Jeb Bush Supports Perry's Tuition Stance for Illegals' Children

The uproar over this law signed into law in 2001 has been mind boggling.  We are talking about children getting an education to have a better life in the only country most have ever known.  Anyone with an ounce of brain knows that it would be impossible to deport all the illegals in the Country so why not educate their children.  

Former Governor Jeb Bush along with Senator Marco Rubio  are speaking out in agreement with Governor Perry on educating children of illegals.  This should show those Republican candidates who tried to score points against Rick Perry with this issue that they are not scoring points with everyone.  Both Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio spoke out because they believe that every child should have an education and so do a lot of Americans.

On the other hand, how many of the candidates that went after Governor Perry have hired illegals to do yard work.  Fox News didn't ask that question at the debate because it didn't fit their narrative.  We know one for sure -- Gov Mitt Romney who attacked the hardest.  Looks like he would rather hire cheap labor to take care of his yard, then see children of illegals get an education.      

Mitt Romney was also for sanctuary cities before he was against them.  Gov Perry pushed for an end to sanctuary cities in Texas in the legislature but it didn't pass this time.  Mitt Romney panders for conservative votes knowing full well that he is a moderate on almost every issue.  Will the voters believe him?  Doubt it.

Jeb Bush Supports Perry's Tuition Stance for Illegals' Children
Thursday, 29 Sep 2011 03:57 PM
By Newsmax Wires 

More ways to share...

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush indicated solidarity with Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s advocacy of tuition breaks for children of illegal immigrants, according to the National Journal.
Perry, who generated a firestorm in his squabble with other GOP presidential candidates on the tuition issue in an interview with Newsmax, signed the first state law in the nation a decade ago allowing children of illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition rates. 

Former Florida state Rep. Juan Zapata said the Lone Star state law served as his model for legislation he repeatedly pushed in his state, to no avail. 

"Two of his key allies then are now among the GOP's most sought-after stars: Bush, the subject of perpetual draft movements to run for president, and his fellow Floridian, Sen. Marco Rubio, a sure bet for the GOP's vice presidential shortlist in 2012,” the National Journal observed 

“I think that is a fair policy," Bush said in an email to the National Journal. 

Students who benefit from the tuition breaks are in the United States through “no fault of their own," said Bush, who is fluent in Spanish and whose wife, Columba, was born in Mexico.
The Republican split on the issue “reflects a jarring disconnect between the party’s political establishment and the restless conservative grass roots,” the Journal reported. “If Bush and Rubio represent the future of the Republican Party — which is inevitably intertwined with winning favor in the fast-growing Hispanic community, then what does it mean when a rock-ribbed conservative like Perry can’t take a moderate stance on immigration? Perhaps no other issue bedevils the Republican Party as much.”

Bush and several Hispanic Republicans have warned that bitter rhetoric over illegal immigration risks alienating the fastest-growing portion of voters, the Journal noted.

Read more on Newsmax.com: Jeb Bush Supports Perry's Tuition Stance for Illegals' Children

The children from the ranches in the town we lived in Texas were from illegal families who worked the ranches.  Just who are you going to get to come out and work the large ranches including clearing off cedar?  The ranch hands have come to the US pretty much just staying on the ranch but sending their children to school.  If we had a guest worker program this would not be a problem.  I have several friends whose families go back in the Texas Hill Country before the Alamo.  There is so much rich heritage in Texas that includes the Mexican culture that the hatred that has been generated in some parts of the Country compared to what you see in Texas is way over the top.  How can anyone have such hatred for children who were brought here.  

Am I worried about education children of illegals?  Not really as I would rather they have an education then turn to a life of crime.  The problems with many illegals today are the violence and drugs that are being brought across the border which is getting worse.  The drug cartels and Hezbollah sit right on the border and because of lack of border security are able to penetrate places along the border at will.  Yet some of the Republican candidates think a border fence will keep them out in rural areas without guards.  Naive is the word that comes to mind and sounds just like Obama in many ways when he gave his speech in the fortified city of El Paso. 

In fact, a lot of Mexicans have started to return to Mexico because of the jobs in their native country.  Ironic that a lot of those jobs are coming from American auto manufacturers who have found much cheaper labor in Mexico than in the States thanks to the UAW.   That is one way to get illegals to return to Mexico -- send our jobs to Mexico.     

Secretary of Agriculture or Secretary of Amnesty?

This sentence from Iowa Representative Steve King's email makes you go WHAT?

The Center for Immigration Studies concluded in a 2007 report that even if farm wages were to rise by 40%, consumer spending on fresh fruit and vegetables would only be increased by a total of $8 per American per year.

Cong King is correct that we would be willing to pay an additional $8 a year on fresh fruit and vegetables if we could deport the illegals.  We will take it one step further to say the vast majority of American citizens would be more than willing to spend double that or more if we could send the illegals home. What the illegals are costing the Government in services they get for free is much more than $8 per year.

Not sure which Cabinet Secretary is the worst as they all seem to be vying for the bottom reaching into areas that should not concern them. It is beginning to look like amnesty for illegals is one of the major items this Administration is pushing? When the Agriculture Secretary Vilsack starts lying about the results of illegals being deported on the agriculture industry, then it looks like he is all about amnesty not helping the American farmer.

