allowed this growing population and related problems.  

Our refusal to enforce existing border law,  is a disgrace,  but that is problem of our doing;  the "illegal" is only taking advantage of the situation  -  the "illegal" is not causing the problem,  in spite of the fact that their presence, here in this country,  is the problem.  

Understand two things:  One,  we are not going to bus 6 million people out of this country,  for a number of reasons,  logistically and otherwise.  Two,  many (between 40% and 60%) of these people have children born in this country;  those children are American citizens and deserve the consideration due to citizenship.  

Some folks believe that sending the parents back to Mexico and moving the children into foster care is a solution  -  as incredibly blind and heartless solution as that might sound.    

We need to solve the problem and stop worrying about who these folks are going to vote for,  in the future.  Understand this,  the current leadership within the Progressive/Socialist,  Democrat Party,  only cares about the "alien population" because of what they offer at the ballot box.  There is no debate about that.  If we conservatives are consumed by the same consideration,  the problem will never see a solution.  

GW Bush,  as governor of Texas,  ran that state as a conservative and [still] enjoyed a 40% vote support among Hispanics in that state.  In 2004,  GW won that national election with a 44% vote from the Hispanics in this country.  If the GOP and its conservative base can see a consistent 35% to 45% Hispanic vote in our national elections,  we will win more than our fair share of those elections.   Romney lost with 27% of the Hispanic vote.  A 35% total would have won the election for the GOP.  

What I am saying is this:  we are not that far behind with the Hispanic voter.  It is not too late.  But we have a lot of work to do.

Besides securing the border,  we will need to "patriate" these folks,  making certain they understand and appreciate our founding historicity,  its documents and  the role the Constitution plays as the centre of our legal system.  If this is not part of "comprehensive immigration legislation,"  we are only allowing the growth of a rebel, unAmerican population.  

As a nation,  it is suicidal to offer citizenship to a growing population of people who do not appreciate our laws,  our history, and our place/destiny in the world.  If this collective issue is not a part of the solution,  there is no viable solution that advances the goodness of this wonderful country.    A rebel population would be a disaster.  I mean,  look at the rebel leadership in the New Democrat, World Without Borders,  party,  of the Obama era.  

A complicated problem, to be sure. Does Jeb Bush have all the answers?  I doubt it.  But I have not heard a comprehensive solution,  to date,  that embraces such the patriate issue along with border security,  legal work status and a path to citizenship "that begins at the back of the line" (as they say).  

At least,  we are not seriously talking about Chris Christie, anymore.  

Lily Ledbetter was the Dems answer to "equal pay" issues (2009), and, apparently, it failed after being passed. Now, Pelosi is crying for immigration legislation when she could have had this passed into law in 2009 without GOP opposition.

“It’s the biggest thing that we can do, and that’s why I’ve said to the speaker, to the press, to these groups, I would rather pass [a] comprehensive immigration reform bill than win the elections in November,” 

Editor's notes: understand the Democrat legislative strategy:  they use hope as an election cycle strategy,  but never pass a law that actually solves the problem   . . . . . . .  giving them the same election strategies for the next election cycle.  

1.  Their war on poverty,  has been amended on several occasions since the 1960's.  3 trillion dollars spent of the past 4 decades,  and still,  they see this as an election year issue.  

2.  Lily Ledbetter was a bill Obama signed into law in early 2009.  This bill was the end all to women's wage equality issues.  And, yet,  today,  it seems that no one remembers that law,  and,  most certainly,  the bill accomplished nothing when compared to its stated goals.  

3.  Pelosi cries for immigration legislation,  but could have passed comprehensive legislation,  even amnesty,  any time during 2009,  when she was Speaker of the House and Over Lord of a super majority that give congressional Democrat the power of one party rule.  So why no legislation?  Because it is being used as a gimmick for coming elections   . . . .   period.  

The fact that Hispanic legislators and media outlets have never held the Dems accountable for this unequivocal failure exposes them as "game players" on the same plane as their non-Hispanic cohorts.  

Jeb Bush on immigration: Let's keep his words in context, shall we?

13 share

Asked about immigration, [Jeb] Bush started by saying that a bipartisan bill passed by the Senate last year made "a good effort" at proposing ways to ensure that people overstaying visas leave the country.

[He is not saying that he agreed with the full bill,  so let's be careful when we quote him.  It should include what he did NOT say,  as well,  no?  - editor] 

"A great country ought to know where those folks are and politely ask them to leave," he said, adding later that properly targeting people who overstay visas "would restore people's confidence" in the nation's immigration system.

"There are means by which we can control our border better than we have. And there should be penalties for breaking the law," he added. "But the way I look at this -- and I'm going to say this, and it'll be on tape and so be it. The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their families -- the dad who loved their children -- was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table. And they wanted to make sure their family was intact, and they crossed the border because they had no other means to work to be able to provide for their family. Yes, they broke the law, but it’s not a felony.

