Working for logical immigation reform based on a stable population, a recognition of the finite nature of our natural resources and the adverse impact of continued growth on our quality of life, standard of living, national interest, character, language, sovereignty and the rule of law. Pushing back and countering the disloyal elements in American society and the anti-American rhetoric of the leftwing illegal alien lobbies. In a debate, when your opponents turn to name calling, it's a good sign you've already won.

Monday, July 30, 2007

An Immigration Questionnaire for Presidential Candidates

A Yes or No Immigration Questionnaire for Presidential Candidates

Do you favor or support:

1. A systematic, stepwise approach to immigration reform in a series of separate, simpler bills as opposed to a single comprehensive reform bill?

2. The rule of law?

3. Full enforcement of all of the immigration laws currently on the books?

4. Failure to enforce immigration laws as an impeachable offense?

5. Failure to enforce immigration laws as a cause for termination of INS, ICE and Border Patrol agents?

6. Negotiation of an agreement with our neighbors to permit hot pursuit of drug smugglers across the border and the use of lethal force if they fail to halt when ordered?

7. A process for employers to present irrefutable evidence of need before foreign workers can be hired or retained?

8. A process to identify and deport illegals who are holding jobs American will do if offered a fair wage and a hiring preference?

9. An American labor protection provision in any immigration legislation?

10. A simplification of deportation procedures and appeals to assure minimum detention periods and expeditious deportation?

11. Classifying all deportations as involuntary even if the deportee agrees to self deport and does so at his own expense?

12. Holding employers accountable for the immigration status of all employees whether or not they hired them knowingly or intentionally without regard to that status?

13. Requiring employers to be responsible for all the health care costs of their foreign employees and their families?

14. Reducing cross border traffic to enable the Border Patrol to do a more effective job of identifying potential terrorists?

15. Requiring a tamper proof, machine readable, biometric ID for everyone who enters this country?

16. Requiring a background check and medical exam for all who seek such an ID?

17. Specifying the type of work that a foreign worker is authorized to do on the ID?

18. A constitutional amendment specifying English as the Official Language of the U.S.?

19. Repeal of EO13166 with a provision for Public Interpreters for those who cannot afford one?

20. Triggers in any immigration bill that require objective measures of results in terms of a reduction in the illegal population, an increase in the number of border apprehensions and deportations, and a demonstrated system for verifying the immigration status of all employees before any other provisions can go into effect?

21. Use of detainees to help build border security infrastructure?

22. Dual citizenship and dual allegiance?

23. Free schooling for Mexican children in American schools near the borders?

24. Restrictions on display of foreign flags at other than foreign embassies and consulates except by permit?

25. Restrictions on street demonstrations by illegals?

26. A reinterpretation or modification of the 14th amendment to end its abuse?

27. Limiting automatic jus soli citizenship to children who have at least one parent who is a citizen?

28. A stringent requirement for fluency in the English language before a pathway to citizenship can be allowed?

29. Mandatory registration of all aliens?

30. A new alien and sedition act to cover illegal aliens and their fellow travelers?

31. A provision that classifies all border violations by repeat offenders as felonies?

32. A provision that holds those who aid and abet border violators accountable?

33. A provision that enables local communities to enact measures to help enforce immigration laws?

34. A. requirement that local police and sheriffs offices determine the immigration status of any one apprehended for other law violations and hold any illegals until ICE takes custody?

35. A provision to permit local jurisdictions to charge illegals with criminal trespass?

36. Full enforcement of zoning regulations regarding occupancy rates in private residences?

37. A wage rate at the American standard for all foreign workers who qualify for legal status?

38. Prosecution for unfair competition for employers who fail to pay foreign workers at the American standard wage?

39. A five year jail term for anyone registering to vote using fraudulent documents?

40. A five year jail term for anyone permitting or encouraging false voter registration?

41. A regular audit of voter registration roles in areas of where there are large numbers of foreign workers to determine the extent of irregularities and permit the prosecution of those responsible?

42. Higher standards for citizenship by naturalization?

42. A national goal and plan to achieve a stable population?

43. Roy Beck as Executive Director of the INS?

44. A limit on the deductions for exemptions for dependent children to two per couple?

45. No cross border permits for work commuters?

46. Repeal of NAFTA?

47. Only American tractors on American highways; foreign trailers to be unhitched and inspected at the border?

48. A five year jail term for anyone convicted of renting, selling or forging fraudulent immigration documents such as passports, green cards, social security cards, drivers licenses or any other such documents?

49. A two year jail term for anyone who uses a fraudulent document or social security number to gain employment or achieve entry into the U.S.?

50. A ten year jail term for identity theft or attempted bribery of a federal agent?

51. Turning the apprehension and deportation job over to private enterprise with all costs recovered and a reasonable profit from the illegals, their families and/or their employers?

52. The North American Union

53. Some form of amnesty for illegal aliens already living in the U.S.?

54. Reduce federal aid to cities that proclaim that they are sanctuary cities?

Sunday, July 29, 2007

The New Assimilation

A well-founded perception is that Latinos do not assimilate, do not learn English, and are unraveling the fabric of the identity of a nation. Some Latinos undoubtedly learn English by the second or perhaps as late as the fourth generation. However, they do not uniformly speak English in school or workplace settings. Some high schools have seen rifts develop on campus between those Latinos who speak Spanish among themselves and those who prefer to hone their English skills. First generation workers who speak Spanish in the workplace lay the foundation for resentment among English speakers who feel no camaraderie with them since there is no communication.

“It is one of the ideas that anti-immigrant forces take advantage of: the notion that immigrants today do not assimilate and that other generations did. But it is not true,” says Cecilia Muñoz of the National Council of La Raza. The very existence of La Raza seems to suggest that Muñoz is wrong about this. Moreover, the extensive network of Spanish language media has significantly reduced the incentive to assimilate culturally and linguistically.

“Culturally, Latinos are never going to totally assimilate. Latinos are creating their own space in this country. And the characteristics of Hispanic culture are changing forever the face of the nation,” Jorge Ramos wrote in his book, "The Latino Wave: How Hispanics Are Transforming Politics in America." He's got that right but he could have gone much farther and described how Hispanics are recreating in America the very economic conditions of poverty and joblessness they left their homelands to escape. He could have dealt with the inevitable impact on the U.S. standard of living of unfettered population growth due to legal immigrants, illegal aliens and their progeny. This aspect of the problem is conveniently ignored.

When a disparity in the standard of living exists between two neighboring countries, it creates enormous immigration pressures. Under these conditions, if immigration is largely uncontrolled, the inevitable result will be an equilibrium between the two standards of living, with the higher standard being substantially reduced and the lower standard being increased. Population growth means that finite resources available per capita will be reduced and the standard of living will decline, for yet another second reason.

