Saturday, November 12, 2011
Friday, October 21, 2011
Utah Rattler Video: Utah Attorney General Shifts Position On Illegal Immigrant ID Theft
The Utah Rattler has this video posted at his youtube site. His blog can be accessed via the link in the list at the right.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Fox 13 Report: Key members of Mexican cartel arrested in Utah:
Fox 13 news reports, at fox13now.com, on a bust of Sinaloa Cartel members in Utah along with large quantities of drugs and cash:
The written report is brief. The video report on the site below contains more information:
http://www.fox13now.com/news/
The written report is brief. The video report on the site below contains more information:
http://www.fox13now.com/news/
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Video: Legal Mexican Immigrant Gabriella Speaks – Tucson, AZ City Council Meeting, April 27, 2010:
Legal immigrant, Gabriela Saucedo, addresses the Tucson City Council about a proposal to sue the state of Arizona over SB1070:
Friday, August 26, 2011
Obama's Comments on Univision on 3/28/11 about Administrative Amnesty:
This is a follow-up to a previous posting in which I posted a link to the video of President Obama's appearance on a Univision show which aired on 3/28/11.
Below is a link to a transcript of the show (the transcript is in English):
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
The show's primary focus was on education and Hispanics. Immigration issues also came up as they related to this topic.
In addition to the link to the entire broadcast on Univision at youtube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
Univision has also broken the program down into shorter segments on video. One in particular is of special interest, given the actions by the Obama administration regarding their plans to review the deportation cases of all those already in the deportation process who are not guilty of serious criminal acts (about 300,000).
It is my view, at this point in time, that Obama's administrative amnesty will clearly also mean that those in the nation who are not already in deportation proceedings and who have not committed serious crimes will be ignored in terms of deportations. It also means that anyone who can enter or remain in the U.S. illegally and is not caught and prosecuted for a serious crime will also be ignored.
In other words, Obama has opened the gates of America and hung up a sign that says: Enter, behave, and we will look the other way.
Unfortunately, it also means that those who are here now or who will come, and are criminally inclined, will have a free pass until they are caught.
So much for his oath of office, which charges the President to enforce our laws.
The video segment of particular interest is 2.5 minutes long (you have to wait for an ad to play at the beginning). The ad is in Spanish, but the video segment is in English and is available at:
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
Below I have pulled out some Obama quotes that are particularly relevant:
That does not mean, though, that we can't make decisions, for example, to emphasize enforcement on those who’ve engaged in criminal activity.
So, if on 3/28/11, administrative suspension of deportations "would not conform with my appropriate role as President," then why is it compatible in August 2011?
It is hard to describe the level of irresponsibility that this action by Mr. Obama embodies.
Below is a link to a transcript of the show (the transcript is in English):
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
The show's primary focus was on education and Hispanics. Immigration issues also came up as they related to this topic.
In addition to the link to the entire broadcast on Univision at youtube.com (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
Univision has also broken the program down into shorter segments on video. One in particular is of special interest, given the actions by the Obama administration regarding their plans to review the deportation cases of all those already in the deportation process who are not guilty of serious criminal acts (about 300,000).
It is my view, at this point in time, that Obama's administrative amnesty will clearly also mean that those in the nation who are not already in deportation proceedings and who have not committed serious crimes will be ignored in terms of deportations. It also means that anyone who can enter or remain in the U.S. illegally and is not caught and prosecuted for a serious crime will also be ignored.
In other words, Obama has opened the gates of America and hung up a sign that says: Enter, behave, and we will look the other way.
Unfortunately, it also means that those who are here now or who will come, and are criminally inclined, will have a free pass until they are caught.
So much for his oath of office, which charges the President to enforce our laws.
The video segment of particular interest is 2.5 minutes long (you have to wait for an ad to play at the beginning). The ad is in Spanish, but the video segment is in English and is available at:
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
Below I have pulled out some Obama quotes that are particularly relevant:
"With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed..."
"There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President."
Obama adds this as way out of his bind that will become the basis of his administrative amnesty and the foundation for his massive undermining of immigration law:
That does not mean, though, that we can't make decisions, for example, to emphasize enforcement on those who’ve engaged in criminal activity.
So, if on 3/28/11, administrative suspension of deportations "would not conform with my appropriate role as President," then why is it compatible in August 2011?
It is hard to describe the level of irresponsibility that this action by Mr. Obama embodies.
Video: Sheriffs Begin Thumbing Their Nose At Obama's Unconstitutional Executive Order Immigration Waiver:
Sheriff Babeau of Pinal County in Arizona speaks good sense about Obama's administrative amnesty:
Friday, August 19, 2011
Video: Obama Answers a Question on Univision About Suspending Deportations of Illegal Alien Students:
Below is a video which aired on Univision probably in March of this year.
In the video, President Obama addresses the question of suspending deportations of illegal immigrant students through executive order.
His answer, given his recent actions, will surprise you.
It is clear to me that Mr. Obama is treading on very very thin ice on this matter and this broadcast demonstrates that Mr. Obama is fully aware of his role as president to enforce immigration laws.
Personally, the use of administrative action to suspend deportations indefinitely for 300,000 illegal aliens already in the deportation process is a sign that all those illegals here now, who have not been caught committing serious crimes, will not face deportation under the Obama administration.
It is also a strong sign to all those exterior to the U.S. that we will not deport them should they find their way here.
Mr. Obama's actions are, in short, beyond belief.
I personally believe, at this point in my understanding, that a president who declares that the will of Congress, as embodied in our immigration laws, is "suspendable" at his discretion has breached the constitutional separation of powers and has violated his oath of office.
The relevant segment of the video is at: 18:40 - 21:10.
A video clip of just the relevant segment can be found at:
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
In the video, President Obama addresses the question of suspending deportations of illegal immigrant students through executive order.
His answer, given his recent actions, will surprise you.
It is clear to me that Mr. Obama is treading on very very thin ice on this matter and this broadcast demonstrates that Mr. Obama is fully aware of his role as president to enforce immigration laws.
Personally, the use of administrative action to suspend deportations indefinitely for 300,000 illegal aliens already in the deportation process is a sign that all those illegals here now, who have not been caught committing serious crimes, will not face deportation under the Obama administration.
It is also a strong sign to all those exterior to the U.S. that we will not deport them should they find their way here.
Mr. Obama's actions are, in short, beyond belief.
I personally believe, at this point in my understanding, that a president who declares that the will of Congress, as embodied in our immigration laws, is "suspendable" at his discretion has breached the constitutional separation of powers and has violated his oath of office.
The relevant segment of the video is at: 18:40 - 21:10.
A video clip of just the relevant segment can be found at:
http://vidayfamilia.univision.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Video: Father Bascio on the Immorality of Illegal Immigration:
The people pushing HB116 as "the" compassionate approach to illegal immigration usually reduce the discussion to a prototypical representation of a nice hard-working family that will be ripped apart by enforcement of immigration laws.
This reductive process, however, needs to be challenged.
There are many dimensions to compassion and how illegal-immigration impacts communities in the U.S. and, indeed, the nations from which many illegals come as well.
Father Bascio passionately touches upon a larger view of how illegal-immigration affects the U.S. and the world.
He is well worth paying attention to and his ideas are important to consider.
This reductive process, however, needs to be challenged.
There are many dimensions to compassion and how illegal-immigration impacts communities in the U.S. and, indeed, the nations from which many illegals come as well.
Father Bascio passionately touches upon a larger view of how illegal-immigration affects the U.S. and the world.
He is well worth paying attention to and his ideas are important to consider.
Friday, August 5, 2011
The "Labor Shortage" Limbo Dance:
How low can they go?
Wages, that is...
The cheap labor lobby has worked hard to convince us that there are severe labor shortages in America (during a recession, no less, where millions have lost jobs).
Below I reproduce a short article from numbersusa.com that challenges the "labor shortage" campaign of the cheap labor lobby:
The article is available at: https://www.numbersusa.com/
The "labor shortage" claim is an old lobbying gambit that reporters still haven't caught onto. Mass-immigration activists learned decades ago that the press loves a scary story about shortages, whether it is true or not. In 2007, just before the recession Michael S. Teitelbaum, Vice President of the Sloan Foundation testified before Congress and noted that interest groups have a right to promote their own interests, but "politicians [and] journalists often believe, [and] Federal agencies often fail to analyze" the unsubstantiated claims of labor shortages. His testimony rings as true in this jobless recovery as it did four years ago before the recession.
Consider these statistics:
In Politico's story, "Sen. Chuck Schumer tries reviving immigration bill," Sen. Schumer is quoted:
The witnesses at Schumer's hearing say there aren't enough capable Americans to fill the jobs. This is where the media often fails the reader. The shortage claim is an invention of tech lobbyists. In response to the latest calls for more high-skilled foreign workers, Hal Salzman of Rutgers University, and B. Lindsay Lowell of Georgetown University published an op-ed in The Chronicle of Higher Education that stated, "There is actually no compelling evidence that, over all, the educational pipeline is failing to meet demand." Unfortunately, their analysis and other like it rarely makes it into hard news stories.
If reporters did a little digging, they would quickly find out what prompts "labor shortage" claims: money. Advocates from Alan Greenspan to the National Science Foundation support increased immigration for purpose of holding down salaries.
Not Enough Hard-Working Americans?
In the New York Times' story, "Farmers Oppose G.O.P. Bill On Immigration," illegal labor advocates warn that the Legal Workforce Act, which would require farmers to use E-Verify after three years, would "cripple" the U.S. agricultural industry. Farmers say they won't survive without illegal labor. If you think you've read this "labor shortage" story before, you probably have. The American media has been writing this story for nearly 50 years!
Illegal labor advocates like to talk about how American's aren't hardy enough to take these jobs. The mainstream media never reports that at least one-quarter of all crop laborers are U.S. citizens. In the Midwest, 48 percent of crop laborers are citizens.