Is amnesty the way they plan to get more votes in 2012 for Obama? Do have one small question -- how can amnesty lead to illegals being eligible to vote or does Obama plan to give them citizenship at the same time? Last we knew amnesty and citizenship were not one in the same, but then this is the Obama Administration so who knows!

Secretary of Agriculture or Secretary of Amnesty?

Congressman Steve King
Sept 10, 2010

If someone asks what the initials "USDA" stand for, most Iowans will automatically respond "United States Department of Agriculture." After all, Iowa has long prospered on the strength of its agricultural roots, and the United States Department of Agriculture has played a large role in the affairs of our state. Given recent events in Washington, however, it would be understandable if someone were to reply that "USDA" stood for "United States Department of Amnesty."

This is because the Obama administration has enlisted the Agriculture Department to help further its high-pressure, high-profile sales pitch for illegal immigrant amnesty. How else to explain the grossly erroneous claims Secretary Vilsack recently made to the Politico about the effect of illegal labor on food prices? This is what Secretary Vilsack told the paper, speaking of illegal immigrants:

"But, if you didn't have these folks, you would be spending a lot more- three, four or five times more, for food, or we would have to import food and have all the food security risks. Neither is what Americans want. What they want is what we have. Which is why we need comprehensive immigration reform." (Emphasis added).

His claim about food prices being "three, four, or five times more" without illegal immigrant labor is markedly false, and Secretary Vilsack should know better. In fact, I would encourage him to check with the Department he heads before he repeats this sales pitch to the public. Otherwise, he just might get accused of dishonest sales practices.

For clarification, here is what Secretary Vilsack's own Department of Agriculture has to say on the subject of illegal immigrant labor and food prices. Data compiled by the Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that labor costs only represent six-percent of the price consumers pay for fresh fruits and vegetables, the market in which illegal immigrant labor is most prevalent.

If illegal alien labor accounts for only 6% of the total cost of fresh food, how could the absence of their labor possibly lead to food price spikes of 300%, 400%, or 500% as Secretary Vilsack claims? It couldn't. Secretary Vilsack simply isn't playing straight with you as he tries to sell you on "comprehensive immigration reform."

But suppose we were to give Secretary Vilsack and the Obama administration the benefit of the doubt, and assume that illegal alien labor costs did play a more significant role in setting food prices. The Center for Immigration Studies concluded in a 2007 report that even if farm wages were to rise by 40%, consumer spending on fresh fruit and vegetables would only be increased by a total of $8 per American per year. This is hardly the doomsday scenario conjured up by Secretary Vilsack's misleading, pro-amnesty claims. In fact, many Americans would willingly pay an extra $8/year to enforce the immigration laws, knowing that doing so would result in savings many times greater in other areas of government.

Although Secretary Vilsack pretends to be speaking to "what Americans want", he is really just delivering a sales pitch on behalf of an immigration policy that continues to be overwhelmingly rejected by Americans. If he were truly interested in discussing "what Americans want", Secretary Vilsack would begin by discussing the need to increase border security, the need to fund the completion of a border fence, and the need to increase enforcement of the immigration laws that are already on the books.

The fact that he prefers to spin yarns about the price of produce tells you everything you need to know about what the Obama administration's priorities truly are. Americans should insist that the USDA get out of the business of amnesty and return to the business of agriculture.

Obama Stiffs AZ on Troops and Gives More $ to Mexico

Bottom line is that Obama has more money for Mexico than he does for Border Security for our Border States. Over twice as much money will be leaving the US Treasury to go to the corrupt Mexican Government who wants to join in a lawsuit against Arizona and a Mexican President who trashed Arizona on our soil. Mexico should get zero and instead be issued a bill for costs associated with the United States having to provide for the needs of their citizens who are in this country illegally. Doesn't anyone in the Obama Administration including Obama understand the word 'illegal?'

Main Entry: illegal (+)i(l)-!lE-gul
Pronunciation: \ (ˌ)i(l)-ˈlē-gəl \
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French or Medieval Latin; Middle French illegal, from Medieval Latin illegalis, from Latin in- + legalis legal
Date: 1538
not according to or authorized by law: unlawful, illicit
also not sanctioned by official rules (as of a game)

It is very simple -- come across the border without an official green card and the person is here illegally and should be sent back to Mexico. Border Security should have kept them out for years but INS turned a blind eye and now we have a huge problem that is getting worse. At one time people coming across the border were hard working people who wanted a better life for their families. In recent years that has changed as the drug cartels have been running drugs into this country and with that has come the violence. Without illegals from Mexico and Central and South America, Hispanic gangs would not be the problem they are today.

The fence needs built all along the border like it is in El Paso. The Border with Mexico needs secured because not only illegals are coming across but so are terrorist. Does Obama care? Not from what we can see as he looks at illegals as potential Democrat voters with 'his' amnesty plan and road to citizenship. No one here illegally should ever have a path to citizenship unless they serve in the US military. With that they will have earned their citizenship. Amnesty is earning nothing but being rewarded for breaking the law.

We also learned from the meetings the Obama people had with Arizona officials they would not discuss a possible lawsuit against Arizona:

The meetings were held as Arizona officials awaited word on a widely anticipated federal legal challenge to the measure. Obama has called the law "misguided." Brewer has called its enactment necessary due to federal inaction on border enforcement.

Goddard said the federal officials clammed up when asked during the Tucson meeting about a possible challenge. Brewer said the subject didn't come up during the Phoenix meeting.

