Posts Tagged ‘Immagration’

Janet Napolitano accused her boss President Barack Obama of making an inaccurate statement on immigration law enforcement

By Matthew Boyle

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano accused her boss President Barack Obama of making an inaccurate statement on immigration law enforcement during testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday.

A hot topic during the hearing was the Obama administration’s decision to selectively enforce immigration laws. The administration decided in mid-June – via an announcement from Napolitano and a subsequent Rose Garden speech from Obama – that it would not deport illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as “young children.”

The president’s decision to selectively enforce immigration laws directly contradicts a public statement he made in March 2011. Back then, Obama said he thought “[t]here are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

During Thursday’s Judiciary Committee hearing, Napolitano admitted to Virginia Republican Rep. Randy Forbes that Obama’s March 2011 statement was inaccurate. “Could he have issued an executive order to do what you did?” Forbes asked her.

“Yes,” Napolitano responded.

Napolitano wouldn’t, however, go so far as to admit that Obama technically used an executive order to announce the new selective enforcement policy.

Forbes asked her if “this memorandum” was “issued on behalf of the president or under the authority of the president.”

She responded, “it was under my authority as the secretary, setting the priorities for the enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws in an effort to deal not only with these compelling cases, but the continued effort to clear the backlog to deal with the more.”

“The president obviously approved of the decision, which is what he announced at the Rose Garden,” Napolitano said. “But the decision had already been announced that morning by myself.”

“You take your authority directly from the president and the appointment he made, is that not correct?” Forbes asked.

“And the Constitution and laws of the United States, that’s true,” Napolitano responded.

Obama to Court: Drop Dead

No kidding.

Within hours of the Supreme Court’s decision on the Arizona immigration law — leaving in place a core section of the law that allows local law enforcement to continue checking the immigration status of anyone suspected of being an illegal — the Obama administration has just said it will no longer enforce the law.

Fox News reports that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security — that would be Secretary Janet “Big Sis” Napolitano — has just announced that the Obamites are “suspending a key program that allowed state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law.”

In other words, they didn’t like the Court’s ruling so — they simply will not enforce the law because they don’t like it.
Why? The unspoken reason?
Progressives need to play the politics of race or they are out of business. So Secretary Janet Napolitano has just played the race card — effectively telling the Court to drop dead.
Who cares about the Constitution when the Latino vote is so critical?
Shades of George Wallace.

Imperial Decree Puts America on Notice

Obama's Use of Immigration is Meant to Deflect From How Bad Administration Has Been For Latinos

President Obama must believe he can’t close the deal with Latinos, because during his Friday interview on Univision he resorted to lying about Mitt Romney’s stance on racial profiling. Obama implied that Romney’s approval of the Arizona illegal immigrant was an indication that he approved of racial profiling. What a way to deflect attention away from how bad his administration has been for the Hispanic community.

Host Enrique Acevedo asked Obama if he would make immigration reform a priority during the first year of a second term:
“I can promise that I will try to do it in the first year of my second term. I want to try this year. The challenge we’ve got on immigration reform is very simple. I’ve got a majority of Democrats who are prepared to vote for it, and I’ve got no Republicans who are prepared to vote for it. It’s worse than that. We now have a Republican nominee who said that the Arizona laws are a model for the country; and these are laws that potentially would allow someone to be stopped and picked up and asked where their citizenship papers are based on an assumption.”
“Racial profiling,”asked Acevedo.

“Very troublesome — and this is something that the Republican nominee has said should be a model for the country,” replied Obama.

“What we need is a change either of Congress or we need Republicans to change their mind, and I think this has to be an important debate during — throughout the country. What I’ve said to Latinos across the United States is that my passion for this issue is undiminished; that when it comes to, for example, the Dream Kids who have been raised as Americans and see themselves as Americans and want to serve their country or are willing to work hard in school and start businesses or work in our laboratories and in our businesses, it is shameful that we cannot get that done. And so I’m just going to keep on pushing as hard as I can, and what I’m going to be encouraging is the Latino community continue to ask every member of Congress where they stand on these issues, but the one thing that I think everybody needs to understand is that this is something I care deeply about. It’s personal to me, and I will do everything that I can to try to get it done. But ultimately I’m going to need Congress to help me.”
Makes you wonder why Acevedo didn’t ask if immigration reform was such a big personal issue to the President why didn’t he try and push it through during the first two years of this administration when his party dominated both houses of Congress