The Associated Press reports on a new twist to the "job Americans won't do" argument. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently found evidence of farmers discouraging and discharging American workers in order to replace them with H-2A workers. This has happened before, and whether these are isolated incidents or part of a larger trend, the point is that Americans will do hard work for the right pay and conditions.
Not Enough Innovative Americans?
The Wall Street Journal's headline "U.S. to Assist Immigrant Job Creators" echoes the mantra of the witnesses at Sen. Schumer's hearing. The Obama administration is easing the rules for high-tech H-1B visas and the so-called "investor's visa," the EB-5 visa (see analysis from David North, Center For Immigration Studies). "The measures won't require congressional approval," according to the Wall Street Journal, "because they don't constitute changes in current immigration law. Instead, clarifications will be issued for existing visa categories with the objective of enabling more entrepreneurs to gain entry into the U.S. and of bringing more speed and efficiency to the visa-application process." - emphasis added
Immigrants and native-born Americans have similar rates of self-employment. Yet, according to the chief of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services who announced the changes, "In this economy, it certainly is in the interest of this nation to welcome foreign talent." The most important "talent" to get the EB-5 visa is having $500 thousand dollars.
The greatest threat to the American workforce may not be our lack of innovation, but the ability of firms to move jobs overseas or import foreign workers to compete with Americans domestically. Ironically, the H-1B visa program enables both. See Diane Drozdowski's story on Dan Rather Reports.
Advocates of expanded immigration spend millions of dollars to hire lobbyists to plant their stories in the press. Five hundred thousand dollars may purchase a green card these days, but you can't put a price on the truth.
JEREMY BECK is the Director of the Media Standards Project for NumbersUSA
NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Wages, that is...
The cheap labor lobby has worked hard to convince us that there are severe labor shortages in America (during a recession, no less, where millions have lost jobs).
Below I reproduce a short article from numbersusa.com that challenges the "labor shortage" campaign of the cheap labor lobby:
The article is available at: https://www.numbersusa.com/
'Labor Shortage' Stories
By Jeremy Beck, Friday, August 5, 2011, 8:00 AM EDT
The "labor shortage" claim is an old lobbying gambit that reporters still haven't caught onto. Mass-immigration activists learned decades ago that the press loves a scary story about shortages, whether it is true or not. In 2007, just before the recession Michael S. Teitelbaum, Vice President of the Sloan Foundation testified before Congress and noted that interest groups have a right to promote their own interests, but "politicians [and] journalists often believe, [and] Federal agencies often fail to analyze" the unsubstantiated claims of labor shortages. His testimony rings as true in this jobless recovery as it did four years ago before the recession.
Consider these statistics:
- In the first two years of the recession (2008, 2009), the U.S. economy lost 8.2 million jobs while adding 2.4 million legal and illegal immigrants.
- From 2000-2009, the U.S. government imported 10.3 million permanent foreign workers, a new record, despite two recessions and jobless recoveries.
- The U.S. government issues an average of 75,000 new permanent work visas every month.
- Eight million U.S. jobs are held by illegal workers.
In Politico's story, "Sen. Chuck Schumer tries reviving immigration bill," Sen. Schumer is quoted:
We decided we ought to start highlighting the fact that immigration creates jobs rather than takes them away,” Schumer, the No. 3 Senate leader, said in an interview. “Everyone agreed that is how we are going to start talking about immigration, as a job creator.The U.S. has issued over one million permanent green cards every year for the past decade. During that same span, American-born workers increased by 13.5 million. Yet fewer American-born workers were employed in 2010 than in 2000. All of the net employment gains went to foreign workers. A diligent reporter should justifiably ask Schumer how much the U.S. would have to increase immigration before Americans start seeing those jobs?
The witnesses at Schumer's hearing say there aren't enough capable Americans to fill the jobs. This is where the media often fails the reader. The shortage claim is an invention of tech lobbyists. In response to the latest calls for more high-skilled foreign workers, Hal Salzman of Rutgers University, and B. Lindsay Lowell of Georgetown University published an op-ed in The Chronicle of Higher Education that stated, "There is actually no compelling evidence that, over all, the educational pipeline is failing to meet demand." Unfortunately, their analysis and other like it rarely makes it into hard news stories.
If reporters did a little digging, they would quickly find out what prompts "labor shortage" claims: money. Advocates from Alan Greenspan to the National Science Foundation support increased immigration for purpose of holding down salaries.
Not Enough Hard-Working Americans?
In the New York Times' story, "Farmers Oppose G.O.P. Bill On Immigration," illegal labor advocates warn that the Legal Workforce Act, which would require farmers to use E-Verify after three years, would "cripple" the U.S. agricultural industry. Farmers say they won't survive without illegal labor. If you think you've read this "labor shortage" story before, you probably have. The American media has been writing this story for nearly 50 years!
Illegal labor advocates like to talk about how American's aren't hardy enough to take these jobs. The mainstream media never reports that at least one-quarter of all crop laborers are U.S. citizens. In the Midwest, 48 percent of crop laborers are citizens.
The Associated Press reports on a new twist to the "job Americans won't do" argument. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission recently found evidence of farmers discouraging and discharging American workers in order to replace them with H-2A workers. This has happened before, and whether these are isolated incidents or part of a larger trend, the point is that Americans will do hard work for the right pay and conditions.
Not Enough Innovative Americans?
The Wall Street Journal's headline "U.S. to Assist Immigrant Job Creators" echoes the mantra of the witnesses at Sen. Schumer's hearing. The Obama administration is easing the rules for high-tech H-1B visas and the so-called "investor's visa," the EB-5 visa (see analysis from David North, Center For Immigration Studies). "The measures won't require congressional approval," according to the Wall Street Journal, "because they don't constitute changes in current immigration law. Instead, clarifications will be issued for existing visa categories with the objective of enabling more entrepreneurs to gain entry into the U.S. and of bringing more speed and efficiency to the visa-application process." - emphasis added
Immigrants and native-born Americans have similar rates of self-employment. Yet, according to the chief of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services who announced the changes, "In this economy, it certainly is in the interest of this nation to welcome foreign talent." The most important "talent" to get the EB-5 visa is having $500 thousand dollars.
The greatest threat to the American workforce may not be our lack of innovation, but the ability of firms to move jobs overseas or import foreign workers to compete with Americans domestically. Ironically, the H-1B visa program enables both. See Diane Drozdowski's story on Dan Rather Reports.
Advocates of expanded immigration spend millions of dollars to hire lobbyists to plant their stories in the press. Five hundred thousand dollars may purchase a green card these days, but you can't put a price on the truth.
JEREMY BECK is the Director of the Media Standards Project for NumbersUSA
NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted.
Views and opinions expressed in blogs on this website are those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect official policies of NumbersUSA.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Video: Brian Terry: Semper Fidelis & Honor First
The Stand With Arizona (and Against Illegal Immigration) Facebook site posted the following video in honor of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry who was shot and killed on the Arizona border in December 2010. Their comments:
"
"
Soros Foundation a Funder of ImmigrationWorks USA (Co-Sponsor of Conference Featuring AG Shurtleff and Senator Bramble):
This is just a small bit of information which you may find interesting:
ImmigrationWorks USA, the organization that co-sponsored the "fly-in" in Washington, D.C. featuring Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Utah State Senator Curt Bramble is yet another organization that has received funding from a George Soros foundation.
The "fly-in" on immigration was held in Washington, D.C. on July 19, 2011. (http://www.
The purpose of the fly-in event seems to have been to demonstrate that blocking enforcement-only approaches in the states is achievable while also pushing for comprehensive immigration approaches similar to HB116.
In other words, selling the cheap labor lobby line.
The link to Soros: ImmigrationWorks USA received 150,000 dollars from the George Soros foundation, Foundation To Promote Open Society, in 2009.
This information comes from the foundation's 2009 990-PF form available at:
http://dynamodata.fdncenter.
George Soros, as you may already be aware, is a billionaire financier of leftist causes - including many groups pushing for amnesty.
Videos of the conference are also available on the ImmigratonWorks USA website at:
http://www.
ImmigrationWorks USA, the organization that co-sponsored the "fly-in" in Washington, D.C. featuring Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Utah State Senator Curt Bramble is yet another organization that has received funding from a George Soros foundation.
The "fly-in" on immigration was held in Washington, D.C. on July 19, 2011. (http://www.
The purpose of the fly-in event seems to have been to demonstrate that blocking enforcement-only approaches in the states is achievable while also pushing for comprehensive immigration approaches similar to HB116.
In other words, selling the cheap labor lobby line.
The link to Soros: ImmigrationWorks USA received 150,000 dollars from the George Soros foundation, Foundation To Promote Open Society, in 2009.
This information comes from the foundation's 2009 990-PF form available at:
http://dynamodata.fdncenter.
George Soros, as you may already be aware, is a billionaire financier of leftist causes - including many groups pushing for amnesty.
Videos of the conference are also available on the ImmigratonWorks USA website at:
http://www.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Deseret News Calls for "Cheap Labor":
The Deseret News reproduced an editorial from the Dallas Morning News on August 2, 2011.
The editorial can be found at:
http://www.deseretnews.com/
The original editorial at the Dallas Morning News is at:
http://www.dallasnews.com/
An astute observer at the "Repeal HB 116" Facebook Group noticed two very interesting things about this editorial.
The facebook page is at:
http://www.facebook.com/
The first is that a paragraph was left out of the reproduced version at the Deseret News.
Was this an oversight? Was it merely a mistake? Was it intentional?
The reader must decide.
Here's the missing paragraph:
"A guy steals a car, they do the fingerprints, send it to Washington, have the person deported. That’s not the Boston I want. I want Boston to be a city that welcomes immigrants,” he told reporters."
The problem for the average American, and one that perhaps the Deseret News recognized, is that, unlike the mayor of Boston, most of us think that stealing a car is a serious crime!
The mayor of Boston, on the other hand, thinks that stealing a car should not be a deportable offense for someone who is here illegally in the first place!