If Obama chooses to sue Arizona, a firestorm against Obama and the Democrats will errupt across America by American citizens including Hispanics who want the laws enforced. Hispanics here legally have worked hard to make a better life and along come illegals who want everything handed to them.

This YouTube from Governor Brewer says it all about Obama putting Mexico over Border Security for our States:



The Texas and Arizona governors criticized the Obama administration's border security plans Monday, saying not enough National Guard troops are being deployed to their states.

"What we heard wasn't anything what we hoped to hear," Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer told reporters after a 90-minue briefing by federal officials sent by President Barack Obama.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican like Brewer, said the deployment to his state was "insufficient to meet the needs of securing the Texas-Mexico border."

A White House statement said plans to deploy 1,200 additional National Guard soldiers along the U.S.-Mexico border would "complement the unprecedented resources and additional efforts already devoted by this administration to securing the Southwest border."

Arizona would get 524 National Guard troops, Texas would get 250, California 224 and New Mexico 72, officials said. Another 130 would be at a national liaison office.

Brewer has said the deployment should total 6,000, including 3,000 in Arizona, the state with the most illegal border crossings. Perry asked in January 2009 for 1,000 National Guard troops to help with border security in Texas alone.

The White House statement said the extra Guard troops would be used to provide intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance support as well as backup to counternarcotics enforcement until more civilian officers are trained and stationed at the border.

Read more...

Mexican President CalderonVisits the White House with a State Dinner Tonight -- Attacks Arizona Immigration Law

Today the Mexican President Felipe Calderon arrived in the United States for a two-day visit with Obama including a state dinner this evening as well as addressing a joint session of Congress tomorrow.

Calderon and Obama blasted the Arizona Immigration bill during welcoming ceremonies. Since Holder and Napolitano have not read the bill, what are the chances that Obama has not looked at it as well but that didn't stop him from attacking the bill as a "misdirected effort."

He also went on to say "Today I want every American to know my administration has devoted unprecedented resources in personnel and technology to securing our border."

What? You could have fooled us as Arizona and Texas have been asking for National Guard along the border for the last year. Senator McCain brought it up in a Meet the Press segment in the spring of 2009. Yet no guard troops and Napolitano has cancelled the contract with Lockheed-Martin for the virtual fence. That is providing unprecedented resources? How about finishing the fence like it is in El Paso, Texas?

The nerve of Calderon to attack the laws of one of our States when the Mexican law on illegals in the Country of Mexico is much tougher.

Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.

The law also says Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," violate Mexican law, are not "physically or mentally healthy" or lack the "necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents.

We agree with Cong Steve King of Iowa that the Mexican law makes sense but now Calderon attacks the new Arizona law that doesn't go near as far as the Mexican Law.

Why should the American taxpayers have to support the Mexican illegals in this Country? Does Calderon like the idea of illegals in the United States as they send so much money back to Mexico never giving a thought to the drain they put on states? More important, sounds like Calderon could care less if it costs the United States money to take care of medical care and other expenses for illegals as well as the fact it is costing our own citizens jobs. He seems to be okay with illegals as long as the Mexican Goveernment doesn't have to handle the problem of lack of jobs in Mexico. Why is it the responsibility of the United States to take care of the citizens of Mexico?

The audacity of the two Presidents to attack one of our states for passing a law that 2/3rds of the Country support and mirrors what is already on the federal books which the Federal Government under Obama refuses to enforce. Obama and his Administration have been commenting on the Arizona law now for weeks, and yet they did not take the time to read it before commenting. How long does it take to read 11 pages?

What is stopping the US from enforcing a law similar to Mexico's on illegal immigrants? It is time that the United States stopped playing nurse maid to the illegals from Mexico and their own Government started taking responsibility for their own citizens within their own borders and stop encouraging illegals to find jobs in the United States.

What do you think would happen if we got caught in one of the many speed traps that Arizona Highway Patrol puts out on I-40, I-10, and I-8? First thing the officer is going to do is ask for is a driver's license and then a copy of current insurance for the vehicle. If you don't have that with you, then you are going to be visiting the local judge and explaining why not. How is that different than requiring immigrants to carry their paperwork with them showing they are here legally in this Country? We have immigration laws on the books if you want to come to this Country -- it is not like we are shutting down immigration into the United States.

What is wrong with enforcing immigration laws already on the books and deporting illegal immigrants when they are discovered. They are breaking the law being in this Country yet Obama and the Democrats want to reward their unlawful behavior by giving them amnesty and a path to citizenship. What did the last amnesty do? Made more illegals enter this country hoping for amnesty and a path to citizenship. This is a wrong headed approach to get more Democrat voters which seems to be the aim of a majority of Democrats supporting illegal immigrants.

May 19, 2010
Obama, Calderon Blast Arizona Immigration Law During White House Visit
FOXNews.com

President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon joined hands Wednesday in blasting Arizona's controversial immigration law, with Obama calling the legislation a "misdirected effort" after Calderon slammed it as discriminatory.

President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon joined hands Wednesday in blasting Arizona's controversial immigration law, with Obama calling the legislation a "misdirected effort" after Calderon slammed it as discriminatory.

Obama, speaking next to Calderon during Wednesday's state visit, called the tough immigration law a "misdirected expression of frustration over our broken immigration system."