To most citizens of the U.S., assimilation means adopting a new lifestyle identified with the dominant Anglo- Catholic - Protestant culture and absorbing the individuality of the United States. It means becoming an American, not a hypenated American. Assimilation has occurred when someone feels American. People that march, yelling, "Nosotros somos América" (We are America), waving the flags of other countries, are clearly not assimilated.Richard Rodriguez, a writer who has published various books about the adaptation of Latinos to U.S. culture overlooks the fact that the country is becoming more Mexican, and that everything is changing our food, customs, music and religion. “As Latinos continue incorporating themselves into society, Americans feel they have to learn fragments of Spanish. And there will be weddings, hatred, friendship, solidarity, curiosity and competition.”

What's certain is that many Latinos live with one foot in each culture and they flow like water from one side to the other. The question becomes one of dual citizenship and dual allegiance. These terms are essentially oxymorons. Citizenship should continue to require the renunciation of allegiance to any foreign government. The unwillingness of Latinos to take this step is another source of irritation and strong evidence that they are not assimilating. Some maintain that earlier immigrants did not assimilate either. There is some limited degree of truth in that statement. Initially, we did see enclaves of Italian, Polish and other nationalities but most have now fully assimilated linguistically because it was necessary to do so in order to communicate with each other and carry on the commerce essential to the vitality of the broader communities. Latinos seem to find this unnecessary as their numbers increase daily and government is unwilling to take the stringent and continuing steps required to curb this invasion.

Tuesday, July 24, 2007

Do Illegals Return Home?

The following seems to suggest that Mexicans are neither returning to Mexico nor assimilating. This should give all citizens cause for grave concern.

In city after city, the sprawl and destruction or development of arable land has become overwhelming as citizens are pushed farther and farther out as a result of the influx of illegal aliens. There is a cultural and ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods going on in many of our cities. In Chicago, there are four Spanish language TV Stations, 17 Spanish language radio stations and numerous Spanish language publications, church services, street signs, box store signage, as well as government documents in Spanish. Some schools have hired teachers to educate children solely in Spanish. Does that sound like assimilation? Does it suggest that these developments are only temporary and eventually they will all return home? Even though Chicago is over one-thousand miles from the Mexican border, the Hispanic population in the area is now approaching two million. In 1965, it was less than 100,000, mostly citizens of Puerto Rican ancestry.

While illegal aliens march and chant about racism and make demands for rights no guest should expect, they methodically take over neighborhoods and create their own ethnic enclaves. Travel to Houston, Atlanta, Miami, New York City, Dallas, Raleigh, Denver and any American city with major illegal alien overload and you will see the same pattern of ethnic cleansing. Dallas County gained 175,000 Hispanic residents (now 35 percent of the population) from 2000 to 2005, 130,000 Anglos moved out. White America subjugated Black America for much of the last two centuries, but now a new threat faces our Black citizens as Mexicans overwhelm their neighborhoods in city after city. Mexicans chase Blacks out as fast as they can bring in their relatives from Mexico while at the same time recreating the very conditions they left Mexico to escape.

Senators Hillary Clinton, Kennedy, Specter, McCain, Reid, Hagel, Martinez, and the Administration and the pro illegal liberals think this is good for America. They are dead wrong. The unabated influx of foreigners rips at America’s core and weakens our cohesive society. It destroys our single language. It wreaks havoc in our schools. It shreds the American Dream. In the long run it will result in, not a multicultural society, but a new unicultural society that demands that all children be taught in Spanish.

Friday, July 20, 2007

Immigrants: the Explorers, Founders, Developers and Defenders of America.

From all parts of the world, immigrants came to America because of persecution, wars, pestilence, poverty, crime and disease in their homelands. They came to this new land with a lot of trepidation, especially those who did not speak English. They knew they would face hardships and that it would take years to adapt to their new country. Nevertheless, as a result of the vision of the Founding Fathers, they believed America offered personal and religious freedom and the opportunity to pursue happiness and economic success. They also believed that a vast open country with limitless resources lay before them, waiting to be settled and developed. That history and the history of sacrifices of our armed forces in defending our freedom are what strengthen our love for America and our resolve to defend our borders, our national sovereignty, and the national interest. Interlopers with little regard for the rule of law, the very basis for all civilized societies, now threaten our country. They make claims of commitment to community and respect for human beings but have little respect for the rights of their fellow citizens or for the national interest.

What binds Americans together is our desire to preserve the nation founded on the principles of law, freedom and citizenship. Not all who come here deserve to be American citizens. Many been invited but few will be chosen.

The nation we treasure cannot be preserved if we invite all the downtrodden peoples from the crime-ridden, disease-infested, and impoverished neighborhoods of world to share in the American Dream. There is no longer a vast unsettled continent. There is no new Louisiana Purchase available. And every day at the gas pump we are reminded that our natural resources are not limitless.

There are various ethnic lines of descent within the mainstream American culture and most of them value our national sovereignty, the American flag, our constitution, our language, our laws, the rule of law and the quality of life we enjoy. This is what brings meaning to the lives of Americans. We must think of ourselves as Americans first and always.

We believe in respecting our heritage which is the lasting gift from the Founding Fathers and our ancestors who braved the oceans, the mountains, the deserts and the weather enduring untold hardships to come here, settle this great land moving west, shed their former nationalities and allegiances and become Americans. They learned to celebrate all things American. People from all parts of the world came together in America from which emerged a new people and a new culture, one that is fundamentally different from that of the old country, the old ways, the old cultures and the old concepts of slavery, peonage, serfdom, royalty, nobility and special privilege. We bow to no one.

Without question the America the immigrants found then was the land of opportunity. All worked together as Americans to make good on the promise of the Republican concept that a rising tide lifts all boats.

Americans believe in a level playing field, where a citizen's starting point in life does not necessarily determine where they end in life. A citizen's potential for success is limited only by his indolence or his failure to take full advantage of all the educational and other opportunities available to him.

Americans believe that every citizen deserves the opportunity to develop his or her human potential through education and work.

The promise of America has already been fulfilled manifold but the continued genuine economic, civic and political participation of all of its citizens is necessary to preserve that promise as it relates to the quality of life for our descendants. America can no longer offer all things to all people. Whether you speak of petroleum, water, arable land or a host of other natural resources, it is obvious that these dwindling resources cannot be spread over an unlimited number of people without adversely affecting everyone's quality of life. America should not be expected to and cannot accommodate an unlimited number of people at any desirable level of material, mental and civic well-being. Those who deny this obvious truism are the ones we should worry about the most. Those who advocate unlimited immigration and population growth have reduced their argument to the absurd, a reductio ad absurdum.

Quick and sure justice is due to all citizens and to all the criminals in our midst and all others who violate our laws and our borders. That is our social and national responsibility. Justice delayed is justice denied.

We must all work at expanding democracy and prosperity for our citizens by insisting that all laws be forced and all threats to our national sovereignty be removed. There are those among us who have a very narrow concept of loyalty to America. They think if they fly the flag [and some don’t], serve in the armed forces, and vote legally that that is enough. They give no thought to their obligation of loyalty to their fellow Americans and to the national interest. Instead they give their loyalty to foreigners, foreign governments, foreign cultures and foreign philosophies.

We have duties and responsibilities to all of our fellow citizens, to our families, to our communities and to society. We cannot discharge those duties or fulfill those responsibilities if we give priority to concern for foreigners, foreign governments, foreign cultures and foreign philosophies.