The second thing the Repeal HB 116 facebook observer noticed is that the paragraph talking about "cheap labor" as a goal of immigration policy was left in!
I get the feeling that someone at the Deseret News is getting a stern talking to about now...
This paragraph is as follows:
"But that's not enough. The U.S. also must offer realistic hopes for those taking the legal route. A responsive visa system must help applicants get the permits they need quickly. Employers must have assurances that a large pool of legal migrant workers will be available to meet their demands for cheap labor."
The Deseret News, oddly enough, has come out and told the public what many opponents of HB116 have been saying: it's about cheap labor.
This new honesty among the pro-HB116 Deseret News is refreshing.
Let us hope that it leads to them to a new openness about how illegal immigration is really affecting Utah and the United States.
The editorial can be found at:
http://www.deseretnews.com/
The original editorial at the Dallas Morning News is at:
http://www.dallasnews.com/
An astute observer at the "Repeal HB 116" Facebook Group noticed two very interesting things about this editorial.
The facebook page is at:
http://www.facebook.com/
The first is that a paragraph was left out of the reproduced version at the Deseret News.
Was this an oversight? Was it merely a mistake? Was it intentional?
The reader must decide.
Here's the missing paragraph:
"A guy steals a car, they do the fingerprints, send it to Washington, have the person deported. That’s not the Boston I want. I want Boston to be a city that welcomes immigrants,” he told reporters."
The problem for the average American, and one that perhaps the Deseret News recognized, is that, unlike the mayor of Boston, most of us think that stealing a car is a serious crime!
The mayor of Boston, on the other hand, thinks that stealing a car should not be a deportable offense for someone who is here illegally in the first place!
The second thing the Repeal HB 116 facebook observer noticed is that the paragraph talking about "cheap labor" as a goal of immigration policy was left in!
I get the feeling that someone at the Deseret News is getting a stern talking to about now...
This paragraph is as follows:
"But that's not enough. The U.S. also must offer realistic hopes for those taking the legal route. A responsive visa system must help applicants get the permits they need quickly. Employers must have assurances that a large pool of legal migrant workers will be available to meet their demands for cheap labor."
The Deseret News, oddly enough, has come out and told the public what many opponents of HB116 have been saying: it's about cheap labor.
This new honesty among the pro-HB116 Deseret News is refreshing.
Let us hope that it leads to them to a new openness about how illegal immigration is really affecting Utah and the United States.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Mexican National Shouts "Viva Mexico!" During His Execution in Texas:
Humberto Leal, a Mexican national who came to the United States as a small child, decided at the last moments of his life that his loyalty to Mexico was too important not to express as he was being executed.
Humberto Leal was convicted of killing a 16-year old girl in a most gruesome fashion and sentenced to death in Texas.
According to Fox news:
"As the lethal injection began taking effect, the Mexican National convicted of the brutal rape and killing of a teenage girl in 1995 shouted, "Viva Mexico!" just before he died at a Texas prison."
The case received much publicity as Mexico attempted to halt the execution because Mr. Leal had not been apprised of his right to seek counsel from the Mexican government through a Mexican consulate.
Somehow, this issue had not come up during the previous sixteen years of appeals by Mr. Leal.
President Obama also sought to halt the execution.
Details are available at the link to Fox news below.
After reading of the details of the crime, a reasonable person would think that Mexico would send a letter of appreciation to Texas for removing Mr. Leal from this mortal existence. Instead, they used it as yet another occasion to meddle in U.S. and Texas affairs and to whip up Mexican nationalism.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/07/white-house-seeks-delay-mexican-mans-execution-as-supreme-court-mulls-case/#ixzz1Rcix4l1C
Humberto Leal was convicted of killing a 16-year old girl in a most gruesome fashion and sentenced to death in Texas.
According to Fox news:
"As the lethal injection began taking effect, the Mexican National convicted of the brutal rape and killing of a teenage girl in 1995 shouted, "Viva Mexico!" just before he died at a Texas prison."
The case received much publicity as Mexico attempted to halt the execution because Mr. Leal had not been apprised of his right to seek counsel from the Mexican government through a Mexican consulate.
Somehow, this issue had not come up during the previous sixteen years of appeals by Mr. Leal.
President Obama also sought to halt the execution.
Details are available at the link to Fox news below.
After reading of the details of the crime, a reasonable person would think that Mexico would send a letter of appreciation to Texas for removing Mr. Leal from this mortal existence. Instead, they used it as yet another occasion to meddle in U.S. and Texas affairs and to whip up Mexican nationalism.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/07/07/white-house-seeks-delay-mexican-mans-execution-as-supreme-court-mulls-case/#ixzz1Rcix4l1C
Friday, July 8, 2011
Video: Mexican Military Incursions into the U.S.!:
The following video is a bit out of date, but is sobering nonetheless. The current situation in Mexico, along the border, and incursions by the Mexican military are certainly issues that need to be examined further and appropriate responses put into place. The sense that the U.S. government under Obama is lying about border security is widespread and growing. Parts of Arizona are posted with warning signs - warning Americans to stay out!
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Paul Mero Calls for Reasonable People to Wake Up Against the Anti-HB116 Mob!:
Paul Mero, of the Sutherland Institute, in a recent article in the Deseret News calls for "principled and reasonable people to wake up."
Why should they wake up?
According to Mr. Mero, they need to get elected delegates in party caucuses to overthrow the "mob" of anti-HB116 advocates.
They must do so in the name of "decency, mutual respect and sound thinking for the future of this great state."
The article ("Passion of HB116 activists could backfire," Deseret News, 7/5/11) can be accessed at:
http://www.deseretnews.com/
The very odd thing about this call, in the name of decency and mutual respect, is that Mr. Mero seems to have forgotten to apply these same principles in his article.
For example, this is how he portrays the anti-HB116 people:
"...the delusions continue for many activists who oppose the reasonable idea of responsible reform."
"...these disgruntled patriots..."
"...Utah's enforcement-only crowd..."
"...it's difficult (even unwise) to discount the efforts of an angry mob."
"The more vocal and passionate these disgruntled patriots become, the more they run the risk of sounding increasingly unreasonable."
"...instead of getting its narrow-minded way about who represents Utah, the mob could get the very same boot it seeks to apply..."
I ask you, does this sound like "mutual respect?"
Does it sound civil?
Or does it sound like Paul Mero is trying to frame opponents in terms that make people, who are not awake, reject without reason the anti-HB116 viewpoint?
The problem for Paul Mero and the Sutherland Institute is that, when people do wake up and start to examine the issues surrounding illegal immigration, they move toward the anti-HB116 position.
Indeed, they need to wake up so that the legislature follows their lead and throws out the absurdity of HB116.
Paul Mero is making a good call for people to wake up - it just won't lead to his expected result.
Why should they wake up?
According to Mr. Mero, they need to get elected delegates in party caucuses to overthrow the "mob" of anti-HB116 advocates.
They must do so in the name of "decency, mutual respect and sound thinking for the future of this great state."
The article ("Passion of HB116 activists could backfire," Deseret News, 7/5/11) can be accessed at:
http://www.deseretnews.com/
The very odd thing about this call, in the name of decency and mutual respect, is that Mr. Mero seems to have forgotten to apply these same principles in his article.
For example, this is how he portrays the anti-HB116 people:
"...the delusions continue for many activists who oppose the reasonable idea of responsible reform."
"...these disgruntled patriots..."
"...Utah's enforcement-only crowd..."
"...it's difficult (even unwise) to discount the efforts of an angry mob."
"The more vocal and passionate these disgruntled patriots become, the more they run the risk of sounding increasingly unreasonable."
"...instead of getting its narrow-minded way about who represents Utah, the mob could get the very same boot it seeks to apply..."
I ask you, does this sound like "mutual respect?"
Does it sound civil?
Or does it sound like Paul Mero is trying to frame opponents in terms that make people, who are not awake, reject without reason the anti-HB116 viewpoint?
The problem for Paul Mero and the Sutherland Institute is that, when people do wake up and start to examine the issues surrounding illegal immigration, they move toward the anti-HB116 position.
Indeed, they need to wake up so that the legislature follows their lead and throws out the absurdity of HB116.
Paul Mero is making a good call for people to wake up - it just won't lead to his expected result.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Paul Mero and Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff's New Friends - The Partnership for a New American Economy (Part 1):
To be fair, I don't know how close Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff is with billionaire Bloomberg's pro-immigration insider-club described below or whether or not Paul Mero is a good buddy with the same group.
Certainly, for Mr. Shurtleff, there is some contact, communication and coordination for at least the meeting described below.
In Paul Mero's case - at the very least, an adoring fascination and fixation with the group surfaces. He may see in them an ally to help fulfill his desire to take his amnesty and cheap labor options nationwide in the immigration debate.
However, since they are all singing from the same page, so to speak, it is reasonable to ask whether or not they are much better friends than it appears from the brief news coverage of billionaire Bloomberg's pro-immigration group in our local media. I will leave it an open question, but the nature and goals of billionaire Bloomberg's group, The Partnership for a New American Economy, should be examined more closely.
We need to take seriously the goals of this group as they have deep, deep, deep pockets.
If they so choose, they can throw a lot of money around.
Their clout can also certainly open doors to elected officials' offices and to media access.
But whose interest is this group really serving?
That is the question that has to be considered before public officials run like a herd to follow the money-powers' lead.
Indeed...a lead that will be coded in the most noble principles and framed in an elegant campaign to convince us that immigration is one of the greatest things we could possibly do for the economy!
The current stage of the story begins back in May 2011.
Paul Mero, of the Sutherland Institute, wrote an article which appeared in the Deseret News on 5/5/11 ("Taking the compact to Washington").
In his article, Mr. Mero lets the cat out of the bag when he tells us that Utah has the right to pursue its own solutions to immigration issues: "...in the face of federal inaction regarding comprehensive immigration policy."