"We're examining any implications especially for civil rights because in the United States of America, no law abiding person -- be they an American citizen, illegal immigrant, or a visitor or tourist from Mexico -- should ever be subject to suspicion simply because of what they look like."

Obama said he has directed the Justice Department to review the law and said he expects to receive a final report soon.

Arizona's law, which takes effect in July, will make it a crime under state law to be in the U.S. illegally

At the start of Wednesday's White House visit, Calderon said the law discriminated against Mexicans and called for the two countries to work together to develop an immigration policy that did not force people to live in the shadows "with such laws as the Arizona law, which is forcing our people to face discrimination."

Calderon, whose remarks were translated from Spanish, said "We can do so if we create a safer border -- a border that will unite us instead of dividing us.

"We are and will continue to be respectful of the internal policies of the United States and its legitimate right to establish, in accordance to its Constitution, whatever laws it approves," he said, "But we will retain our firm rejection to criminalized migration so that people that work and provide things to this nation would be treated as criminals."

Obama also stressed that he and Calderon had directed their governments to make the U.S.-Mexican border more secure and efficient.

"Illegal immigration is down, not up," Obama said, "And we will continue to do whatever is necessary to secure our shared border."

"Today I want every American to know my administration has devoted unprecedented resources in personnel and technology to securing our border," he added.

Fox News

The United States didn't cause this illegal immigrant problem. The corrupt Governments of Mexico did over the years when they looked out for their own personal gain of wealth and not their citizens. It was easier to encourage their citizens to immigrant to the United States illegally then to find a solution to the employment problem in Mexico.

Now with the ongoing drug cartel fights along the border, it is a matter of Border Security. El Paso has gone from a city with major crime to a safe city because they sealed the border with a fence and Border Patrol stations along the fence. If you work in the United States, you don't have any trouble coming across into El Paso with the correct paperwork. What they are keeping out is bringing the drug wars across into El Paso. Terrorists have also targeted the southern borders especially where the border runs through the National Parks and Forests as they have pretty much been declared off limits to law enforcement and their vehicles which has given illegals as well as terrorists a clear shot into the United States where there are no fences.

We found this description of the Border Security from Professor Grayson of William and Mary one of the more honest assessments of the Mexican Government on Border Security.

"I think that some tough love is in order," said George W. Grayson, a government professor at the College of William and Mary. "Obviously cooperation at the border is in our self-interest, but it's time for Mexico's establishment to take possession of the security problem and they simply haven't."

Mexican trucks should not be on American highways as many do not meet truck safety requirements including their tires along with a good portion of the trucks being driven by underage drivers. When the border was opened earlier to Mexican trucks, a series of problems ensued including underage driver's and bald tires for starters. Does the United States want to go that route again? Looks like Obama does. Any truck entering the United States registered in Mexico and countries south should have to pass a strenuous inspection before being allowed on our roads -- same with the drivers.

Touchy issues await Mexican leader's visit
By Kara Rowland

Immigration, trafficking key problems

For the leaders of two friendly nations, President Obama and Mexican President Felipe Calderon have certainly piled up a long list of touchy issues to address when they meet in Washington this week for a state visit.

From Arizona's controversial immigration law to disputes over Mexican trucks to the illicit flow of guns, drugs and people across the border, the U.S. and its southern neighbor are at no loss for thorny challenges.

Foremost among those is the drug war, in which more than 23,000 people have died since Mr. Calderon cracked down on the cartels after taking office in 2006. But policy experts question to what extent the U.S. can — and should — help the embattled nation.

(snip)

Recent and high-profile flare-ups, led by the killing of an American consulate worker in March, have injected a renewed sense of immediacy on the part of the U.S. That incident in particular prompted a trip to Mexico by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who — echoing the sentiment of Mr. Obama during his visit last year — expressed support for Mr. Calderon's efforts and said the U.S. deserves blame for providing a market for the drugs and supplying weapons to the cartels.

(snip)

On the economic front, Mexico is the nation's third-largest trading partner and sticking points remain when it comes to obligations under the North American Free Trade Agreement, particularly with respect to Mexican trucks. To the chagrin of Mexican manufacturers, the U.S. government has balked at allowing them on U.S. roads, prompting Mexico to retaliate by imposing more than $2 billion in duties on American goods.

But in a sign Mr. Calderon might be able to return home with some good news, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood last week told Congress the administration is about to unveil a new plan that would reopen the border to the trucks.

Excerpt: Read more at Washington Times

Sources have said that Mexican President Calderon is rewriting his speech to the Joint Session of Congress to go after Arizona on its new immigration law. Will the Mexican President whose Government threatened a boycott of Oklahoma earlier because money transfer fees were raised also go after Oklahoma? If Calderon attacks individual states then the Congressional delegations from those states should walk out because he is a guest of the Congress and not his place to attack individual states.

We will see what happens tomorrow when Calderon addresses the Joint Session of Congress. We would take no bets on what he is going to say because he seems to think he can say whatever he wants against the United States and Obama will agree.

Mexican president Felipe Calderón to visit at a tense time
Erin Kelly - May. 17, 2010 12:00 AM
Republic Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON - Mexican President Felipe Calderón's trip to the U.S. Capitol this week comes as Congress is struggling to pass comprehensive immigration reform and the Mexican people are angry at what they see as a harsh new law targeting their countrymen in Arizona.