We have a steadfast belief in the promise of America; an untiring willingness to work to expand the American Dream; and an unfaltering vision for a brighter, better future of respect and honor for all loyal citizens. We believe it is each country’s responsibility to create a dream for its people and to work unfailingly to foster that dream and improve the quality of life for its people. Other countries should not look for a place to dump their poor and their other social problems in the backyard of another country. Such behavior cannot be tolerated on the part of any government. It is not America's job to solve the problems of other countries but, like Home Depot's motto, they can do it, we can help.

We will hold our community leaders, political representatives and ourselves accountable and responsible for preserving the America we know and love, its values, its rule of law, its flag, its history, its multi-faceted, but e. pluribus unum culture. We will work without respite to deter those who would compromise America and destroy the greatest nation on earth with misguided concerns for other countries and their peoples. We will help those peoples to unfurl their sails and straighten their rigging so they can realize their own dreams in their own countries.

The American Republic is a fragile institution that is under duress from excessive population growth and an unsustainable economy. It is in danger of being Balkanized and of foundering from excessive debt. It suffers from immigration zealots who care more about ethnic politics, cheap labor and misguided globalism than they do about the long term survival of America as we know it. Their faith is boundless but they are without wisdom and foresight. They are like Alfred E. Neuman, the original “What, me worry" kid of Mad Magazine fame (See picture above)

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Is Mexifornia a Pejorative Term?

The terms Mexifornia, Mexizona, Mexas, Mexichusetts and even Mexico Norte, Amexico, or Meximerica have been coined to describe the trends apparent in the U.S. demographics due to immigration, legal and illegal, and differences in fertility rates. These terms are not precisely accurate because second generation Mexicans, if born in the U.S., are in fact Americans under the 14th amendment, regardless of what they might otherwise call themselves. A more general term in the case of California might be Hispanifornia which would include all those living in California of Hispanic extraction. Are these terms pejorative and racist or merely factual. Do they reflect the actual and undeniable trend toward more Hispanic citizens everywhere across the nation?

The ruckus caused by the use of terms “Hymietown” and “Chocolate City” in the past has been used in an attempt to prove that Mexifornia is a pejorative term. Politically-correct folks would be quick to agree. However, one should look a little bit deeper at the context in which each of these terms has been used. Given the context in which Hymietown was used by Jesse Jackson, one would probably have to agree that it was a pejorative term. Jessie Jackson later apologized for using it. Nevertheless, we have long referred to ethnic enclaves one way or another, for examples: Chinatowns in San Francisco and other cities, Little Havana in Miami and Little Kabul in Fremont, California and Little Israel which is used to refer to any area in a city which has a relatively dense population of persons of Jewish descent, but not necessarily to the utter exclusion of other races, creeds and denominations. In former times, these enclaves of Jewishness were called 'Ghettos', although the term ghetto is now more commonly associated with areas populated by lower-class African American communities. A good example of a Little Israel would be the Sarcelles district in Paris, France or Kew Garden Hills, Queens, New York. Synonyms for Little Israel are Little Tel Aviv, Little Jerusalem, or Hymietown

Mayor Ray Nagin on Tuesday apologized for urging residents to rebuild a "chocolate New Orleans" and saying, "You can't have New Orleans no other way. I'm really sorry that some people took that they way they did, and that was not my intention," the mayor said. "I say everybody's welcome." Nagin added that he never should have used the term "chocolate." This is not the kind of mistake a politician usually makes although there are certainly other examples such as former Senator Allen of Virginia use of the term Macaca to refer to a Democrat ringer in a campaign crowd. It seems to me that New Orleans is a chocolate city by and large. So why not recognize that fact. As long as the context does not denigrate other residents of a different ethnicity, I see no harm in it. Perhaps he could have used a little more context to explain what he meant. Apparently a liberal view of off-the-cuff political gaffs is not shared by many.

At a campaign rally in southwest Virginia, Senator Allen repeatedly called a volunteer for Democrat James Webb "macaca." During the speech in Breaks, near the Kentucky border, Allen began by saying that he was "going to run this campaign on positive, constructive ideas" and then pointed at S.R. Sidarth in the crowd.

"This fellow here, over here with the yellow shirt, macaca, or whatever his name is. He's with my opponent. He's following us around everywhere. And it's just great," Allen said, as his supporters began to laugh. After saying that Webb was raising money in California with a "bunch of Hollywood movie moguls," Allen said, "Let's give a welcome to macaca, here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia." Allen then began talking about the "war on terror."

Critics claimed that the word is a European slur of people from North Africa, of which Allen might have been aware, since his Mother is French Tunisian. Indeed, that is not implausible. There are problems, however, that are worth mentioning: (1) Senator Allen said "macaca", but the European slur is Macaque. Aside from being a rather obscure slur, the words are pronounced differently. (2) The "Macaque" slur means "a Negro (originally) or a person of North-African origin". S.R. Sidarth neither looks nor is African — he is Indian, against whom the Macaque slur is not intended. Which is it, is Allen familiar with the slur or not?

"It doesn’t make much sense that Allen knowingly dropped an ethnic slur against the person videotaping him for his opponent." Other critics claimed that Allen's statement "Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia!" was a remark about Sidarth looking 'foreign', when he was actually "born and raised in Virginia". This criticism depends an out-of-context read of the statement. Allen was specifically contrasting the "Beltway" and "Hollywood" crowd with the "real world" of Virginia and the rest of America that exists outside the Beltway.

As with Hillary Clinton's "[Ghandi] ran a gas station down in St. Louis", or Ted Kennedy's Barrack "Osama bin...Osama...Obama" moments, this is almost certainly more of a mild mistake, rather than a scandal from which anyone should draw personal inferences.


Monday, July 16, 2007

Do Illegals Return to Mexico in Retirement?

Mirror believes that Mexican illegals return to Mexico when their working years are over. Perhaps if they have remained in illegal status, that is one choice they might consider. However, if their children are American citizens as they surely will be if they were born here, isn't it more likely that in the Mexican tradition the parents will remain here and live with one or more of their children? Also as pointed out in the 14th Amendment Babies post, at age 21, the citizen children can arrange permanent residency for their parents. Mirror asks, "Why should children return to Mexico or eslewhere if they are citizens of the U.S.?" The answer is that all minor children belong with their parents, not left to fend for themselves or to impose on other relatives. Children of illegals who have reach their 21st birthdays can do whatever they like which more than likely will be to remain in this country and arrange permanent residency for their parents. The parents may wish to return to Mexico if they think the cost of living is lower and if they think the climate is more hospitable. I had no intention of suggesting children of age 21 or older had any obligation to return to their homelands if they were born in this country because as 14th amendment children they are entitled to remain.

Sunday, July 15, 2007


Mirror properly points out that what I propose requires many changes in laws, the constitution and the negotiation of agreements with foreign countries. I agree but we cannot accomplish anything unless we begin. Employer verification of immigration status by the best means available is the next logical step. An avenue for employers to get foreign workers to the extent they can demonstrate the need is another step. A reinterpretation of the 14th amendment or approval of the constitutionality of HR 1940 is another.