It seems, from this admission, that the goal of HB116 and the "Utah Solution" was meant to be "comprehensive" in the sense that it creates, among other things, an amnesty for those who are in the United States illegally and living in Utah.
Mr. Mero and the amnesty-gang, furthermore, are not trying to get the federal government to actually enforce current laws in any meaningful way.
That would not be "comprehensive."
But it would be effective!
So, I gather that they are not interested in effective enforcement.
If not enforcement, then what is their motivation?
Are they merely humanitarians seeking to create an open-door to ever increasing numbers of workers in America from foreign lands because they want what is best for those in other nations? (I gather that American workers can just fend for themselves).
Indeed, Mr. Mero states that the Utah bills will have the effect of:
"...ensuring that our businesses have all of the employees they need for future growth."
And how many of those employees will be Americans, Mr. Mero?
In the same article, Mero talks about the great sounding "Partnership for a New American Economy" and how they have taken notice of the Utah Compact:
"The original signers of the Compact, among others and led by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, soon will be calling on all states to embrace a proposed America's Compact. And national groups, such as the Partnership for a New American Economy, are taking notice."
Imagine that...amnesty and cheap labor flows into the U.S. - now to be a national project being pushed by our own attorney general.
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff had this to say at the meeting Mr. Mero writes about:
"Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and an adviser to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg asked mayors Wednesday to help refocus the debate and show how fixing immigration could boost the economy and create jobs." (Salt Lake Tribune, 5/4/11, "SLC-area mayors urged to make immigration an economic issue")
By "refocus the debate," Mr. Shurtleff seems to be saying that a repackaging is needed to sell the amnesty and cheap labor laws. In other words, the old shade of lipstick on the pig wasn't getting the job done.
But who is this Bloomberg waterboy fellow?
Jeremy Robbins (no relation) is "the Bloomberg adviser who manages the Partnership for a New American Economy."
And who are those guys?
Their website is: http://www.renewoureconomy.
Their members are presented to us at:
http://www.renewoureconomy.
There are a lot of names and companies associated with the individuals listed as well as of mayors of certain American cities.
If I had to guess, I would say that the mayor-focus is an angle to help sell their plans, which sound a lot like HB116, to the American public.
The bring-the-mayors-into-the-campaign is a nice touch as mayors can always get into the news. Get a few mayors all singing the same tune and it looks like some type of public consensus - never mind that the consensus is being pushed by some of the biggest money-players in the game.
Some local mayors are on the list, such as Salt Lake City Mayor Becker.
Lane Beattie of the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce is also a member.
The group must be quite impressive as our own local mayor of Park City, for example, liked the group so much that he signed their statement of principles even before the city council had voted on it:
"The mayor also apologized for signing the organization's statement of principles prior to the City Council voting for municipal involvement in the group. A document outlining the principles, already signed by Williams, was presented to the City Council before the vote." (http://www.parkrecord.com/ci_
Why would the Park City mayor want to work with this group?
According to the Park Record:
"Park City attracted a significant community of immigrants, many from Mexico, starting in the 1990s, as the area's economy started to hum during an era of fast growth. They were drawn by the plentiful construction, resort and hospitality jobs available in the Park City area in the years before the onset of the recession."
When the Park Record says "immigrants" above, do they actually mean it in a way that obscures the fact that many of these same workers were probably "illegal aliens?"
But notice the jobs the "immigrants" were working: "construction, resort and hospitality jobs."
These must be the types of jobs I keep hearing about that Americans just won't do!
No one was making money from cheap "immigrant" labor in Park City, were they?
Another interesting element derived from the article is this: the "immigrants" seemed to be flowing toward the jobs during the "era of fast growth" in Park City and were not the source of the fast growth itself.
In other words, the opposite of what the billionaire Bloomberg's "immigration" group is now selling.
What are they selling then?
Amnesty and cheap labor.
Deseret News (5/5/11)(Salt Lake City, UT)
"Taking the compact to Washington"
http://www.deseretnews.com/
ParkRecord.com (7/1/11)(Park City, UT)
"Immigration reform: City Hall enters the discussion"
http://www.parkrecord.com/ci_
Salt Lake Tribune (5/4/11)(Salt Lake City, UT)
"SLC-area mayors urged to make immigration an economic issue"
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
Certainly, for Mr. Shurtleff, there is some contact, communication and coordination for at least the meeting described below.
In Paul Mero's case - at the very least, an adoring fascination and fixation with the group surfaces. He may see in them an ally to help fulfill his desire to take his amnesty and cheap labor options nationwide in the immigration debate.
However, since they are all singing from the same page, so to speak, it is reasonable to ask whether or not they are much better friends than it appears from the brief news coverage of billionaire Bloomberg's pro-immigration group in our local media. I will leave it an open question, but the nature and goals of billionaire Bloomberg's group, The Partnership for a New American Economy, should be examined more closely.
We need to take seriously the goals of this group as they have deep, deep, deep pockets.
If they so choose, they can throw a lot of money around.
Their clout can also certainly open doors to elected officials' offices and to media access.
But whose interest is this group really serving?
That is the question that has to be considered before public officials run like a herd to follow the money-powers' lead.
Indeed...a lead that will be coded in the most noble principles and framed in an elegant campaign to convince us that immigration is one of the greatest things we could possibly do for the economy!
The current stage of the story begins back in May 2011.
Paul Mero, of the Sutherland Institute, wrote an article which appeared in the Deseret News on 5/5/11 ("Taking the compact to Washington").
In his article, Mr. Mero lets the cat out of the bag when he tells us that Utah has the right to pursue its own solutions to immigration issues: "...in the face of federal inaction regarding comprehensive immigration policy."
It seems, from this admission, that the goal of HB116 and the "Utah Solution" was meant to be "comprehensive" in the sense that it creates, among other things, an amnesty for those who are in the United States illegally and living in Utah.
Mr. Mero and the amnesty-gang, furthermore, are not trying to get the federal government to actually enforce current laws in any meaningful way.
That would not be "comprehensive."
But it would be effective!
So, I gather that they are not interested in effective enforcement.
If not enforcement, then what is their motivation?
Are they merely humanitarians seeking to create an open-door to ever increasing numbers of workers in America from foreign lands because they want what is best for those in other nations? (I gather that American workers can just fend for themselves).
Indeed, Mr. Mero states that the Utah bills will have the effect of:
"...ensuring that our businesses have all of the employees they need for future growth."
And how many of those employees will be Americans, Mr. Mero?
In the same article, Mero talks about the great sounding "Partnership for a New American Economy" and how they have taken notice of the Utah Compact:
"The original signers of the Compact, among others and led by Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, soon will be calling on all states to embrace a proposed America's Compact. And national groups, such as the Partnership for a New American Economy, are taking notice."
Imagine that...amnesty and cheap labor flows into the U.S. - now to be a national project being pushed by our own attorney general.
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff had this to say at the meeting Mr. Mero writes about:
"Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and an adviser to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg asked mayors Wednesday to help refocus the debate and show how fixing immigration could boost the economy and create jobs." (Salt Lake Tribune, 5/4/11, "SLC-area mayors urged to make immigration an economic issue")
By "refocus the debate," Mr. Shurtleff seems to be saying that a repackaging is needed to sell the amnesty and cheap labor laws. In other words, the old shade of lipstick on the pig wasn't getting the job done.
But who is this Bloomberg waterboy fellow?
Jeremy Robbins (no relation) is "the Bloomberg adviser who manages the Partnership for a New American Economy."
And who are those guys?
Their website is: http://www.renewoureconomy.
Their members are presented to us at:
http://www.renewoureconomy.
There are a lot of names and companies associated with the individuals listed as well as of mayors of certain American cities.
If I had to guess, I would say that the mayor-focus is an angle to help sell their plans, which sound a lot like HB116, to the American public.
The bring-the-mayors-into-the-campaign is a nice touch as mayors can always get into the news. Get a few mayors all singing the same tune and it looks like some type of public consensus - never mind that the consensus is being pushed by some of the biggest money-players in the game.
Some local mayors are on the list, such as Salt Lake City Mayor Becker.
Lane Beattie of the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce is also a member.
The group must be quite impressive as our own local mayor of Park City, for example, liked the group so much that he signed their statement of principles even before the city council had voted on it:
"The mayor also apologized for signing the organization's statement of principles prior to the City Council voting for municipal involvement in the group. A document outlining the principles, already signed by Williams, was presented to the City Council before the vote." (http://www.parkrecord.com/ci_
Why would the Park City mayor want to work with this group?
According to the Park Record:
"Park City attracted a significant community of immigrants, many from Mexico, starting in the 1990s, as the area's economy started to hum during an era of fast growth. They were drawn by the plentiful construction, resort and hospitality jobs available in the Park City area in the years before the onset of the recession."
When the Park Record says "immigrants" above, do they actually mean it in a way that obscures the fact that many of these same workers were probably "illegal aliens?"
But notice the jobs the "immigrants" were working: "construction, resort and hospitality jobs."
These must be the types of jobs I keep hearing about that Americans just won't do!
No one was making money from cheap "immigrant" labor in Park City, were they?
Another interesting element derived from the article is this: the "immigrants" seemed to be flowing toward the jobs during the "era of fast growth" in Park City and were not the source of the fast growth itself.
In other words, the opposite of what the billionaire Bloomberg's "immigration" group is now selling.
What are they selling then?
Amnesty and cheap labor.
Sources for this blog entry:
Deseret News (5/5/11)(Salt Lake City, UT)
"Taking the compact to Washington"
http://www.deseretnews.com/
ParkRecord.com (7/1/11)(Park City, UT)
"Immigration reform: City Hall enters the discussion"
http://www.parkrecord.com/ci_
Salt Lake Tribune (5/4/11)(Salt Lake City, UT)
"SLC-area mayors urged to make immigration an economic issue"
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Would Reagan Reject HB116? - Video Interview with Ed Meese
Watch the video below with the context of the current debate about HB116 in mind and then decide if Reagan would support or reject HB116. The video is an interview with former U.S. Attorney General Ed Meese, who served in the Reagan administration. I, for one, believe that Reagan would have been extremely disappointed that the enforcement measures of the 1986 law were ignored - which led to our current situation. Ed Meese speaks wisdom in this video:
Friday, July 1, 2011
Mexican Heroin in Utah?:
In a recent article from McClatchy Newspapers, which appeared in the Salt Lake Tribune, the problem of increasing use of Mexican heroin is presented.