[And,  illegal aliens are not guilty of felonious behavior.  That IS a fact.  In that sense,  they are not “criminals,”   by definition.  Whether that is the way it should be, is one thing;  the fact of the matter is this: that is the way it is ~editor]

It’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family.

[Here,  Jeb is speaking from a father’s point of view.  He is not saying that this fatherly love makes the violation of immigration law a non-factor.  Note that he says,” . . .  there should be a price paid”   ~ editor]

I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime that there should be a price paid, but it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families."

Editor notes:  One thing for certain,  we are not going to round these people up,  load them onto buses and ship them back to Mexico.  There are too many of them,  and many,  if not most of these families,  have children who were born in this country,  and are American citizens.  So,  what do we do?  

Maybe we could start with not getting so emotional about this issue.  Whether they all become Democrat voters,  is one thing,  and I am sure that is the primary reason for the Democrat push,  as shallow a political party as they are.    But,  how we treat those who are American born, is quite another matter.  Keep the kids here,  give them to the State and send their parents home?  Really.  That is the solution?  Not here on this blog.  

Let's elect people who will solve the problem,  beginning with border security.  I do not know if I will support another Bush.  The father (Bush 41) endorsed "Project 21,"  a damnable plot to take away private property rights and move this country closer to a "world without borders."  GW,  while right on Iraq and waterboarding (we HAD to do it.  The Dems somehow think killing thousands via drone attacks is better - go figure),  continued the nationalization of our educational system and supported "Affordable Housing,"  a Progressive/Socialist plot to make housing ownership possible for all,  regardless of their ability to pay.  They couldn't pay,  as it turned out,  and we had the recession beginning in 2008.  

I am thinking it is time for this nation to come out of the Bushes,  but,  to date,  Jeb Bush's view on immigration is not the game stopper, for me,  that it is for many.  

I want to wait and see what Jeb's comprehensive politic is.  I don't think any of us know.  

Bush's words taken from the WaPost, here. 

Over the weekend, House Democrats make a move to force a vote on the House floor regarding immigration and the minimum wage.

Editor’s notes:  House Dems announced a move,  over the weekend,  to force a vote on the minimum wage and immigration.  Neither attempt will succeed.  This is a first move in establishing a 2014 campaign strategy that avoids ObamaCare as the primary issue.  If the GOP plays its cards right,  the Dems will need to explain why they did not pass comprehensive legislation in 2009,  as promised by Obama,  when they had super-majorities in both the Senate and the House.  They also,  need to explain why they believe that $10.20 per hour is,  somehow,  a living wage. 

From Washington and the AP   — House Democrats are determined to cast an election-year spotlight on Republican opposition to raising the minimum wage and overhauling immigration laws.

To try to accomplish that in the GOP-controlled House, Democrats are planning to rely on an infrequently used, rarely successful tactic . . . . . . 

Why not support the new immigration bill?

 It appears that the Senate has the votes to pass their version of the immigration bill,  in spite of the fact that these feckless leaders,  Republican and Democrat alike,  have no intentions of reading the 800 page bill before the Senate vote. 

And therein is my reason for not supporting this bill  . . . . . .  I have no idea what it says,  what additional regulations are added against the business community,  the total bill within this bill for unrelated “pork,”   how many additional agencies will be created,  the cost of this  bill,  where this money will come from,   or,  whether the border will be “closed” before this bill becomes law.   

Anyone think these considerations important?  One thing for certain,  the past four years has revealed a congressional process that is wholly ignorant of the laws it passes.  The failure to read a bill before passage is not a practice that began with the advent of the current empty suit acting (read: “pretending”) as our president.  Our congress has been following this practice for years,  if not  decades.   

As a conservative pundit,  I have come to believe that we are much too focused on the Obama Administration when criticizing the way Congress does its business and its penchant for spending money.  

With this Senate bill,  all I can say is,  "Here we go again." 

Marco Rubio's comprehensive immigration reform formula.

Understand that when he speaks of the “will of the people” or words to that affect,  he is just kidding.  The will of the people had nothing,  absolutely nothing,  to do with the passage of ObamaCare and,  every survey since that debate was framed,  has expressed a deep disappointment in what Obama calls “health care reform.”  That negative attitude will only increase with the passage of time.  The reason?  The bill is full of taxes at all levels, including a heavy dose directed at the middle class.  But before the taxes kick in,  sometime during 2014 and before the coming midterms,  there is the fact of rising healthcare costs.  Since this bill’s passage,  healthcare costs for those not on Medicare,  have risen $2,500 per year,  for a family of four.  He promised a decrease of that exact amount,  but that failing was not a central issue in the 2012 election cycle.  Why?  No one knows. 