We have some leverage with other countries. Remittances can be taxed if those countries refuse to reimburse us for the cost of apprehension, detention and deportation. And foreign aid can be reduced by the amount of that cost. Trade can be also curtailed or taxed where negotiations fail.


Mirror points out that an emergency patient isn't in much of a position to prove his or her identity. Of course, that is true but usually a relative of some kind accompanies the patient or arrives shortly thereafter. They are the ones who must prove the identity of the patient or whoever service is being provided to. A national system for checking SSN vs names is already available and should be used immediately by all employers until an even better system can be devised. Once we have machine-readable, tamper proof IDs for foreign workers that problem will be largely solved.

We can also begin by insisting that the patient or his relatives identify his employer so that followup on immigration status can be instituted immediately while the patient's condition is being stabilized. All need to sign a statement that indicates they understand that the use of any false identity documents is a felony and will subject the perpetrator to two years in jail and deportation. Under those conditions, a patient or his family might be better advised to simply admit that they are illegal and be finger printed and a DNA sample taken.

This is not an easy problem to solve but we can do it if we put our minds to it and are really serious about it.

Unemployment Rate and Fair Wages

Mirror raises a legitimate question about the number of jobs held by illegals that can be filled by Americans at the present low unemployment rate. I have merely suggested that this be put to the test by requiring employers to prove they cannot fill their jobs with citizen labor no matter how widely they advertise and no matter what wage they offer. It seems like this would be a worthwhile exercise for employers who feel they need foreign workers. Let them make their best case with irrefutable evidence of a good faith effort to hire U.S. citizens to no avail.

I have been an advocate of allowing local labor unions in concert with the Dept. of Labor to determine what is a fair wage. I washed dishes for 50-70 cents per hour plus meals when I was in college and stoop labor for $1.25 - $2 a day in earlier times as a teenager. There must be data out there which could be updated with cost of living factors to show what a fair wage would be today in relation to what citizens were paid to do any particular kind of work in the past. I could do this myself without too much trouble.

Jail time vs Detention at Minimum Wage

Mirror believes it is difficult to make a case against an illegal and that none can be jailed unless they are repeat offenders. I believe there are some other laws that come into play. For example, the use of another person's social security number to gain employment, the use of other fraudulent documents or stolen identities, criminal trespass and vandalism could all be cause for detention pending deportation if not actual jail time. He is right when he says no one can be forced to work without pay if they don't want to but if some minimum amount above room and board is offered, there will usually be some takers. Others will prefer work to inactivity.

Rio Grande Property Owners

It is understandable that those who run cattle along the Texas/Mexican border would want free access to the river and that they would not want some of their river frontage used for fences and detention facilities. Yet, they are the same people who complain about drug runners and illegals crossing and trashing their properties. This creates a real dilemma for them without an easy solution. Detention facilities are not so much of a problem. They could be located some distance from the border. Perhaps even the fence could be so located as a second line of defense. It's not clear how effective this would be. It is possible that some existing fence lines could be used or significantly improved.

14th Amendment Babies

14th Amendment Baby is a term used to refer to a child born in the United States to illegal aliens or other non-citizens. Such a child is legally a citizen of the United States. The term refers to a resident alien's child's role in facilitating chain migration under the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965. Such a baby becomes the anchor of a chain by which its family may receive benefits from social programs such as Aid to Dependent Children, subsidized low income housing, and by which the parents may themselves eventually become lawful permanent residents or citizens of the United States.

A US-born child can in fact sponsor his/her parents for legal immigration to the United States when he/she becomes an adult, but illegal immigrant parents do not gain any immediate additional legal rights based solely on the fact that they have had a child born in the US. However, illegal immigrant parents of US-born children often avoid deportation by immigration judges because they are the biological parents of minors, who have every right to be in the US as citizens. This is the flimsy "separation of families" argument. Deporting the illegal parents of US-born children need not necessarily cause the legal breakup of families. Parents should feel obligated to take their minor children with them if they are deported. Nevertheless, liberal judges are often unwilling to recognize this obligation and allow the parents to stay, completely thwarting any semblance of a rational immigration and deportation policy. When the child becomes an adult, the child can apply to sponsor his or her foreign-born parents for U.S. citizenship.

The term "14th Amendment Babies" is also used to refer to children born to women who are legally in the US on temporary visas (for example a visitor’s visa) when the child's birth is specifically intended to obtain citizenship for the child under US law; however, this is more precisely described as birth tourism. Sometimes the term jackpot baby is used interchangeably with the term anchor baby. Both terms are considered pejorative by the pro-immigration activists but at least the latter term is considered by others to be non-pejorative and fully descriptive of the nature of the children born in the U.S. of illegal parents.

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Secure Borders -- What Does it Take?

Admittedly multi-layer fences cannot do the job alone. They may slow down the traffic if the Border Patrol is beefed up and if it does the job it is being paid to do. Other border infrastructure such as roads and electronic and aerial surveillance will also help. The roads will enable the patrol to get there faster when a violation is detected by whatever other means are available.

We should utilize the National Guard, rotating them in and out for their two weeks of active duty. They should be fully trained and deputized to act as Border Patrol auxiliaries. The Minutemen might also be able to play a role in this regard but I would make sure that any of their members who have shown a propensity to violence are weeded out and that they also are well-trained on what they can and cannot do with regard to border violators.

Construction of detention facilities near the border is imperative so there are at hand many places to detain the border violators. Those apprehended should be put to work building those facilities and the other border infrastructure for the duration of their stay in this country. This is not slave labor. That is just hyperbole. This is a way of recouping the cost of apprehension and detention pending an immigration decision. OTMs should never be paroled because they simply disappear never to be seen again. Mexicans could be paroled back to Mexico with their families if they promise to return to complete their detention or until their case is decided. They must be admonished that any other return to the U.S. will cause them to classified as felons and be sentenced to two years of detention or jail. Of course, all must be photographed, fingerprinted and DNAed.

Employers may recruit the paroled border violators on the Mexico side of the border in facilities organized and funded by the Mexican government but only U.S. state employment offices will be authorized to examine the evidence presented by an employer to prove that he has advertised for American workers to no avail, having offered a fair wage by American standards and a hiring preference for citizens.

Interior workplace enforcement, involuntary deportations, and employer sanctions can also be viewed as essential parts of a comprehensive border security plan because they create disincentives to repeat offenders. Employers must be required to validate the immigration status of all employees, both existing and new, using an automated system devised by the federal government. Employers must be held accountable for the immigration status of their employees whether they were hired knowingly or unknowingly. Not knowing is not an acceptable excuse.

Cross border traffic of all kinds must be reduced. If you are a citizen of Mexico, you don’t work in the U.S. unless you have a tamper-proof ID issued on the basis of employer-produced evidence of need. If you are a citizen of the U.S., you are not allowed to commute from Mexico to work in the U.S.. You must live here if you want to work here. Mexican tractor trailers will be unhitched at the border and re-hitched to tractors belonging to American trucking companies. Repeal NAFTA.