It also comes amid growing concern by U.S. officials about the violent Mexican drug cartels that smuggle narcotics and people into the United States and weapons and cash into Mexico.

The U.S. already has pledged $1.4 billion to help Mexico fight its drug cartels, and experts say Calderón is likely to ask for more. Calderón launched the war on drugs soon after taking office in late 2006, and the battle has grown increasingly bloody and dangerous. An estimated 20,000 people have died in drug-related violence since then.

While Calderón will undoubtedly emphasize the strong friendship between countries, he also must appeal to his constituents by repeating his condemnation of the Arizona law, which makes it a crime to be in the state illegally. Calderón, whose government issued a travel advisory in the wake of the law, will ask Congress to pass immigration legislation to prevent other states from adopting measures similar to Arizona's, experts say.

"I think we're in a different world than we were before the Arizona law," said Mark Jones, chairman of the political-science department at Rice University in Houston. "Prior to that, President Calderón had done pretty much all he could to stay out of U.S. immigration policy. He was listening to President (Barack) Obama's assurances that he was working on reform and that it would be counterproductive for the Mexican president to weigh in on that.

"But this law has really outraged Mexicans, and President Calderón can't go to Washington without President Obama at least assuring him he will do everything possible to get reform legislation through this year," Jones said.

Early reports were that Calderón's speech Thursday to a joint session of Congress would focus on fighting cartels and opportunities for Mexico and the U.S. to work together on renewable-energy projects, said Alberto Diaz-Cayeros, director of the Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies at the University of California-San Diego.

Now, Calderón reportedly is rewriting the speech to take on the Arizona law, he said.

Read more: Arizona Central

Mexico's illegals laws tougher than Arizona

The Mexican President Felipe Calderon denounced Arizona's new Immigration Law as "racial discrimination" but what does he call what Mexico does to illegals which is much tougher than Arizona? We call it hypocricy to be nice.

How many news outlets are going to cover the fact that the Mexican laws against illegals are tougher than Arizona? These two paragraphs from the article say all we need to know about Mexico's double standard:

Under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms. Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered criminals.

The law also says Mexico can deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," violate Mexican law, are not "physically or mentally healthy" or lack the "necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents.

Cong Steve King (R-IA) is correct that this Mexican law is what every Country should have on the books including the United States. It is good, common sense law to have strict enforcement against illegal immigrants. We don't don't understand the Democrats reluctance to pass a national strict immigration law unless it all has to do with amnesty and eventual citizenship in hope that they will provide more Democrat votes. The fact that amnesty is about voters for Democrats is beyond despicable. These illegals are breaking the law and need punished not rewarded.

As for the Mexican President Calderon's comments, the whole world can now see what a hypocrite he is. He is a perfect match for Obama with his rhetoric!

Mexico's illegals laws tougher than Arizona's
Calderon condemns 'racial discrimination'
May 3, 2010
By Jerry Seper

Mexican President Felipe Calderon denounced as "racial discrimination" an Arizona law giving state and local police the authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and vowed to use all means at his disposal to defend Mexican nationals against a law he called a "violation of human rights."

Mexican President Felipe Calderon denounced as "racial discrimination" an Arizona law giving state and local police the authority to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and vowed to use all means at his disposal to defend Mexican nationals against a law he called a "violation of human rights."

But the legislation, signed April 23 by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, is similar to Reglamento de la Ley General de Poblacion — the General Law on Population enacted in Mexico in April 2000, which mandates that federal, local and municipal police cooperate with federal immigration authorities in that country in the arrests of illegal immigrants.

(snip)

"This sounds like the kind of law that a rational nation would have to protect itself against illegal immigrants — that would stop and punish the very people who are violating the law," said Rep. Steve King of Iowa, ranking Republican on the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, citizenship, refugees, border security and international law.

"Why would Mr. Calderon have any objections to an Arizona law that is less draconian than his own, one he has pledged to enforce?" Mr. King said.

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on terrorism and homeland security, described Mr. Calderon's comments as "hypocritical to say the least."

"I would have expected more from Mr. Calderon," said Mr. Kyl, who serves as the Senate minority whip. "We are spending millions of dollars to help Mexico fight the drug cartels that pose a threat to his government, and he doesn't seem to recognize our concerns. He ought to be apologizing to us instead of condemning us."

Mr. Kyl, along with fellow Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, has introduced a 10-point comprehensive border security plan to combat illegal immigration, drug and human smuggling, and violent crime along the southwestern border. It includes the deployment of National Guard troops, an increase in U.S. Border Patrol agents and 700 miles of fencing, along with other equipment and funding upgrades.

Excerpt: Read More at Washington Times

Obama at the AZ Border!

Is this one reason why he supports amnesty for illegals? Thanks to Lucianne.com for the graphic.

Violent Pro Illegal Immgration Protest in Arizona

Arizona passes a tough immigration bill and people in this country ILLEGALLY go on a rampage of violence. Something is very wrong with that picture. They should be arrested and deported. They have no right to rally or be violent when they shouldn't be here in the first place. Coming to America illegally should mean you do not have rights that citizens and people in this Country legally are entitled.,

Guess they were afraid to riot in Oklahoma when we passed our tough immigration bill. Illegals fled Oklahoma which tells us that AZ has not only a lot more illegals than most places but for years they had a Governor, Janet Napolitano, who turned her head and didn't see the problems caused by illegals. Unfortunately she is now the head of Homeland Security and not answering the request for help from the States along the border to stem the stream of illegals escaping the drug wars of Mexico.