Obama has made no attempt to control the borders. Republicans have always contended they will work on immigration reform once the President seals our borders. To date there has been no action by Obama or his fellow Democrats to gaining control of our northern and southern borders.The part of the Arizona law liberals point to as “profiling” says that immigration status can be checked at
“any lawful stop, detention or arrest made where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person.”
The law says a person is presumed to be in this country legally if he presents a valid Arizona driver’s license, tribal identification or a form of federal ID such as a resident alien card.

In English the law says if you have been stopped or arrested police can ask you for an ID. And how do you belong? With a valid Arizona driver’s license, tribal identification or a form of federal ID such as a resident alien card. Mull that over for a second. You can’t get on an airplane in the US without one of those. Does that mean the TSA racial profiles?

If Obama were being honest, he would concede that per the law police couldn’t stop some innocent person on the street and ask them for papers they would first have to be arrested or accused of some crime. He would also concede that Mitt Romney has never said he supports racial profiling…Never! Obama’s contention that Romney is a supporter is nothing but political spin (a nice way of saying he lied).

If the liberal Univision host Enrique Acevedo cared about America’s Latinos he would’ve asked why the Latino Community has fared so badly under Obama’s tenure. Why they have been hit by the recession more than other communities.

For example:
Bureau of Labor Statistics results for the month of March was that the unemployment rate for the US population was 8.2%. The jobless rate in the Hispanic community was 26% higher at 10.3%
According to the Census Department Between 2006 and 2010, the poverty rate among Hispanics increased nearly six percentage points from 20.6% to 26.6%– an increase higher than any other group. To put it in perspective, the same report showed poverty rates among whites increased from 8.2% to 9.9%.
A poll released earlier this month by The Libre Initiative of U.S. Hispanics and Latinos reveals that many Hispanics may not be buying the Presidential subterfuge.
Alarmingly, a majority (51 percent) say it is harder to open a business in America today compared to 4 years ago, and the data also shows that a majority (52 percent) now fear that the next generation will not be able to achieve the American dream. Similarly, a majority of respondents (51 percent) believe the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Furthermore, a full 85 percent of Hispanics say they are “very” or “somewhat” concerned about Washington’s current levels of spending and debt, according to the survey (the poll has accuracy rate of plus or minus 4.5 percent). Despite President Obama’s overtures for increased spending, a 54 percent majority of Hispanics say the higher priority of the federal government right now should be a reduction in spending to shrink the deficit while just 36 percent say more spending is the answer.
President Obama’s emphasis on immigration (supported by the liberal media) gives the impression Latinos are somehow less American– that they only care about one issue: immigration. That in itself is racist, it reflects the progressive desire to lump folks into hyphenated whose political positions are ruled by common stereotypes.

Immigration is not their top issue. A recent Pew Research study of American Latinos registered to vote reported their top issues were not vastly different than the general population. The poll defined priority Determined by saying the issue was extremely important their top issues were; Jobs 50%, Education 49%, Healthcare 45%, Taxes 34%, Federal Budget deficit 34%, and Immigration 33%. The Libre Initiative survey had similar results.

Just as he did with “the war against women,” and “class warfare, Barack Obama is resorting to lies as a way to deflect attention from his record.

The President and the progressive establishment may believe that Latinos are not quite American, that all they care about is allowing illegal immigrants into the country, but that is far from the truth. Just like their compatriots from other ethnic groups, Latinos have been suffering under the the Obama administration. And just like other Americans they want the country they love to once again become the land of opportunity.

Those are real facts, something the President is very reluctant to use.

Report describes ‘confusion’ over immigration program

Investigators found no evidence that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials intentionally misled Congress or state and local officials about the controversial program that gives federal immigration authorities access to fingerprints of prisoners in local jails, according to two reports released Friday.

The program, called Secure Communities, began with considerable fanfare in 2008 as a way to find violent criminals who should be deported. Local and state agencies signed agreements with ICE to participate in the program. When deportations soared as a result of ICE finding minor violations, some agencies sought to back out of the agreements, but were told by ICE that they could not.
A report by the acting inspector general at the Department of Homeland Security, Charles K. Edwards, said initial “confusion” inside ICE about whether local approval was needed to join the federal effort resulted in a “lack of clarity” in explaining it to state and local officials.