No Mexican children are allowed to go to school in the U.S. if they live in Mexico. There can be no border security with the present volume of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Schools, hospitals and other service organizations must be required to verify the immigration status of all individuals before any service can be provided. Children whose parents are legally employed in the U.S. must attend school. Employers must reimburse hospitals and emergency rooms for any costs not recovered from their employees or their families or, alternatively, must provide family health care coverage for all foreign employees.

This is what it takes to secure the borders. Comprehensive border security is not simple. It requires round the clock enforcement and severe penalties for those who fail to enforce the law including for the president of the U.S. Failure to enforce immigration laws must be an impeachable offense -- a high crime or misdemeanor.

What is an Anchor Baby?

In many respects an anchor baby is no different from any other squalling, red-faced baby, capable of burps coming from his toes or babbling happily in his mother’s arms. That’s about where the similarity ends.

According to the principle of jus soli, embodied in the 14th amendment, a person's nationality at birth is determined by the place of birth. Thus, any child born in the United States is an American. The 14th amendment has been abused by tourists, guest workers and those who enter the U.S. illegally for the sole purpose of delivering an instant citizen. As a result, many believe that if the framers of the 14th amendment had been able to anticipate immigration’s unarmed invasion and its deadly consequences, the amendment would have been much more restrictive. Some have suggested that the citizenship of the child should be the same as the citizenship of the mother, regardless of the place of birth. This is the principle of jus sanguinis, that a person's nationality at birth is the same as that of his natural parents.

The term anchor baby is an accurate descriptor for any baby who subsequently serves as a basis for awarding preferential immigration status to the baby’s parents and other close relatives, thus creating an immigration tail of significant magnitude. This term applies to any child regardless of the citizenship of the parents. If such a child enables parents and other relatives to achieve legal status or preferential immigration standing, then indeed the child has played the anchor baby role to the hilt. Anchor in this context is anything or person who acts to hold himself fast, as to a place; anything that makes stable or secure or anything that is depended on for support or security. There is nothing pejorative about the application of this term to babies who play this role. It is certainly not de-humanizing or de-Americanizing.

There have been many stories reported lamenting the separation of parents from children when illegal aliens are apprehended, detained and/or deported but the children are jus soli citizens. The illegals blame the government for enforcing the law when it is they themselves who have created the family separation problem by their violation of the border without proper authorization and then delivering a baby in the U.S..

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

A Rational Approach to Immigration Reform

Writers on the subject of immigration reform often like to characterize their proposals as the only rational approach. I may be making the same mistake with this post. As a disclaimer, I will say at the outset that there may well be other rational approaches. I do not have a corner on all solutions to this important national problem. Capitulation is, however, not a rational solution.

Columnist Tom Hexner seems to think that because illegals are willing to break the law and risk life and limb to get here that somehow that excuses their behavior. He thinks that because they are trying to achieve a decent life, that makes it okay. He is wrong. He says rhetoric will always lose out to sincere desire. He may be right about that. We need a lot more than rhetoric. We need action -- vigorous, consistent and unrelenting action. We need enforcement not just rhetoric. These folks are breaking the law. Doesn’t that suggest that the problem is a lack of enforcement rather than the desires of the border violators? The problem with the 1986 law is it was was never enforced. It is not because of people wanted their lawns mowed but because successive administrations catered to the cheap labor and immigration lobbies and were looking ahead to the day when their Party might need Hispanic votes to get reelected.

Hexner suggests that even if the congress had passed a new immigration reform bill, it would not have been enforceable. Many felt that it would have been more a question of the lack of will on the part of the administration to enforce the law. Hexner cites prohibition and marijuana as illustrations of unenforceable policies. By extension, one could argue there should be no laws because all are unenforceable to some degree. Does Hexner advocate decriminalizing marijuana? He doesn't say.

Hexner derides the idea of an expensive fence at the border yet just one of the Mexican oligarchs, like Carlos Slim, could easily finance this fence all by himself. No one argues that a fence by itself will stop all border violations. Other infrastructure and surveillance techniques will be needed. But perhaps even more important is the idea of disincentives. If physical barriers are buttressed with significant penalties for the illegals and those who employ them or offer aid or sanctuary, we will begin to see some real results. If failures to enforce the law are considered to be "high crimes and misdemeanors", they become an impeachable offense as they should be. If underlings fail to enforce the law, they should be summarily fired.

If deportation is an expensive process, simplify and expedite it by reducing the levels of and bases for appeal. Put the job of roundup, detention and deportation into the hands of private enterprise with all costs and a profit to be recovered from the illegals, their employers and/or their homeland governments. Tell the Secretary of State to get busy negotiating a treaty to enable cost recovery. Make all deportations involuntary whether or not the illegal agrees to leave at his own expense. Keep illegals in detention only until transportation to the border can be arranged and the limited appeal, if any, quickly completed. Assign immigation judges to detention facilities so that cases can be decided the day they are received with no more than a week for a further appeal. Advise each illegal that if he or she returns they will be felons under current law and subject two years in jail.

Why should we throw up our hands and say it can't be done when we have never tried any of the above measures? Hexner is not a proponent of rational reform; he is a defeatist who is ready to capitulate rather than try harder.


There has been a significant amount of discussion regarding the loyalty of those who favor mass legalization of illegal aliens and the other provisions of the now defunct Senate Bill 1639. They keep repeating the litany: I am a loyal American; my family has been here for over 200 years. But they are unable to demonstrate how their position constitutes loyalty to the U.S., the national interest, and their fellow citizens.

Loyalty is a fairly simple concept. It means bearing true allegiance to one's sovereign nation and to its duly constituted authority and laws. In a more general sense, loyalty means constant faithfulness in any relation or obligation implying trust and confidence.

Fidelity to one' s spouse in a marriage is an example of loyalty of the latter more general definition. Praising in public and criticizing in private is part of that fidelity.

One cannot give precedence to the brotherhood of race or ethnicity and still be considered a "loyal American". As one Black lady once said to me, "I consider myself an American first and a Afro American second." Most of us have even gotten beyond that stage. We think of themselves as just Americans rather than Afro Americans, German Americans or Mexican Americans. The inability to clear this hurdle is what keeps some from achieving or realizing true loyalty to America. They still think in separatist racial terms rather than as inclusive Americans.

When it comes to the illegal aliens, the matter is quite simple. They are, after all, illegal, so starting the discussion with what they want or what is right and fair for them is a form of disloyalty. A loyal citizen starts from what is in the national interest and the interest of their fellow Americans. This is the approach that can lead to a resolution of immigration issues and the formulation of acceptable reform legislation. Those who approach the problem from the point of view of foreigners and their governments are not loyal citizens and that approach has ended and should continue to end in failure. One can arrive at a satisfactory solution starting from the national interest rather than the interests of foreigners. Without raging ethnic politics, a solution can be achieved. A solution can be reached without involving the lunatic fringes on either the Right or the Left. A solution can be reached by separating fact from fiction, ratings-driven entertainment from true journalism.

In search of compromise on this issue, who should have the longest road to travel, illegal aliens or U.S. citizens? Whose country is it anyway? The way in which one answers these questions clearly defines his or her loyalties.