There is no way the Tea Party people would ever act like this -- they are conservatives who will yell and scream at a rally but violence is not their nature. Yet, people like Clinton are talking about them being prone to violence.

Where is Clinton and others condemning people who are in this country illegals for committing violence. They shouldn't even be here, but should be back in their home Country.

From Flopping Aces: Violent Pro Illegal Immigration Protest in Arizona

Posted by: Mike's America

Where is Bill Clinton?

This ain’t no Tea Party!

Really, where is Bill Clinton? Wasn’t he lecturing us just a week ago that protests could lead to violence? Where are all the media talking heads who echoed Clinton’s absurd attempt to link the Tea Partiers to violence? Yet, here’s a riot started by protesters against the new law in Arizona to toughen up enforcement on illegal immigration in Phoenix on April 23. Bottles were hurled at police and threats of violence that make even the rowdiest Tea Party look like a church picnic.
You’ll see the bottles thrown here, striking police officers who try to usher a lone anti-illegal immigration protester from the scene for his own safety:




The scene from overhead clearly shows a fusillade of bottles being thrown at the Police:



Once again, violent agitators of the left take to the streets breaking our laws and the silence from Democrats who condemn peaceful protests by Tea Partiers is stunning!

Source: Flopping Aces

Census Bureau Wasted Millions on 2010 Headcount Preparations, Audit

Why are we not surprised? One question we have for the Census Bureau is why would you pay someone $300 before they did anything? Most jobs require you to do the work before you are paid.

As someone who asked to fill out the long form, I am not at all happy with the Census Bureau and the questions they asked which were none of their business. The long form is way too intrusive and should never have been sent out. We will comment on the short form after we talk to someone who has filled it out.

Worst travesty is counting non-citizens in order to reapportion Congressional Seats. Only American citizens should be counted for that purpose and don't understand where counting illegals should ever be part of the equation to determine seats in Congress. Something inherently wrong with that idea.

Updated February 16, 2010

Census Bureau Wasted Millions on 2010 Headcount Preparations, Audit Finds

AP


Federal investigators caution the excessive charges could multiply once the $15 billion headcount begins in earnest next month unless the agency imposes tighter spending controls, according to excerpts of a forthcoming audit obtained by The Associated Press.

The Census Bureau wasted millions of dollars in preparation for its 2010 population count, including thousands of temporary employees who picked up $300 checks without performing work and others who overbilled for travel costs.

Federal investigators caution the excessive charges could multiply once the $15 billion headcount begins in earnest next month unless the agency imposes tighter spending controls, according to excerpts of a forthcoming audit obtained by The Associated Press.

On a positive note, investigators backed the Census Bureau's decision to spend $133 million on its advertising campaign, saying it was appropriate to boost public awareness. The spending included a $2.5 million Super Bowl spot that some Republicans had criticized as wasteful.

The findings by Todd Zinser, the Commerce Department's inspector general, highlight the difficult balancing act for the Census Bureau as it takes on the Herculean task of manually counting the nation's 300 million residents amid a backdrop of record levels of government debt.

Because the population count, done every 10 years, is used to distribute U.S. House seats and billions in federal aid, many states are pushing for all-out government efforts in outreach since there is little margin for error -- particularly for Democratic-leaning minorities and the poor, who tend to be undercounted. At the same time, the national headcount will employ 1 million temporary workers and is the most expensive ever, making it a visible sign of rising government spending.

The federal hiring has been widely touted by the government as providing a lift to the nation's sagging employment rate -- but investigators found it also had waste.

The audit, scheduled to be released next week, examined the Census Bureau's address-canvassing operation last fall, in which 140,000 temporary workers walked block by block to update the government's mailing lists and maps.

While the project finished ahead of schedule, Census director Robert Groves in October acknowledged the costs had ballooned $88 million higher than the original estimate of $356 million, an overrun of 25 percent. He cited faulty assumptions in the bureau's cost estimates.

Among the waste found by investigators:

--More than 10,000 census employees were paid over $300 apiece to attend training for the massive address-canvassing effort, but they quit or were otherwise let go before they could perform any work. Cost: $3 million.

--Another 5,000 employees collected $300 for the same training, and then worked a single day or less. Cost $1.5 million.

--Twenty-three temporary census employees were paid for car mileage costs at 55 cents a mile, even though the number of miles they reported driving per hour exceeded the total number of hours they actually worked.

--Another 581 employees who spent the majority of their time driving instead of conducting field work also received full mileage reimbursements, which investigators called questionable.

Census regional offices that had mileage costs exceeding their planned budgets included Atlanta; Charlotte, N.C.; Chicago; Dallas; Denver; Detroit; Kansas City and Seattle.

Excerpt: Read More at Fox News

Illegal aliens get past TSA, jet off to Hawaii with forged ID

When we have an Intelligence community in DC that is unable to connect the dots, this doesn't shock us at all. This is so wrong on so many levels.

If you are a white male or female traveling on a one-way ticket with proper identification, your chances of being singled out for further screening is quite high. Now we learn if you an illegal alien and have forged ID under an assumed name you have no trouble boarding a flight. When are we going to stop this politically correctness and not be afraid to target groups for further checking?