Florida Republican leaders drawing up Arizona-styled anti-immigrant legislation

Tea Partiers,

Recall our reading of the AZ anti-illegal-alien law at a Channeside rally a few weeks ago? Our efforts contributed to an initiative to craft an AZ-style law for Florida. Check out this article in the St Pete Times, entitled Florida Republican leaders drawing up Arizona-styled anti-immigrant legislation

Florida Republican leaders have begun crafting anti-illegal-immigrant legislation modeled after an Arizona law that has incited widespread protests and fueled national and international debate over U.S. immigration policies.

I object to the reporter’s mischaracterizing illegal aliens as a kind of immigrant. illegal aliens are different from immigrants legally, morally and ethically.

Under the proposed bill, police would have broad power under state law to ask suspects for proof of legal residency, said Rep. William Snyder, a Republican from Stuart who plans to introduce the legislation in November.

“We have significant components from the Arizona bill that I plan to incorporate,” he said. “We have the beginnings of it.”

The effort, which would be filed for consideration during the March legislative session, is already drawing broad support within the GOP.

In an election year shaped by anti-incumbency sentiment, majority leaders in the Florida Senate and House said a new approach is needed to address the federal government’s failure to temper illegal immigration.

The effort has the backing of both leading Republican gubernatorial candidates — businessman Rick Scott and Attorney General Bill McCollum.

In fact, McCollum’s office is helping to draft the bill.

Snyder, a former police officer, said the proposed legislation is needed to protect undocumented immigrants, who are vulnerable to abusive employers and violent criminals.

“This is a human right issue,” he said. “They don’t enjoy the same rights and privileges that you and I do. The solution is to enforce the laws that currently exist and to discourage people from coming here to ‘find a better life’ when in fact they just come here and are victimized.”

Immigrant advocates and Hispanic lawmakers alike called the measure an unconstitutional assault on minority communities.

“The reaction is, ‘What? This is ridiculous,’ ” said Neelofer Syed, a Tampa immigration lawyer who hails from Pakistan. “It is supposed to be that you are legal until you are proven guilty. This law is like, ‘we think you are guilty unless you establish that you are innocent.’ ”

This law does not require anyone to presume guilt.

Rep. J.C. Planas, a Republican from Miami, called it an election year stunt.

“I don’t understand how anyone can think the Arizona law is good for Florida,” said Planas, chairman of the Florida Hispanic Legislative Caucus. “It is a huge waste of police resources to start doing these things.”

Senate and House leaders said immigration reform is ripe for passage.

“What we want to do is encourage legal immigration and discourage illegal immigration,” said incoming Senate President Mike Haridopolos, who cautioned that any changes will be shaped by how the Arizona law is put into practice after it takes effect next month.

Republican leaders in Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Minnesota, South Carolina and Michigan have made similar vows to mirror Arizona’s immigration law, amid growing criticism that the federal government has not adequately protected the nation’s borders.

Civil rights groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union have filed legal challenges to the legislation and President Barack Obama’s administration is expected to follow suit.

If an Oil well in the gulf blows out and cannot be capped then Obama will try to make time between golf sessions to cause BP to create a $20B fund that can be handed out to union-connected political allies. If Iran is on the verge of being able to fabricate a nuclear weapon then Obama will do, well, nothing effective about it.

BUT, let a border state have the audacity to do the job that the Federal government refuses to do, that is, try and do something about illegal aliens then Obama declares a jihad on that state and gets about the serious work of seeing to it that federal laws pertaining to illegal aliens are unenforced throughout the country.

Critics questioned why Florida lawmakers would consider replicating Arizona’s untested immigration strategy while legal challenges are still pending.

“Rep. Snyder’s proposal solves nothing, exploits public concern over immigration and just creates new problems,” said Howard Simon, executive director of ACLU Florida.

The tension has become a rallying point for candidates on both sides of the political spectrum. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink has highlighted her Republican opponents’ support of the law in stump speeches. “She was opposed to the law in Arizona,” said campaign spokeswoman Kyra Jennings. “She believes it unfairly discriminated against American citizens. She would veto that type of legislation.”