Friday, July 6, 2007

The Pros vs the Antis, Part II

The Pros:

(1) This term is generally a misnomer because those in this fold are more often than not opposed rather than for something.

(2) Some are for secure borders but would deny our country the tools necessary to achieve that goal.

(3) Some give lip service to the English language but oppose Official English.

(4) Some are in favor of employer sanctions but oppose the sanctions against the illegals that would create the disincentives necessary to buttress the physical barriers at the border.

(5) Some oppose the interests of their fellow citizens and the national interest and, instead, are intensely pro-illegal, favoring foreigners and foreign governments rather than supporting their own country.

(6) Use terms like racist, bigot, nativist, and others to describe citizens who disagree with them.

(7) Like ad hominem arguments because they don't have to think to advance those arguments. They can just appeal to emotion.

(8) There are radical elements on both sides of the issues but the Pros like to lump all "Anti" citizens into the lunatic fringe while saying nothing about the radicals they support like MALDEF, MECHa, La Raza, LULAC and the Atzlanistas.

(9) Favor legalizing all illegals already here, thereby extending an open invitation for more to come.

(10) Have a singular lack of appreciation of the heartfelt concerns of American citizens -- they attribute all those concerns to racism or worse and yet no one has advocated the deportation of anyone except the illegals, regardless of their ethnicity or country of origin.

(11) Oppose any approach except comprehensive reform.

(12) Believe Americans do not have a good work ethic and strong families.

(13) Believe assimilation is taking place and everyone is learning English by the second generation.

(14) Believe illegals are needed and can develop the skills and professional knowledge to replace retiring boomers.

(15) They believe the illegals deserve a pathway to citizenship.

(16) They believe most illegals pay all the applicable taxes.

(17) Believe border violations and use of another person's SSN are trivial offenses.

(18) Believe in self-deportation so that the those involved can return quickly without the onus of classification as a felon.

The Antis:

(1) Have a strong desire to preserve the America they know and love.

(2) Some believe that to accomplish that legitimate goal requires a stable population.

(3) Some believe strongly in the rule of law and therefore think that most if not all illegals should be repatriated.

(4) Most see support of foreigners and foreign interests as a form of disloyalty.

(5) Some believe that the 14th amendment has been regularly abused and therefore needs to be revised or reinterpreted.

(6) Some would make support of a revision of the 14th a test of loyalty.

(7) Some see a simple compromise for dealing with the illegals already in this country -- institute a stringent process for determining which of them hold jobs citizens would do if offered a fair wage and a hiring preference.

(8) Those who fail this process go to immigration appeals court to state their case for remaining. They must show why they should remain. No one is required to show why they should not.

(9) Most believe strongly in employer sanctions and in the employers' obligations to confirm the immigration status of every existing employee and every new employee.

(10) Most believe those who fail the immigration status test should be turned over to the ICE.

(11) Most believe there is no excuse for hiring an illegal whether or not his documents look authentic. Employers must be held accountable whether they hired them knowingly or unknowingly.

(12) Most believe family separations are caused by the illegals not by the ICE.

(13) Most believe the use of fraudulent documents or a fake SSN or an SSN belonging to someone else should be classified as a felony.

(14) Most believe that some assimilation is taking place but maybe a new trend is taking place in Southern California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.

(15) Many believe that a pathway to citizenship should be reserved for those who were born here or who arrived here legally and that there should be no permanent residency for anyone else.

(16) Many believe the Pros, despite their protestations to the contrary, want a bilingual nation.

(17) Many believe bilingualism in the individual is good but wasteful as a national policy and that it would weaken national unity.

(18) Many believe that dual citizenship is an oxymoron.

(19) Many believe illegals conduct business and are paid on a cash basis with no tax deductions other than perhaps social security on another persons SSN.

(20) Many believe that all repatriations should be involuntary to create a disincentive for repeat offenses. Repeat offenders would be classified as felons and subject to a two year jail term.

Wednesday, July 4, 2007

Wage Depression

Dee says Antis make an uncorroborated claim that the 12M drag down the minimum wage.

Here's corroboration:

Characterizing the Pro-Illegals

The so-called Pro-Illegals advocate secure borders, sanctioning employers, comprehensive immigration reform, and a path to citizenship for the 12-20 million. They maintain that most of these illegals have worked and contributed to this country for +5 – 20 years. Of course, no one knows the actual distribution of these aliens by the length of their stay in this country.

By favoring the illegals and their countries of origin, the Pro-Illegals exhibit what many would consider a basic disloyalty to their fellow citizens and to the national interest. One can be in favor of a solution to the immigration conundrum without taking the part of foreigner or thier governments. When seeking a compromise in the national interest, who should have the longer road to travel, the illegals or U.S. citizens? This is the key question. Once it is answered, the way forward will become apparent, compromise will be easier, America will be preserved, and the demonstrated labor needs of employers will be met.

However, the Pro-Illegals fail to recognize that securing the borders means more than just physical barriers, roads and electronic and aerial surveillance. One cannot expect these measures to succeed by themselves without the creation of significant disincentives for prospecctive new violators of the borders. This means sanctioning the illegals themselves, their employers and those who aid and abet them or who offer sanctuary. Buttressing the physical barriers with important disincentives will improve our chances of success. Any other provisions of immigration reform must be held in abeyance until there are concrete results from the border measured not in terms of the completion of the infrastructure but in terms of a reduction in the illegal population and a reduction in the number of illegals being apprehended at the border.

The disincentives can be created with viforous interior enforcement including: (1) daily roundups, (2) more immigration judges to expedite the deportation appeal process, (3) quick involuntary deportation. Self-deportation will not longer be allowed because that avoids the onus of a removal order followed by a felon classification for those who return.

The bases for appeal could include: (1) testimonials from fellow workers not of their ethnicity, (2) evidence of social integration and cultural and linguistic assimilation, (3) children in school over the age of eight, (4) input from local unions, and (5) evidence of attendance at a community-based ESL course.

Characterizing the Antis (Pro-Legals)

According to Dee, "Some of the Worst Terms the ANTIs use are: 3rd World Country, Mexifornia, return to American Values."

She didn't provide a list of the positive terms that characterize Antis. One such term is: loyalty -- loyalty to one's fellows citizens and to the national interest.

If one spends any time in California, especially Southern California, it won't take long to see that "Mexifornia" is a apt term for that state. Of course, no one can predict what America will be like 50 or 100 years from now. However, if Southern California is any indication of what is to come for the rest of the country, it is reasonable to assume that not only is "Mexifornia" an appropriate description for California but "Mexico Norte" or "Amexico" will be an appropriate term for the country as a whole. The legal immigrants and illegals from south of the border will have re-created in this country the very conditions that led them to leave their homelands: poverty, disease, overpopulation, joblessness, oligarchs, corruption and crime. We have our share of all of these already. We don't need anymore.