We are beginning to buy into that we should all have to have passports to travel using a Government issued ID but how long until they start forging those.

Remember coming back from San Diego on a one-way ticket after 9-11 and being screened over and over again. Even had a Government ID but still singled out as I was on a one-way ticket. Didn't feel bad after seeing three Marines traveling on a one way ticket along with two women who had just cleared customs going through the same screening. Looked through all our bags, went through additional screening at the checkpoint, and more at the gate which almost made us late for our plane. Finally in AZ where we had to change planes, Southwest said no more checks -- we had enough.

My favorite that day was an older woman in a wheel chair that belonged to the airport. Security screeners (could barely speak English) had her get out of the chair so they could check everything to see if she had put anything in the hollow parts of the chair. It was the airport's own wheelchair. Yet three Middle Eastern, turbin wearing, men speaking a foreign language zipped right through security and boarded the plane next to ours without being stopped once. All I could think of was buy a round trip ticket, and you are home free.

Looks like not much has changed as you can now get through screening on forged ID's under assumed names.

This article sure doesn't make us feel safer!

Illegal aliens get past TSA, jet off to Hawaii with forged ID
Hawaii Free Press
January 9, 2010
Andrew Walden

Thousands of airline passengers on domestic US flights are using forged IDs to get past TSA screeners and board commercial flights under assumed names.

Just days after the al-Qaeda Panty Bomber tried to blow NW Flight 253 out of the sky, evidence leading to acquittals in a Honolulu illegal alien smuggling case has exposed the US Transportation Safety Administration’s repeated failure to spot phony IDs. All of Honolulu illegals were Mexican—but they got past TSA screeners as they flew to Hawaii from California on regularly scheduled domestic commercial flights.

Oahu farm managers David Kato and Glen Kelley McCaig faced a ten-day jury trial in the Federal Courtroom of Judge David Ezra. The charges stem from a July 20, 2008 immigration raid on a Waipahu, Oahu apartment house.

Federal prosecutors told the jury nearly 100 illegals were able to get past TSA screeners using “micas”-- falsified identification cards obtained from Southern California forged-document mills. And the forgeries weren’t very good. The Honolulu Star-Bulletin December 31 reports:

The backs of the cards contained numerous spelling and typographical errors.

The errors include "Deparment," "Departament," "Adminstration," "identifield," "punishible," "ins't," "Homel and Security" and "United State of America."

The front of one card said it was newly issued by the Department of Homeland Security while the back of the card said it had been issued by the Department of Justice.

And not a single card presented as evidence in the trial had a hologram on its face like a real permanent resident card.

Defense lawyers argued that Kato and McCaig could not be expected to spot the forgeries if the TSA did not. And a Honolulu Federal jury apparently agreed, coming back with a December 30 not guilty verdict on all 17 counts.

The Waipahu raid is not an isolated incident. Many farm workers on the Big Island are reputed to be illegals recruited from California. Anonymous leaflets have occasionally circulated in Kona demanding deportations. In a 1997 Star Bulletin interview, a labor contractor in Kona describes how he entered the US illegally at Miami after evading Pinochet’s forces in Chile. He received a Green Card in the 1986 amnesty. To recruit workers he places ads in California newspapers offering round-trip airfare and other incentives to prospective coffee pickers and speaks of having “a lot of brotherhood for people who will take the risk to work hard." A farmers’ spokesperson asks: “Who else will harvest the coffee?” Thirteen years later the same system is still at work supplying labor to Big Island farms.

The Hawaii Carpenters Union has complained about contractors hiring illegal aliens on Honolulu construction sites while union members sit at home unemployed. In 2008 sixty-two were arrested—including Mexicans, Brazilians, and one European--in two separate raids on one Maui construction site. On one Honolulu jobsite 17 illegals were arrested in December, 2007.

Excerpt Read more at hawaiifreepress.com

President Misleads Americans in Health Care Speech

After reading all the comments about the President's Health Care speech, this article summed it up the best. Turns out when Cong Wilson shouted out 'you lie' when the President talked about no healthcare for illegals, it was a lie. Today at a press conference, Minority Leader Boehner explained how twice the Democrats had voted down amendments that would make it illegal to give health care benefits to illegal aliens. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BsMFTgXhCg)

Congressman Wilson's remark which he apologized to the President for making during his speech, has shown this Nation that when a Republican makes a mistake they are not afraid to apologize. Note his apology was for disrupting the speech with his comment, not for the comment itself which was true. Obama didn't hesitate to attack those of us who oppose Obamacare. Please don't hold your breath on waiting for an apology from Obama or Dems -- it is a one way street as they call dissenters names but never apologize.

MSM has a short memory because a lot of us remember the booing of President Bush by the Democrats and shouting. Funny that were no comments made then or people shouting out identified. Let one Republican Congressman actually speak the truth and the MSM attacks him.
Obama also lied about about another important issue in the bill, paying for abortion, as pointed out below by Jordan Sekulow.

President Misleads Americans in Health Care Speech
Jordan Sekulow,
Sep 10, 2009

Tonight, President Obama had an opportunity to reshape the health care debate. Instead, the President rattled off the same broad, partisan health care points that the White House Communications Department has been using for the last two months.
Where were the health care specifics we were led to believe this speech would include? Yes, President Obama told us that his plan, though the White House actually has no specific health care plan, would cost 900 billion dollars over the next ten years. Other than that, which most astute political junkies know is a "read my lips" moment in the making, the President merely echoed hard left partisan rhetoric while continuing to mislead the American people.