The article, "Mexican heroin use surges in U.S." (6/30/11 - on-line version), is available at:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
The article only briefly touches on the distribution network that underlies the increase use.
Clearly, the distribution network must rely on the casual attitude of U.S. authorities towards illegal aliens in the U.S. as one key element of their ability to maneuver in the U.S.
The drug cartels, the article tells us:
"What’s indisputable is that drug syndicates that produce black tar and brown heroin in Mexico’s Sierra Madre mountains are pushing aggressively into areas where they haven’t been active before."
Who is the target? According to a U.S. law enforcement official quoted in the article:
"You’re seeing it everywhere. It’s cheap. The market base is teenagers. They are the target consumers," the official said."
What are the impacts on the U.S.:
"Teenagers in Albuquerque, N.M.; Milwaukie, Ore.; Fenton, Mich.; Troy, Ill.; La Porte, Ind.; and Mentor, Ohio, have died from apparent heroin overdoses in the past nine months. Law enforcement officials warn that heroin has gained a foothold in suburban Atlanta and is the fastest-growing drug in northern Ohio. Prosecutors indicted 20 people in Toledo on May 10 on charges of conspiring to bring Mexican heroin to the city."
Utah and Salt Lake City are not immune. Heroin is here.
By not dealing aggressively with illegal immigration, Utah officials are helping to create the environment for the expansion of this drug trafficking.
HB116 is a law that would create "legal" residents of illegal aliens and facilitate the expansion of this drug trade.
How long before arrests are made of drug dealers holding Utah "guest worker" documents?
You see, providing documents, whether driver's licenses, guest worker cards, Matricula Consular cards, etc., facilitates the ability of illegal aliens to maneuver in society.
That maneuvering will not just be hard-working families looking "for a better life." It will also be members of the drug cartels looking for your teenager to hook on heroin.
The article, "Mexican heroin use surges in U.S." (6/30/11 - on-line version), is available at:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
The article only briefly touches on the distribution network that underlies the increase use.
Clearly, the distribution network must rely on the casual attitude of U.S. authorities towards illegal aliens in the U.S. as one key element of their ability to maneuver in the U.S.
The drug cartels, the article tells us:
"What’s indisputable is that drug syndicates that produce black tar and brown heroin in Mexico’s Sierra Madre mountains are pushing aggressively into areas where they haven’t been active before."
Who is the target? According to a U.S. law enforcement official quoted in the article:
"You’re seeing it everywhere. It’s cheap. The market base is teenagers. They are the target consumers," the official said."
What are the impacts on the U.S.:
"Teenagers in Albuquerque, N.M.; Milwaukie, Ore.; Fenton, Mich.; Troy, Ill.; La Porte, Ind.; and Mentor, Ohio, have died from apparent heroin overdoses in the past nine months. Law enforcement officials warn that heroin has gained a foothold in suburban Atlanta and is the fastest-growing drug in northern Ohio. Prosecutors indicted 20 people in Toledo on May 10 on charges of conspiring to bring Mexican heroin to the city."
Utah and Salt Lake City are not immune. Heroin is here.
By not dealing aggressively with illegal immigration, Utah officials are helping to create the environment for the expansion of this drug trafficking.
HB116 is a law that would create "legal" residents of illegal aliens and facilitate the expansion of this drug trade.
How long before arrests are made of drug dealers holding Utah "guest worker" documents?
You see, providing documents, whether driver's licenses, guest worker cards, Matricula Consular cards, etc., facilitates the ability of illegal aliens to maneuver in society.
That maneuvering will not just be hard-working families looking "for a better life." It will also be members of the drug cartels looking for your teenager to hook on heroin.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Please Explain This Video If It's Not About Cheap Labor:
If you are one of those who believe all the nice-sounding ideas about illegal immigrants and refuse to believe that one of the main objectives of the non-enforcement of our laws is to preserve the cheap labor pool for certain business owners, please explain the video below.
These individuals, illegal aliens, are working construction jobs in Pennsylvania. If it isn't about paying them less and keeping more money for the contractor, then how does one explain the fact that the crew consists of illegal aliens?
Could it be that the pro-illegal immigration impulse in Utah, being run by people in the shadows, is also all about money?
Cheap labor leads to bigger profits for those running the game.
A big part of the problem is the pressure it then puts on honest businesses to also sell out.
The video below is from the youtube.com site, standwitharizona - videos are also posted on their website, standwitharizona.com as well as on their facebook site:
These individuals, illegal aliens, are working construction jobs in Pennsylvania. If it isn't about paying them less and keeping more money for the contractor, then how does one explain the fact that the crew consists of illegal aliens?
Could it be that the pro-illegal immigration impulse in Utah, being run by people in the shadows, is also all about money?
Cheap labor leads to bigger profits for those running the game.
A big part of the problem is the pressure it then puts on honest businesses to also sell out.
The video below is from the youtube.com site, standwitharizona - videos are also posted on their website, standwitharizona.com as well as on their facebook site:
Video: Drug Cartels, Violence, Distribution - "It Is a Part of Your World"
Agent Borland of the DEA tells us in the video below that cartel drug distribution and violence is part of our world.
The video also makes clear that it is all over the U.S.
A central question for us in Utah is this: Does HB116 make it easier or more difficult for drug cartels to maneuver within our own state?
Another question to ask ourselves is this: are those promoting HB116 so naive that they can't see the increasing power, brutality, and corruption of drug cartels in America and how that power, brutality and corruption will also increase in Utah?
Or are they so blinded by greed that they simply don't care?
The video also makes clear that it is all over the U.S.
A central question for us in Utah is this: Does HB116 make it easier or more difficult for drug cartels to maneuver within our own state?
Another question to ask ourselves is this: are those promoting HB116 so naive that they can't see the increasing power, brutality, and corruption of drug cartels in America and how that power, brutality and corruption will also increase in Utah?
Or are they so blinded by greed that they simply don't care?
Monday, June 27, 2011
Why Won't the Sutherland Institute Answer This Letter?:
The letter below was sent on June 1, 2011 to the Sutherland Institute. As of June 25, 2011, I had not received a response. Maybe it just takes them a while to respond to letters. I patiently wait for their reply.
The letter reads:
"I have looked through your website and cannot locate any information as to who your major donors are and what amounts they have contributed to your organization for the current year or for past years.
I am very interested in knowing this information.
Are you able to provide me with this information or direct me to where I can find it?
Any assistance in this regard would be greatly appreciated."
The letter reads:
"I have looked through your website and cannot locate any information as to who your major donors are and what amounts they have contributed to your organization for the current year or for past years.
I am very interested in knowing this information.
Are you able to provide me with this information or direct me to where I can find it?
Any assistance in this regard would be greatly appreciated."
Friday, June 17, 2011
Representative Sandstrom Calls for Repeal of HB116:
Representative Stephen Sandstrom has issued a press release calling for the repeal of HB116.
The press release is available at:
http://stephensandstrom.com/
He makes the following comments as part of his press release that say much about who is really behind HB116:
The press release is available at:
http://stephensandstrom.com/
He makes the following comments as part of his press release that say much about who is really behind HB116:
"As I am now proceeding with a comprehensive E-Verify law for the State of Utah that will have real penalties and consequences for those that hire illegal aliens, I am troubled that the same organizations that supported HB 116 and who say that they want to end all new illegal immigration to the State of Utah and the rampant identity theft that it brings with it are now lining up to fight my proposed comprehensive E-Verify legislation.
This only shows that their previous assertions that they support the rule of law and sincerely want to end illegal immigration while protecting Utah’s children from identity theft was only political posturing and untruthful.
They want to keep the status quo in Utah that turns a blind eye to companies that want to hire illegal immigrants, to continue to sacrifice Utah children to identity theft for profits and to ensure that Utah employers have an unlimited source of poorly paid, illegal immigrant labor."
Excellent job, Rep. Sandstrom!
I urge all to contact their state delegates and encourage them to vote for the repeal HB 116 resolution at the state Republican convention tomorrow.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
HB116 Fact Sheet
Keri Witte compiled and posted the fact sheet below at the Repeal HB116 Facebook Group. It contains a lot of good information for delegates to consider before Saturday's vote on the repeal resolution for HB116. Delegates are being inundated with materials by e-mail, etc., to get them to support HB116 and to vote against the repeal. Keri Witte's fact sheet makes a strong case for voting for the repeal resolution. I urge all delegates to consider the information below and to vote for repeal.
The fact sheet:
_______________________________________________________
Someone sure wants to make sure HB116 isn't seriously challenged.
Who could that be?
The money-powers who want cheap labor, I am willing to bet.
The fact sheet:
_______________________________________________________
HB116 Q/A / Fact Sheet
Want the facts about what's in HB116? Why should it be repealed and fixed? Here are the details - complete with line numbers from the bill for your reference. Read on - you may be surprised by what's in the bill. (For more info visit Repeal116.com)
Here you can access a copy of the resolution entitled "Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace":
http://www.utgop.org/media/files/2._Uphold_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States_and_Republican_Platforms
Here you can access the text of HB116:
http://le.utah.gov/~2011/bills/hbillenr/hb0116.htm
HB116 Fact Sheet
HB 116 Q&A
What does HB116 do?
HB116 implements a state-run work permit program only for those who are here illegally, ignoring federal guest-worker visas that already exist for skilled, unskilled and migrant workers. The program requires a fine of $2,500 (HB116 line 823) for each person who has violated our sovereign borders and come here illegally, and offers a reduced fine of $1,000 (line 820) for each person who has overstayed a visa (regardless of any other violations of law they have committed, such as identity theft and document fraud).