Some will say that Mexico is not a 3rd world country and maybe that is so, yet it is unable to care for its own citizens and continues to dump its poor into our backyard uninvited. And where does unfettered population growth in all the Americas lead us if not to 3rd world status. I like to cite the simple equation: the limit of finite resources divided by population, as population increases without bounds, is zero -- ask any math professor. There is no more stark evidence of this than here in the West where water is in increasingly short supply as our population continues to grow.
I watch the continuing plunder of the Great Plains’ Ogallala Aquifer, the largest underground reservoir in the United States and one of the largest on the planet. It once held as much water as Lake Huron. It is a treasure that took millenia to accumulate. Remarkably, it could cease to be a water resource within another generation…. We are left with yet another illustration of an all too common American mindset: short on vision, mired in denial and unable to comprehend nature’s limits.” (Tom Letheby, The Denver Post)

Professor Jared Diamond, speaking at the University of Colorado Conference on World Affairs, linked the failure of societies to their inability to establish equilibrium with their natural environment. Dwindling natural resources, particularly accessible fuel and arable soil, lead to conflict. People will create cultural reasons to kill each other as justification to claim food and energy for themselves. His modern example was the 1994 Rwandan genocide which was ostensibly an ethnic civil war. Diamond preferred to explain it in terms of an overcrowded, underfed society that turned on itself to reduce its population. When asked about the global implications of this example his conclusion was simple: ‘We can either solve our problems comfortably and in a manner of our choosing over the next fifty years, or our problems will solve themselves uncomfortably and by means not of our choosing, after the next fifty years.

IDs --The Way Forward

This is the fourth topic under the general heading of “The Way Forward.”

All green cards and other flimsy or easily counterfeited documents will be declared invalid. The current holders of such documents will be allowed only six weeks in which to obtain a new machine-readable, biometric ID with a clear photo and thumb print and such other information as may be relevant to their tamper-proof identification as a legal guest worker. The ID will specify the type of work the guest worker is authorized to do. Employers who hire them for other types of work will be prosecuted to the full limit of the law. Issuance of IDs to agricultural workers will be given priority to avoid any impact on the harvesting of crops on a timely basis.

IDs for other types of work will be issued only where the need can be amply demonstrated and where all agricultural needs have been met.

Tuesday, July 3, 2007

Visas -- The Way Forward

The topic of this post in the continuing series on “The Way Forward” is visas.

There are too many different types of visas. Let’s limit the types to four: tourists, students, legal immigrants, and guest workers. Legal immigrants need visas only as a proof of approval of their immigation status. Those applicants who possess skills needed but not available in sufficient numbers in the United States and English-speaking applicants will be given most-favored immigrant status under a point system. Guest workers who are willing to do the type of work needed by employers will have that type of work indicated on their visas and on their machine-readable biometric IDs. For other than agricultural work, strict rules of evidence will be applied before an employer can hire foreign workers.

Monday, July 2, 2007

Employers' Requirements

This is the second post for “The Way Forward”:

What I have attempted here is to give employers a process for meeting their needs even as border security measures are being constructed. Not that this process will still not result in a mass legalization of foreign workers. That will be held in abeyance until such time as the border measures produce significant results such as a 50% reduction in the number of illegals apprehended in the 100 mile zone closest to the Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California borders.

To participate in this process employers must present irrefutable evidence of their need for foreign workers. This evidence shall be verified by state employment offices and union hiring offices. The verification process consists of copies of the advertisements posted in trade journals and state employment offices offering a fair wage by American standards and a hiring preference for citizens and copies of all of the applications received by and certified by the state employment office. Applications submitted directly to employers are not acceptable. Employers will also present evidence of the efforts they have made to hire the handicapped and the unemployed citizens on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder. The names of any welfare recipients who refuse employment offers will be forwarded to the State and County Departments of Social Services for appropriate action.

What constitutes a fair wage shall be determined by local unions in concert with the U.S. Department of Labor. In recognition of the critical timing associated with the harvesting of crops, this review and advertising process will be initiated will in advance of the harvest season and expedited by the state employment office. Qualifying foreign workers will be issued a machine readable biometric ID that specifies the type of authorized work as “agricultural, horticultural and cattle ranching. Other employers are prohibited from hiring these workers.

Employers may assist foreign workers in preparing an appeals where deportation of appears imminent.

Employers will be responsible for any unreimbursed health care costs of their foreign workers and their families. Every foreign worker or family member who appears at a hospital or emergency room will be required to identify the workers’ employers for subsequent billing purposes.

Employers are responsible for verifying the immigration status of all of their employees and will be held accountable for any illegals in their employ whether or not they were knowingly hired.

Falsification of evidence in support of an appeal of a deportation order or in support of an employment application by either the illegal or his employer will subject him to a fine of not less than $5,000 or one year in jail.

Registration and Verification of Immigration Status

This is an elaboration of my first point under "The Way Forward". This is the first of a series of discussions of provisions for a new immigration bill or series of bills.

Illegal aliens should be given no more than six months in which to register. This could be done at their places of work or wherever they are found. Failure to register will be considered a felony and subject the individual to immediate deportation when apprehended.

A sytem will be established not later than six months after the approval of this bill to enable employers to quickly and accurately determine the immigration status of all employees, not just new employees. The system will be sophisticated enough to be able to detect when fraudulent documents are in use. It will permit employers to register all illegals in their employ who have not previously registered.

The mere act of registration does not constitute legalization of the illegals. It enables them to come out of the shadows and be free of the threat of deportation, at least temporarily. It is the beginning point for the re-advertising process and for any efforts the employers wish to make in defense of illegals in his employ.

Green cards, since they are easily counterfeited, will become invalid at the end of the six month registration period and be replaced with biometric IDs with an appropriate green card notation provided the illegal survives the re-advertising and appeal process.

Pro-Illegal -- An Oxymoron?

Those who support illegal aliens rather than the interests of their fellow citizens and the national interests consider themselves to be Pros because they are "for the illegals". But isn't this almost an oxymoron, a conflict in terms? Pro also stands for "professional". Should any professionally- oriented individual be in favor of illegal behavior? I prefer the title DCALs for these folks -- Disloyal, Complicit, Anti-Legal. There is nothing Pro about their advocacy. It is a race-based point of view not unlike that of their fellow travelers, the Aztlanistas and the members of La Raza, MECHa, LULAC and MALDEF.

Then there is the question of loyalty. How does Pro-illegal jibe with loyalty to one's country, the rule of law and one's fellow citizens?

Chris Simcox

One Reporter's Opinion: One Man's Civil Homeland Defense

George Putnam
Friday, April 18, 2003

It is this reporter's opinion that while fighting for freedom elsewhere in the world, we could be losing our own. Over the past 30 years, this reporter has crusaded on and off the air against the invasion of our country by illegal aliens.

Here in California, at our common border with Mexico, we have suffered economically and culturally - in every way - at the hands of foreign invaders. We, more than any other state, are suffering at the hands of these violators of our sovereignty. And more and more, we're finding out that our Immigration and Naturalization Service is in total disarray.

Out of this growing disaster has sprung an heroic group of dedicated civilians who are attempting to do the job our government refuses to do - protecting our lives from violent criminals, armed drug smugglers and terrorists pouring across our borders.