The will of the people have nothing to do with his fetish for spending,  and the number of concerned citizens on this score,  is around 70%.  Yet,  nothing of substance from this man who would be King. 

Because this is his second term,  he will have more time to get things done,  since he will not have the excuse of running a campaign.  And,  if the Socialist/One Worlders, win back the House,  he just might get more accomplished. 

Its  just that since he failed to get all that much accomplished,  in this first two years,  when the Republicans could not stop anything he thought to do,   one wonders how much will be accomplished with or without a takeover of the House by the Dems. 

Editorial notes:  understand that Marco Rubio came up with a "dream act" to deal with so-called "illegals,"  during the 2012 campaign cycle.  B Hussein stole that idea, a week later,  and put it into effect via an executive order.  His campaign was full of co-oped ideas,  cover -ups and dozens of promises initially made during his 2008 campaign. 

 

News Update:  a group of Senators including Senator Rubio,  will hold a joint press conference on immigration reform,  today  (Jan 28th) at 11:30,  pt.  Some of Rubio's ideas,  expressed below,  may be a part of what comes from this bipartisan effort. 

By MARCO RUBIO SPECIAL TO THE LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

Posted: Jan. 27, 2013 | 2:11 a.m.
Updated: Jan. 27, 2013 | 9:35 p.m.

As a nation of immigrants, Americans know how important immigration has been throughout our history. It's an indispensable part of our future.

Sadly, our immigration system is broken, and our dysfunctional Congress has been unable to put in place a new legal immigration system that honors our heritage as both a nation of immigrants and a nation of laws. To do this, we need to address three key areas.

I

First, we need a modern legal immigration system with an application  and compliance system that relies on new technology to simplify the process of coming and staying here legally.

We need an agricultural workers program that allows us to bring in seasonal and long-term laborers to provide our agricultural industries with the workers they need.

We need visa programs to attract and keep more entrepreneurs, investors and highly skilled workers in science, technology, engineering and math fields.

None of this should lead us to abandon or undermine family-based immigration. That is how my parents came to America legally, and how a great many new Americans join our society every year. Family unification should remain a high priority alongside the nation's economic interests.

II

A second key area is improving our law enforcement. Every nation has a right to protect its sovereignty by enforcing its immigration laws. We must attain operational control of our borders, create an effective workplace enforcement mechanism, and make sure that visitors to our nation leave our country when they're supposed to.

III

The third key area: addressing the undocumented immigrants already here. Those who have committed serious crimes in the United States should be found, arrested and deported.

Most of those who are undocumented are not dangerous criminals. But most are also not victims. They knowingly broke our immigration laws and do not have a legal right to remain here. But they are also human beings who made those choices in pursuit of a dream we recognize as the American dream.  [ Understand that coming to this country,  “illegally,”  is not a criminal offence,  according to our courts.  It’s restrictions are part of our civil code,  not our criminal code.  -  editor ]

The best thing for our country is to deal with this issue in a humane but responsible way that ensures this never happens again - not because anyone has a "right" to reside here illegally, but because, with or without documents, most of them are here to stay.

We can't round up millions of people and deport them. But we also can't fix our broken immigration system if we provide incentives for people to come here illegally - precisely the signal a blanket amnesty would send.

What to do with the millions of “illegal’s” in our country, now.

1)       Instead, the first step should be to require those who have not committed any felonies and are assimilated into America, to have the opportunity to apply for temporary non-immigrant status. To receive this status, they will have to come forward, admit wrongdoing, undergo a background check and pay back taxes and a meaningful fine for violating our laws.

To keep this status, they must maintain clean criminal records.   And they will not be able to receive welfare, student aid or any other federal public assistance.

2)   It's not a good idea to have millions of people permanently trapped in an immigration status that keeps them forever at a distance from our society. Therefore, once our new enforcement measures are certifiably in place, they should be allowed to apply for permanent status - not through a special pathway, but through the new and modernized legal immigration process we envision. They will have to wait behind everyone who applied before them legally. And when their turn comes up, they will have to meet the conditions of the visa they apply for.

3)   In the past, efforts to accommodate the undocumented have failed because the enforcement measures were never implemented. That's why this option to apply for a green card and get in the back of the line should not be made available until it is certified that significant progress has been made on enforcement of our immigration laws.

Both sides should want this kind of common-sense reform. To those concerned about illegal immigration, what we have now is de facto amnesty. To those looking to help the undocumented, families will continue being separated by deportations as long as politicians keep bickering and trying to outdo each other.

I've been encouraged by the support for these ideas I've found across the political spectrum, and my hope is President Obama will use his voice and influence to further this approach. However, if what he offers is a process for the undocumented that is more lenient, faster and unfair to those waiting to come legally, it won't bode well for reform.

I hope he proves that he is as serious about solving the problem as I and many colleagues are.

U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is a former Las Vegas resident and the son of Cuban immigrants.