Does it grant legal status to illegal immigrants?
YES. The bill specifically redefines an illegal immigrant’s status as legal within Utah (line 1555 – definition of illegal alien “does not include an individual who holds a valid permit”).
Is it amnesty?
YES. Amnesty is giving someone the very thing they broke the law to obtain – the privilege of living and working in the US. That is precisely what HB116 does in Utah. The bill also turns a blind-eye to identity theft and document fraud committed prior to permit application, ignoring equal treatment under the law. This bill has been rightly dubbed "Utah's Amnesty Bill", and states around the nation are understandably shocked that conservative Utah would pass liberal amnesty legislation.
Is HB116 constitutional?
NO. Both naturalization and migration are specifically enumerated in the Constitution as being the responsibility of Congress. These are not constitutional rights reserved to the individual states. The Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel (the legislature's lawyers) included a review note on HB116 on 3/4/11 advising the legislature that:
"The Constitution of the United States grants authority to the federal government to regulate foreign commerce and to adopt a uniform rule of naturalization. The United States Supreme Court has also found inherent federal authority to regulate immigration on the basis of federal sovereignty and the power to engage in foreign affairs, this is sometimes referred to as the 'plenary power,' which in more recent years has been made subject to certain constitutional limits."
-- and more specifically:
"In the absence of an effective waiver recognized as valid by the courts, under current law, there is a high probability that a court would find that portions of this bill unconstitutional because they are preempted by federal law as applied through the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States."
(Reference U.S. Constitution, Articles 1:8:4; 1:8:18; 1:9:1; 6:2)
Additionally, the Chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee has asked the federal government to sue Utah over the constitutionality of this bill, which will cost taxpayers millions in legal expenses (“Smith to DOJ: Utah Immigration Law is Unconstitutional”, judiciary.house.gov, April 18, 2011).
Does it violate the Platform?
ABSOLUTELY. Utah's amnesty bill clearly violates the Utah state and national Republican Party Immigration Platform Planks; just a few of Platform principles violated include:
• We oppose illegal immigration and all forms of amnesty, or legal status, for illegal immigrants;
• Control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders;
• We support efforts to enforce the law while welcoming immigrants who enter America through legal avenues;
• Taxpayers should not be covering state benefits for illegal aliens;
• Enforcement of the law against those who overstay their visas;
• Real consequences, including denial of federal funds, for self-described sanctuary cities, which stand in open defiance of federal and state statutes that prohibit sanctuary policies ;
• Opposition to government policies that encourage or reward illegal activity.
Does this bill violate federal law?
YES. Because the work permit program is in violation of federal law, this bill requires the governor to seek a waiver from federal law (line 651). There is currently no mechanism for granting waivers from following the law. Additionally, while HB116 redefines a person's legal status within the state, the federal government will not recognize this status, leaving both workers and employers participating in the Utah program subject to all the penalties of breaking federal immigration and employment law (including fines, arrest, and deportation for illegal aliens holding the Utah guest worker permit).
As long as there's no waiver, there's no problem, right?
WRONG. This bill goes into effect on July 1, 2013, with or without a waiver (line 672). This results in a 2-year gap between the date by which illegal immigrants must arrive in Utah (May 10, 2011) and when the program starts. Utah taxpayers will pay for the education, medical expenses and public safety expenses of this influx of illegal immigrants for the next two years. Senator Mike Lee said, “I don’t believe there is any possibility that the state is going to get any kind of a waiver. I know of no process in federal law that suggests that such a waiver could even be granted, nor do I know of any political inclination in Washington to let that happen.” (Salt Lake Tribune, 3/22/11)
Does it make Utah a magnet for illegal immigration and a sanctuary state?
YES. This bill makes Utah a magnet in 3 ways:
1) Any illegal immigrant who has ever lived or work in Utah before May 10, 2011, can apply for the work program (line 746). This bill was signed March 15, 2011, leaving our doors wide open for 2 months.
2) Not only is this an enticement to enter the US illegally, it further entices illegal immigrants who have left Utah for other states to return to Utah when the program is implemented on July 1, 2013 (line 672). Many will simply stay in Utah to await the implementation date.
3) There is no cutoff date for participants to bring their immediate family members (spouse and both single adult and minor children age 21 and younger) illegally in to the U.S. and into Utah (line 797). Additionally, there is no limit to the number of work permits than can be issued, the number of times they can be renewed, nor any limit to the job sectors eligible for the work program - this will hurt the 100,000 Utah citizens who are currently searching for work in an already depressed economy.
Is HB116 a solution?
NO. HB116 was never meant to be a solution. Legislators publicly call HB116 “a resolution on steroids” and an attempt to “get the government’s attention”. It is a message bill -- but is an unconstitutional amnesty bill the message Utah wants to send? Because it makes Utah a magnet for illegal immigration and a sanctuary state, this bill actually makes our immigration problems worse. History has shown that granting amnesty to illegal immigrants does not solve the problem. If anything, it makes the problem worse by creating expectations of similar actions in the future.
Is the bill full of holes?
YES. In a process reminiscent of Obamacare, the final version of this bill was rushed through the legislature in approximately 4 hours late on a Friday night. When asked, only 6 Representatives said they had read the bill. There are many flawed provisions that need to be fixed. For example:
Does the bill improve safety and security in Utah?
NO. The fingerprint background check required for the primary permit applicant (line 772) will only identify crimes for which the person has already been convicted – this will neither catch nor prevent identity theft currently being perpetrated. The background check does not screen for crimes committed outside of the USA, leaving the permit process open to violent criminals and even terrorist (line 783). There is no background check required for anyone covered by the family permit (line 796), which includes a spouse, and both single adult and minor children ages 21 and younger (line 520).
Why should I defend the Platform?
As Republican delegates, we have the right and responsibility to defend our Party Platform, which contains the principles and values that define our Party. The Platform was written and ratified by us, and it defines and unifies us as a Party. Our platform is like a contract with our voters – it tells them ‘if you elect Republicans, these will be our guiding principles.’ If we do not abide by it and defend it, we will lose our support, identity and purpose, and our Party will become irrelevant.
Why should I support the resolution to repeal HB116?
When badly flawed bills are passed, delegates and voters have the right and responsibility to call on the legislature to correct these bills. The resolution “Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace" simply asks the legislature to put this bill back on the table and replace it with a bill that is viable and constitutional.
Please join me in defending the Republican Party Platform, the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States. Please vote to adopt the resolution entitled “Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace".
Here you can access a copy of the resolution entitled "Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace":
http://www.utgop.org/media/files/2._Uphold_the_Constitution_of_the_United_States_and_Republican_Platforms
Here you can access the text of HB116:
http://le.utah.gov/~2011/bills/hbillenr/hb0116.htm
HB116 Fact Sheet
- Violates U.S. Constitution (Articles 1:8:4, 1:8:18, 1:9:1, 6:2). A state cannot make its own immigration & naturalization policy. What are the consequences of 50 different state policies? (See bill’s Constitutional note)
- Favors hiring of illegals over legal Utah citizens. There are over 103,000 unemployed Utahns & 107,000 families on food stamps. What are the consequences of unemployment rising?
- Redefines the status of illegal aliens as legal in Utah. (line 1555)
- Requires Utah to seek non-existent waiver to violate federal law & U.S. Constitution. (line 651)
- Rewards illegal aliens who violate our national borders & come to Utah for sanctuary. (line 746)
- Negatively Impacts Utah’s Economy: Forces Utah taxpayers to cover financial burden of educating, medicating and incarcerating illegal aliens before start date. (lines 672, 746)
- Redistributes wealth through subsidizing illegal alien health care. (line 758)
- No Background check required for the family permit. (line 796)
- Identity thieves will not be prosecuted because of loopholes. (line 754)
- Utah becomes Safe-Haven for international criminals, gangs and terrorists because of no background check outside USA. (line 783)
- Puts employers at serious risk of committing felonies under federal law by hiring permit holders.
- Does nothing to prevent ID theft & restore credit worthiness of victims. (lines 1428, 1437, 1451)
- 2-yr permit has unlimited renewals with one-time fee, resulting in de facto amnesty. (lines 817, 832)
HB 116 Q&A
What does HB116 do?
HB116 implements a state-run work permit program only for those who are here illegally, ignoring federal guest-worker visas that already exist for skilled, unskilled and migrant workers. The program requires a fine of $2,500 (HB116 line 823) for each person who has violated our sovereign borders and come here illegally, and offers a reduced fine of $1,000 (line 820) for each person who has overstayed a visa (regardless of any other violations of law they have committed, such as identity theft and document fraud).
Does it grant legal status to illegal immigrants?
YES. The bill specifically redefines an illegal immigrant’s status as legal within Utah (line 1555 – definition of illegal alien “does not include an individual who holds a valid permit”).
Is it amnesty?
YES. Amnesty is giving someone the very thing they broke the law to obtain – the privilege of living and working in the US. That is precisely what HB116 does in Utah. The bill also turns a blind-eye to identity theft and document fraud committed prior to permit application, ignoring equal treatment under the law. This bill has been rightly dubbed "Utah's Amnesty Bill", and states around the nation are understandably shocked that conservative Utah would pass liberal amnesty legislation.
Is HB116 constitutional?
NO. Both naturalization and migration are specifically enumerated in the Constitution as being the responsibility of Congress. These are not constitutional rights reserved to the individual states. The Utah Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel (the legislature's lawyers) included a review note on HB116 on 3/4/11 advising the legislature that:
"The Constitution of the United States grants authority to the federal government to regulate foreign commerce and to adopt a uniform rule of naturalization. The United States Supreme Court has also found inherent federal authority to regulate immigration on the basis of federal sovereignty and the power to engage in foreign affairs, this is sometimes referred to as the 'plenary power,' which in more recent years has been made subject to certain constitutional limits."