Championing tougher immigration laws is a risky election strategy, said George Gonzalez, a University of Miami political science professor.

“It is a way to channel people’s anger and frustration about the labor market onto a group and to take advantage of it, too,” he said.

But it could also anger Hispanic voters, an important constituency in Florida’s increasingly diverse political landscape, Gonzalez said.

Florida’s estimated illegal immigrant population ranks third in the nation. Arizona places seventh. But while Florida’s undocumented population has dropped by 10 percent during the past decade, Arizona’s climbed by 42 percent.

“None of this is foolproof,” Gonzalez said. “It could blow up in the Republicans’ faces either way.”

Snyder said he doesn’t want his law to stir up the same accusations of racism that hounded Arizona’s decision.

His law would be refined, he said, because it would only allow law enforcement officials to inquire about immigration status during a potential arrest or traffic violation. In Arizona, officers are required to request legal documentation during any lawful stop if “reasonable suspicion” exists.

Coming up with the precise language will be difficult, conceded Snyder, who recently defended his views on Fox News. “Reasonable suspicion makes people nervous,” he said.

But he vowed his final draft would apply equally to all illegal immigrants, regardless of skin color or ethnicity. “I’ve never in my 32 years been accused of using the ‘N’ word or being racially motivated,” he said. “No one who knows me would say I have a racist bone in my body.”

Thank you Tampa Tea Party. This is an accomplishment we can be proud of.

Going forward, the leaders championing this legislation will attract attacks from our usual enemies (e.g., the ACLU, La Raza, identity politicians such as Jessie Jackson, Sharpton.) We will need to defend them politically, We will need to show those who are on our side of the argument that they can expect us to defend them.

We will planning a rally to support these leaders in their pursuit of an AZ-style anti-illegal-alien law.

john hendrix




Why is President Obama suing to invalidate the Arizona law on illegal immigration? Why is he incurring the enmity of even his own Democratic Congressmen from the Phoenix and Tucson areas by trying to kill a law that two-thirds of Arizona and a similar proportion of America as a whole supports?

The answer: It is a desperate, last ditch attempt to rebuild his sagging popularity with America’s Hispanic voters.

Furious at Obama for failing to keep his election year promise to promote comprehensive immigration reform when he had a super-majority at his disposal, they are deserting the president and his party in droves. Unemployment, a sagging economy, and their sharp disagreement with Obama over social issues don’t help the president’s cause any.

So Obama has seized on the Arizona immigration law as a symbolic target, hoping to accomplish in a lawsuit the political task of rebuilding his base.

Remember that in 2008, Obama won precisely the same share of the white vote that Kerry won in 2004. There was a shift among whites as the Obama won more young whites and lost more older ones, but the white vote ratios as a whole remained constant. His entire margin of victory was based on two factors:

a) The African-American vote rose from 11% of the total in 2004 to 14% in 2008 and virtually all voted for Obama; and

b) Latinos, who had backed Kerry by only 10 points, supported Obama by fifty points.

For Obama to have a shot at keeping Democrats in control of Congress, he must replicate the enthusiasm of 2008 among minorities. But his Hispanic flank is definitely weakened. Hence the lawsuit to shore it up.

The answer on immigration reform is to adopt a three part program to dry up the jobs that attract illegal migrants in the first place. When there are no jobs, they will not come and those who are here will go back home without deportations or roundups.

We need to:

1. Strengthen penalties and enforcement of laws barring people and companies from hiring illegal immigrants. Those who do so should face prison time.

2. We need a fool proof national bio-metric ID card so employers can tell who is legal and who is not.

3. We should implement a broad guest worker program to bring upscale and manual workers into the US to fill our labor force needs. They must get at least the minimum wage and have health benefits. But, when the job is over, they must go home.

Democrats won’t embrace this program because the unions won’t let them and because they want illegals to stay here and become Democratic voters. Republican agri-businesses won’t go for it because they want to exploit illegal workers with low pay and bad work conditions.

But this is the solution. Trying to seal the border is good rhetoric but is a hopeless task. Drying up the jobs that bring illegal immigrants here is something we can and must do.

SEO Powered By SEOPressor