But instead of welcoming the assistance of civilian groups, our own federal government treats these volunteers as the enemy.

Take the case of Chris Simcox, who left his teaching job in Los Angeles and invested all of his funds into a small newspaper, the Tombstone Tumbleweed, in Arizona. Chris and his Civil Homeland Defense are patrolling our porous Arizona/Mexico border.

Recently, this incredibly courageous fellow, who daily risks his life to protect us and our loved ones from these foreign invaders, ran into serious trouble.

In the course of a patrol, Chris and a friend crossed a few feet into unmarked territory at a boundary of the Coronado National Park in Cochise County, Ariz. Federal agents lay in wait and placed Chris and his associate under arrest. They were treated as common criminals by the United States government.

Part of the charge was that no weapons could be brought into our national parks. The charge was vague but had something to do with the fact that they'd carried a pistol, which is in violation of a federal weapons code.

Interestingly, one of the arresting agents said she is Hispanic and dislikes the work done by Chris' Civil Homeland Defense group.

Consequently, Chris finds himself facing a court proceeding that could lead to placing him behind bars! This, my friends, for doing the job our federal government fails or refuses to do ... this for a free-from-malice, victimless crime.

Chris's patrolling duties and those of his Civil Homeland Defense are now on hold pending the outcome of this legal proceeding. This has thrown "The Tombstone Tumbleweed," Simcox's only source of income, to the borderline of bankruptcy.

The paper has lost a large percentage of its advertisers because local businesses are struggling with a weak economy and some, sadly, do not agree with the stand that Chris has taken.

Sunday, July 1, 2007

Praise for Loyal Citizens & Patriots

If you’ve seen the movie “Meet John Doe” you might recognize those who worked day and night to defeat the monstrous S.1639 immigration bill as the modern day embodiment of Mr. Doe, played by Gary Cooper. Like John Doe, the vision, tenacity and character of these committed citizens are the foundation and catalyst of the mounting modern day populist uprising against illegal aliens and unfettered population growth. Similarly a handful of principled Senators, those who stood steadfast against cloture, personify the embattled Senator, played by Jimmy Stewart, in “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”. Few can stand up to the pressures and threats from party leadership and the president; but these men and women of character did, and without them the enemy within would most surely have prevailed.

Of course there are other heroes along with villains and their victims in this epoch. Ranchers under siege along a border that has become a war zone comes to mind. Journalist Chris Simcox, camera in hand, mobilizing average Americans from all walks of life. They monitor the border, exposing in graphic reality the national and human tragedies and the environmental catastrophe. No one should forget the Bush administration's newest targets of political terror…
America’s Border Patrol Agents. The message is clear…agents who dare do their job may well face ten years in a small cell as political prisoners… solitary confinement may well be one's fate. Such behavior on the part of a president should be an impeachable offense.

Yes there are lots of true heroines and heroes, and sadly, too many victims in this revolt. Be-that-as-it-may, the clarion call has been sounded by loyal citizens, much as Paul Revere raised the alarm in his day. Committed loyal citizens give a sustaining voice to the growing numbers who are taking up the ‘call’ in this fight for America’s sovereignty and its very survival.

While the next battles in this war to turn back a ‘tsunami’ of foreign ‘labor’ is just over the horizon; incorruptible Patriots and loyal citizens from every corner of
America will stay in the fray. Exposing the skullduggery of the economic hit men and racist organizations [lobbyists] and while not easy ... is essential. Wielding their insidious corrupting influence upon lapdog political minions these people haven’t only forgotten their roots, they’ve lost their souls. We must keep the torches shining bright on those cowards and traitors who, for 30 pieces of silver, would betray America’s future. We must keep the spotlight on those who place loyalty to race or ethnicity before loyalty to their fellow Americans and to our national interest and national sovereignty.

We need to keep working to keep
America strong and save it from the cloture and dagger of WMD politics launched by globalist GWB (a man I’m sorry to say I voted twice for). Ike in his time sent unneeded foreign labor packing, and we can too in a steady, gradual and humane repatriation effort consistent with the labor needs of our economy and a national objective of a stable population. [paraphrased from Brandon E.]

Hypercritical Remarks

Here is an example of the hypercritical remarks that characterize those who favored S.1639.

"We all know the ANTI are a small group of zealots, but a very noisy, pompous group of zealots, nevertheless. What next?"

We should all be committed no matter which side of the issue we are on. Being committed does not make any of us fanatics or zealots. The small group that stopped S.1639 turned out to be not so small after all. The pejorative terms "zealots","noisy" and "pompous" are not helpful when trying to find a way forward. Insults and name-calling are the last resort of those who prefer to attack individuals or groups rather than their facts, positions, reasoning or rationals. This is essentially an ad hominem approach that appeals to individual passions and prejudices rather than reason. This is not helpful and seriously undermines anything of a substantive nature that might be added later.

The Way Forward

The Way Forward

a. Mandatory alien registration within six months

b. Verification of the immigration status of all unregistered employees

c. Register all employees found to be illegal

d. Registration does not equal legalization

e. Verification of green cards

2. Employer Requirements

a. Irrefutable evidence of need for foreign workers

b. Advertising in trade journals and local employment offices

c. Fair wage by American standards and a hiring preference for citizens.

d. The handicapped and other unemployed

e. Agricultural workers

f. Support of appeals

g. Health care costs

h. Employer process

i. Accountability for hiring illegals

j. Penalties for falsification of evidence

3. Visas

a. Tourists

b. Students

c. Guest Workers

4. IDs

a. Machine-readable, biometric ID with clear photo and thumb print

b. Specify type of work authorized, e.g. agricultural

5. Repatriation

a. More immigration judges assigned to detention facilities

b. Expeditious appeal decisions

c. Basis for appeals

6. Interior Enforcement

a. Private enterprise operation at no cost to government

b. Taxation of remittances

c. More detention facilities

d. Detainee work details

e. Involuntary deportation

f. Authority of police and sheriffs

g.. Penalties for aiding and abetting and sanctuary

h. Cost recovery

i. Employer accountability

j. Penalties for false advertising

7. Penalties for Failure to Enforce

a. Impeachable offense

b. Cause for discharge

c. Loss of federal funds

8. Fraudulent Documents

a. Penalties for selling stolen or counterfeit documents

b. Penalties for possessing

c. Penalties for using fake SSN or SSN of another person

9. Border Crossing Obstetrical and Triage Hospitals

a. Location of hospitals

b. Cost sharing

c. Staffing

d. Transportation

e. Rules governing sick/pregnant appearing at border crossings

10. Official English

a. Public Interpreters for those who cannot afford one

b. Ballots in foreign languages at cost

c. Voter credential checking

d. Proof of citizenship

e. Penalties for voter fraud

f. Free community based English courses

11. Border Security and Enforcement

a. Additional border patrol agents

b. Hot pursuit/deadly force against drug runners

c. Wall, charged fences, barriers

d. Electronic and aerial surveillance

e. Roads and infrastructure

12. 14th Amendment

a. Limits on Jus soli

b. HR1940

c. Temporary sovereignty of delivery rooms and other locations

d. Tamper-proof birth certificates