Let's get right to the most inaccurate statement made by the President tonight. President Obama said, "one more misunderstanding I want to clear up - under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions." This statement is downright false.

(Excerpt) Read more at the Examiner

After reading the comments around the Net on his speech, seeing how CNN spun the poll numbers, and listening to comments being made today, we have come to the conclusion that this bill that Obama said is an emergency even though not enacted until 2013, is not going to pass because it is a budget breaker. If we are to take the President's word that he will not approve a bill that would add one dime to deficit, then this bill is DOA as it adds billions and billions to the deficit.

Also we would like to know if there is so much fraud and waste in Medicare/Medicaid as alleged by the President, why are they not taking steps today to end the fraud and waste to lower the deficit. Why do we need a complete overhaul to fix Medicare/Medicaid fraud and mismanagement? We would also like to know how many Democrat campaign accounts are being filled up to support this boondoggle. Looking forward to see the FEC reports for this quarter and see who is giving the dollars to which Congressmen/Senators to vote for Obamacare.

All the Democrats need to do is roll up their sleeves and investigate where the fraud and waste occur and fix that before coming to the taxpayer to fund a complete overhaul of healthcare to give the Government say over our lives. If Uncle Sam cannot fix Medicare/Medicaid fraud and abuse, why would we want them handling our healthcare? Every American taxpayer should be asking this question: Why won't the Democrats investigate the fraud and mismanagement? Are they getting donations? Makes no sense.

Best advice when dealing with politicians is Follow the Money!

Our Unconstitutional Census

NOTE: ACORN, the voter fraud people, have been given millions by the Democrats in power to conduct the Census -- how many illegals and made up names will they count to give Blue States more Congressmen?

Our Unconstitutional Census

California could get nine House seats it doesn’t deserve because illegal aliens will be counted in

By JOHN S. BAKER AND ELLIOTT STONECIPHER

Next year’s census will determine the apportionment of House members and Electoral College votes for each state. To accomplish these vital constitutional purposes, the enumeration should count only citizens and persons who are legal, permanent residents. But it won’t.
Instead, the U.S. Census Bureau is set to count all persons physically present in the country—including large numbers who are here illegally. The result will unconstitutionally increase the number of representatives in some states and deprive some other states of their rightful political representation. Citizens of “loser” states should be outraged. Yet few are even aware of what’s going on.

In 1790, the first Census Act provided that the enumeration of that year would count “inhabitants” and “distinguish” various subgroups by age, sex, status as free persons, etc. Inhabitant was a term with a well-defined meaning that encompassed, as the Oxford English Dictionary expressed it, one who “is a bona fide member of a State, subject to all the requisitions of its laws, and entitled to all the privileges which they confer.”

Thus early census questionnaires generally asked a question that got at the issue of citizenship or permanent resident status, e.g., “what state or foreign country were you born in?” or whether an individual who said he was foreign-born was naturalized. Over the years, however, Congress and the Census Bureau have added inquiries that have little or nothing to do with census’s constitutional purpose.

By 1980 there were two census forms. The shorter form went to every person physically present in the country and was used to establish congressional apportionment. It had no question pertaining to an individual’s citizenship or legal status as a resident. The longer form gathered various kinds of socioeconomic information including citizenship status, but it went only to a sample of U.S. households. That pattern was repeated for the 1990 and 2000 censuses.
The 2010 census will use only the short form. The long form has been replaced by the Census Bureau’s ongoing American Community Survey. Dr. Elizabeth Grieco, chief of the Census Bureau’s Immigration Statistics Staff, told us in a recent interview that the 2010 census short form does not ask about citizenship because “Congress has not asked us to do that.”
Because the census (since at least 1980) has not distinguished citizens and permanent, legal residents from individuals here illegally, the basis for apportionment of House seats has been skewed. According to the Census Bureau’s latest American Community Survey data (2007), states with a significant net gain in population by inclusion of noncitizens include Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, New York and Texas. (There are tiny net gains for Hawaii and Massachusetts.)

This makes a real difference. Here’s why:

According to the latest American Community Survey, California has 5,622,422 noncitizens in its population of 36,264,467. Based on our round-number projection of a decade-end population in that state of 37,000,000 (including 5,750,000 noncitizens), California would have 57 members in the newly reapportioned U.S. House of Representatives.

However, with noncitizens not included for purposes of reapportionment, California would have 48 House seats (based on an estimated 308 million total population in 2010 with 283 million citizens, or 650,000 citizens per House seat). Using a similar projection, Texas would have 38 House members with noncitizens included. With only citizens counted, it would be entitled to 34 members.

Of course, other states lose out when noncitizens are counted for reapportionment. According to projections of the 2010 Census by Election Data Services, states certain to lose one seat in the 2010 reapportionment are Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania; states likely (though not certain) to lose a seat are Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, and Ohio could lose a second seat. But under a proper census enumeration that excluded illegal residents, some of the states projected to lose a representative—including our own state of Louisiana—would not do so.

The census has drifted far from its constitutional roots, and the 2010 enumeration will result in a malapportionment of Congress.

Click to Read More