-- and more specifically:
"In the absence of an effective waiver recognized as valid by the courts, under current law, there is a high probability that a court would find that portions of this bill unconstitutional because they are preempted by federal law as applied through the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States."
(Reference U.S. Constitution, Articles 1:8:4; 1:8:18; 1:9:1; 6:2)
Additionally, the Chair of the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee has asked the federal government to sue Utah over the constitutionality of this bill, which will cost taxpayers millions in legal expenses (“Smith to DOJ: Utah Immigration Law is Unconstitutional”, judiciary.house.gov, April 18, 2011).
Does it violate the Platform?
ABSOLUTELY. Utah's amnesty bill clearly violates the Utah state and national Republican Party Immigration Platform Planks; just a few of Platform principles violated include:
• We oppose illegal immigration and all forms of amnesty, or legal status, for illegal immigrants;
• Control of our borders is an urgent national security interest and our national sovereignty depends on those secure borders;
• We support efforts to enforce the law while welcoming immigrants who enter America through legal avenues;
• Taxpayers should not be covering state benefits for illegal aliens;
• Enforcement of the law against those who overstay their visas;
• Real consequences, including denial of federal funds, for self-described sanctuary cities, which stand in open defiance of federal and state statutes that prohibit sanctuary policies ;
• Opposition to government policies that encourage or reward illegal activity.
Does this bill violate federal law?
YES. Because the work permit program is in violation of federal law, this bill requires the governor to seek a waiver from federal law (line 651). There is currently no mechanism for granting waivers from following the law. Additionally, while HB116 redefines a person's legal status within the state, the federal government will not recognize this status, leaving both workers and employers participating in the Utah program subject to all the penalties of breaking federal immigration and employment law (including fines, arrest, and deportation for illegal aliens holding the Utah guest worker permit).
As long as there's no waiver, there's no problem, right?
WRONG. This bill goes into effect on July 1, 2013, with or without a waiver (line 672). This results in a 2-year gap between the date by which illegal immigrants must arrive in Utah (May 10, 2011) and when the program starts. Utah taxpayers will pay for the education, medical expenses and public safety expenses of this influx of illegal immigrants for the next two years. Senator Mike Lee said, “I don’t believe there is any possibility that the state is going to get any kind of a waiver. I know of no process in federal law that suggests that such a waiver could even be granted, nor do I know of any political inclination in Washington to let that happen.” (Salt Lake Tribune, 3/22/11)
Does it make Utah a magnet for illegal immigration and a sanctuary state?
YES. This bill makes Utah a magnet in 3 ways:
1) Any illegal immigrant who has ever lived or work in Utah before May 10, 2011, can apply for the work program (line 746). This bill was signed March 15, 2011, leaving our doors wide open for 2 months.
2) Not only is this an enticement to enter the US illegally, it further entices illegal immigrants who have left Utah for other states to return to Utah when the program is implemented on July 1, 2013 (line 672). Many will simply stay in Utah to await the implementation date.
3) There is no cutoff date for participants to bring their immediate family members (spouse and both single adult and minor children age 21 and younger) illegally in to the U.S. and into Utah (line 797). Additionally, there is no limit to the number of work permits than can be issued, the number of times they can be renewed, nor any limit to the job sectors eligible for the work program - this will hurt the 100,000 Utah citizens who are currently searching for work in an already depressed economy.
Is HB116 a solution?
NO. HB116 was never meant to be a solution. Legislators publicly call HB116 “a resolution on steroids” and an attempt to “get the government’s attention”. It is a message bill -- but is an unconstitutional amnesty bill the message Utah wants to send? Because it makes Utah a magnet for illegal immigration and a sanctuary state, this bill actually makes our immigration problems worse. History has shown that granting amnesty to illegal immigrants does not solve the problem. If anything, it makes the problem worse by creating expectations of similar actions in the future.
Is the bill full of holes?
YES. In a process reminiscent of Obamacare, the final version of this bill was rushed through the legislature in approximately 4 hours late on a Friday night. When asked, only 6 Representatives said they had read the bill. There are many flawed provisions that need to be fixed. For example:
- An illegal immigrant participating in the program must have health insurance, OR just say they won't incur any health debt (line 758) - how nice would it be to tell your insurance company you don't need their services because you'll never get sick or never get in a car accident? And when those things happen to uninsured illegal immigrants, we end up paying for it through taxes and our own skyrocketing health insurance premiums.
- Another strange provision is that the illegal immigrant must have a Driver Privilege Card, OR they just have to say they won't drive (line 762).
Does the bill improve safety and security in Utah?
NO. The fingerprint background check required for the primary permit applicant (line 772) will only identify crimes for which the person has already been convicted – this will neither catch nor prevent identity theft currently being perpetrated. The background check does not screen for crimes committed outside of the USA, leaving the permit process open to violent criminals and even terrorist (line 783). There is no background check required for anyone covered by the family permit (line 796), which includes a spouse, and both single adult and minor children ages 21 and younger (line 520).
Why should I defend the Platform?
As Republican delegates, we have the right and responsibility to defend our Party Platform, which contains the principles and values that define our Party. The Platform was written and ratified by us, and it defines and unifies us as a Party. Our platform is like a contract with our voters – it tells them ‘if you elect Republicans, these will be our guiding principles.’ If we do not abide by it and defend it, we will lose our support, identity and purpose, and our Party will become irrelevant.
Why should I support the resolution to repeal HB116?
When badly flawed bills are passed, delegates and voters have the right and responsibility to call on the legislature to correct these bills. The resolution “Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace" simply asks the legislature to put this bill back on the table and replace it with a bill that is viable and constitutional.
Please join me in defending the Republican Party Platform, the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States. Please vote to adopt the resolution entitled “Uphold the Constitution of the United States and Republican Immigration Platforms: Repeal HB116 and Replace".
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Monday, June 13, 2011
Video: "Facing the American Future: A West Coast Retreat"
FrontPageMag.com has a video posted on its website about a retreat sponsored by its parent organization, The David Horowitz Freedom Center. The video is interesting and presents some great soundbites from key conservatives. These soundbites, however, are not fluff. They are indicative of the great conservative values that underlie them. The overall focus is the battle over the future of America.
The video is available at youtube.com as well at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?
The video is available at youtube.com as well at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?
Saturday, June 11, 2011
The Immigration Propaganda Matrix - Part 2: Positioning and Demonizing & HB116:
One goal of propaganda is to position the opposition so that they are effectively silenced.
Silenced, however, may not be quite the right term for the process.
They are certainly capable of still proclaiming their point of view - but may hesitate to do so.
The process is also directed towards those who will interpret the words and actions of those expressing the targeted point of view.
The purpose is to create a response, on the part of those who may not be too familiar with the other point of view, so that they essentially refuse to consider the other position.
The positioning itself creates a negative view of those holding the view under attack.
Throw in some additional demonizing and the marginalization becomes even more secure.
The case of HB116 illustrates this process.
Two recent articles from the Salt Lake Tribune contain examples of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) who are key players in the pro-HB116 efforts and who are using the Church as a wedge to push LDS state Republican delegates away from their determination to repeal HB116 and pass a resolution to that end at the state Republican convention on June 18.
Those determined to repeal the bill will most likely not be swayed. However, they may be positioned in such a way as to be hesitant to speak out on behalf of their position.
Those not having a strong view of HB116 are certainly targets of this propaganda process.
In the first article ("Supporter of Utah guest-worker law launch campaign," June 7, 2011 - http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
"If there are delegates who are willing to openly fight against the LDS Church..."
Mr. Roberts equates support for HB116 as the only proper position one can have because he equates supporting the bill as having official sanction of the LDS Church.
Delegates who are LDS members are, therefore, obligated to support that position.
LDS members who are involved in the political process opposing the bill are thus seen to be openly opposing, not just HB116, but the LDS Church itself.
Mr. Roberts may be sincere in his views.
On the other hand, he may also be engaging in a type of characterization intentionally designed to take advantage of many state delegates' religious attachments to the LDS Church and to use those attachments as a way to try to subtly coerce LDS members into rejecting the repeal of HB116.
Additional details of Mr. Roberts' view were described earlier in the article:
"Roberts scoffs at opponents of the bill who still doubt the church’s support for the measure, saying that there is no way top Mormon leaders are "letting their [public relations] department go off the reservation."
"I think the [Republican] Party’s anti-establishment arm has gotten to the point where it has carried over from their politics to their religion," he said."
Mr. Roberts creates a strong characterization of those opposing HB116. He essentially positions both sides in the fight over HB116 as either "good" or "bad." Those who are pro-HB116 are "good" because they support the LDS Church. Those who oppose the bill are "bad" because they oppose the LDS Church.
The question to ask is whether or not it is appropriate, in any sense, to portray the Republican Party in Utah as if it were an auxiliary of a single religious organization.
Certainly, in Utah, many state delegates and opponents of HB116 are LDS. But many are not. Many may participate in other churches and many may not participate in any church at all or may be non-religious. They are all part of the Republican Party and deserve to have a voice in it.
In a recent development, the LDS Church released another statement about immigration on June 10, 2011. The LDS Church has presented us with a thoughtful document which warrants careful consideration as to how it applies to any particular political action regarding immigration. Indeed, thoughtful statements by all religious and other groups presenting us with important principles to consider should be welcomed. The question for this blog entry, however, is not directly related to this new statement. My purpose here is to consider how the LDS Church is being used as part of a campaign to marginalize opponents of a particular bill, HB116.
Is this use justifiable? It is not.
Referencing this new LDS Church statement, State Senator Curt Bramble, R-Provo, also gets into the act. In the Salt Lake Tribune's article, "Latest LDS statement on illegal immigration is murky," (June 10, 2011 - http://www.sltrib.com/
"For Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, who is Mormon and a key architect of Utah’s new guest-worker law, there was no question the statement came from the top, and a vote to repeal HB116 would run counter to the LDS leadership’s wishes.
"This statement leaves no doubt," Bramble said. "None."
Senator Bramble, it seems, is willing to position opponents in the same fashion as Mr. Roberts.
Again, Senator Bramble may be sincere in his views or he may be intentionally using the Church's statement as a way to marginalize those who oppose HB116.
These are strong statements by the pro-HB116 spokesmen.
But, by themselves, are they a strong enough marginalization and demonizing of opponents of HB116?
Apparently not.
Mr. Roberts' quote continues:
"If there are delegates who are willing to openly fight against the LDS Church and there are delegates who sincerely think we should reopen places like Topaz [an internment camp for Japanese-Americans in WWII] and begin rounding up brown people … then maybe there are people who should think about getting [politically] involved and replacing those delegates."
Enforcement, therefore, means brutalization.
The anti-HB116 delegates now, not only openly oppose the LDS Church, but they also want a brutal rounding up of "brown" people?
Who could support such a view?
Mr. Roberts should certainly know better than to leave out any alternative enforcement mechanisms in his portrayal of enforcement as the rounding up of "brown" people. Leaving out any other option for enforcement is a serious omission. It delegitimizes his own point of view through the presenting of a false choice - either you are for a compassionate approach, such as HB116, or you support a brutal rounding up of illegal aliens. His implied racist charge against opponents is equally out of place. His own position must be weak or he would not feel the need to engage in such demonizing of his opponents' views through suspect rhetorical tactics.
Will the delegates fall for the propaganda of the HB116 proponents?
Thankfully, there are clearly those who see through the effort, whether intentional or not, to demonize the anti-HB116 delegates. In the Tribune article, "Latest LDS statement on illegal immigration is murky," one delegate tells us:
"Dan Deuel, a state GOP delegate from Weber County, said a signature by the First Presidency — as had been done when the church dived into the Proposition 8 anti-gay marriage debate in California — wouldn’t make a difference to him, but mentioning HB116 might have.
"The church doesn’t dictate my vote," he said. "I look for my own answers, and there are other ways to do what the church is asking."
Indeed, as important as such statements by the LDS Church are for consideration in the public domain of politics, we also need to remember that delegates were elected by Republicans in their precincts. The delegates, therefore, represent all Republicans within their precincts. This, of course, includes individuals of various other faiths as well as of non-religious Republicans.
For Senator Bramble and Mr. Roberts to imply that a delegate is obligated to follow a Bramble-esque interpretation of LDS Church statements as calling for a specific action, which then represents one's devotion to the LDS Church on the matter, is to pull the delegate away from his or her commitment to that precinct's Republican voters and to subordinate that obligation in a way that cannot be done without being dishonest to those same voters.
Mr. Deuel's thoughtful approach represents the best in the delegate-system.
If all the delegates follow his approach, the convention on Saturday (June 18) will fulfill its duty to represent the Republican voters of Utah.
Silenced, however, may not be quite the right term for the process.
They are certainly capable of still proclaiming their point of view - but may hesitate to do so.
The process is also directed towards those who will interpret the words and actions of those expressing the targeted point of view.
The purpose is to create a response, on the part of those who may not be too familiar with the other point of view, so that they essentially refuse to consider the other position.
The positioning itself creates a negative view of those holding the view under attack.
Throw in some additional demonizing and the marginalization becomes even more secure.
The case of HB116 illustrates this process.
Two recent articles from the Salt Lake Tribune contain examples of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) who are key players in the pro-HB116 efforts and who are using the Church as a wedge to push LDS state Republican delegates away from their determination to repeal HB116 and pass a resolution to that end at the state Republican convention on June 18.
Those determined to repeal the bill will most likely not be swayed. However, they may be positioned in such a way as to be hesitant to speak out on behalf of their position.
Those not having a strong view of HB116 are certainly targets of this propaganda process.
In the first article ("Supporter of Utah guest-worker law launch campaign," June 7, 2011 - http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
"If there are delegates who are willing to openly fight against the LDS Church..."
Mr. Roberts equates support for HB116 as the only proper position one can have because he equates supporting the bill as having official sanction of the LDS Church.
Delegates who are LDS members are, therefore, obligated to support that position.
LDS members who are involved in the political process opposing the bill are thus seen to be openly opposing, not just HB116, but the LDS Church itself.
Mr. Roberts may be sincere in his views.
On the other hand, he may also be engaging in a type of characterization intentionally designed to take advantage of many state delegates' religious attachments to the LDS Church and to use those attachments as a way to try to subtly coerce LDS members into rejecting the repeal of HB116.
Additional details of Mr. Roberts' view were described earlier in the article:
"Roberts scoffs at opponents of the bill who still doubt the church’s support for the measure, saying that there is no way top Mormon leaders are "letting their [public relations] department go off the reservation."
"I think the [Republican] Party’s anti-establishment arm has gotten to the point where it has carried over from their politics to their religion," he said."
Mr. Roberts creates a strong characterization of those opposing HB116. He essentially positions both sides in the fight over HB116 as either "good" or "bad." Those who are pro-HB116 are "good" because they support the LDS Church. Those who oppose the bill are "bad" because they oppose the LDS Church.
The question to ask is whether or not it is appropriate, in any sense, to portray the Republican Party in Utah as if it were an auxiliary of a single religious organization.
Certainly, in Utah, many state delegates and opponents of HB116 are LDS. But many are not. Many may participate in other churches and many may not participate in any church at all or may be non-religious. They are all part of the Republican Party and deserve to have a voice in it.
In a recent development, the LDS Church released another statement about immigration on June 10, 2011. The LDS Church has presented us with a thoughtful document which warrants careful consideration as to how it applies to any particular political action regarding immigration. Indeed, thoughtful statements by all religious and other groups presenting us with important principles to consider should be welcomed. The question for this blog entry, however, is not directly related to this new statement. My purpose here is to consider how the LDS Church is being used as part of a campaign to marginalize opponents of a particular bill, HB116.
Is this use justifiable? It is not.
Referencing this new LDS Church statement, State Senator Curt Bramble, R-Provo, also gets into the act. In the Salt Lake Tribune's article, "Latest LDS statement on illegal immigration is murky," (June 10, 2011 - http://www.sltrib.com/
"For Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, who is Mormon and a key architect of Utah’s new guest-worker law, there was no question the statement came from the top, and a vote to repeal HB116 would run counter to the LDS leadership’s wishes.
"This statement leaves no doubt," Bramble said. "None."
Senator Bramble, it seems, is willing to position opponents in the same fashion as Mr. Roberts.
Again, Senator Bramble may be sincere in his views or he may be intentionally using the Church's statement as a way to marginalize those who oppose HB116.
These are strong statements by the pro-HB116 spokesmen.
But, by themselves, are they a strong enough marginalization and demonizing of opponents of HB116?
Apparently not.
Mr. Roberts' quote continues:
"If there are delegates who are willing to openly fight against the LDS Church and there are delegates who sincerely think we should reopen places like Topaz [an internment camp for Japanese-Americans in WWII] and begin rounding up brown people … then maybe there are people who should think about getting [politically] involved and replacing those delegates."
Enforcement, therefore, means brutalization.
The anti-HB116 delegates now, not only openly oppose the LDS Church, but they also want a brutal rounding up of "brown" people?
Who could support such a view?
Mr. Roberts should certainly know better than to leave out any alternative enforcement mechanisms in his portrayal of enforcement as the rounding up of "brown" people. Leaving out any other option for enforcement is a serious omission. It delegitimizes his own point of view through the presenting of a false choice - either you are for a compassionate approach, such as HB116, or you support a brutal rounding up of illegal aliens. His implied racist charge against opponents is equally out of place. His own position must be weak or he would not feel the need to engage in such demonizing of his opponents' views through suspect rhetorical tactics.
Will the delegates fall for the propaganda of the HB116 proponents?
Thankfully, there are clearly those who see through the effort, whether intentional or not, to demonize the anti-HB116 delegates. In the Tribune article, "Latest LDS statement on illegal immigration is murky," one delegate tells us:
"Dan Deuel, a state GOP delegate from Weber County, said a signature by the First Presidency — as had been done when the church dived into the Proposition 8 anti-gay marriage debate in California — wouldn’t make a difference to him, but mentioning HB116 might have.
"The church doesn’t dictate my vote," he said. "I look for my own answers, and there are other ways to do what the church is asking."
Indeed, as important as such statements by the LDS Church are for consideration in the public domain of politics, we also need to remember that delegates were elected by Republicans in their precincts. The delegates, therefore, represent all Republicans within their precincts. This, of course, includes individuals of various other faiths as well as of non-religious Republicans.
For Senator Bramble and Mr. Roberts to imply that a delegate is obligated to follow a Bramble-esque interpretation of LDS Church statements as calling for a specific action, which then represents one's devotion to the LDS Church on the matter, is to pull the delegate away from his or her commitment to that precinct's Republican voters and to subordinate that obligation in a way that cannot be done without being dishonest to those same voters.
Mr. Deuel's thoughtful approach represents the best in the delegate-system.
If all the delegates follow his approach, the convention on Saturday (June 18) will fulfill its duty to represent the Republican voters of Utah.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Latino Gang and Ethnic Cleansing of Blacks in Azusa, California:
A recent article available at judicialwatch.org presents some very disturbing information about the "Azusa 13" gang in the city of Azusa in Los Angeles County in California.
The gang, to show it's loyalty to the Mexican Mafia prison gang, engages in intimidation tactics and outright violence in an effort to push African-Americans out of the city. Judicial Watch describes it this way:
"To demonstrate its loyalty to the notoriously violent Mexican Mafia prison gang, an affiliate Latino street organization has worked to cleanse a southern California city of black residents by terrorizing, threatening and intimidating them."
Details of the criminal activities are available in the federal grand jury indictment which indicts over fifty Latino gang members. Judicial Watch comments on it as follows:
"Details of the decades-long genocide operation in the Los Angeles County city of Azusa are laid out in a huge grand jury indictment issued by the Department of Justice this week. More than 50 Latino gang bangers, many of them surely in the U.S. illegally, have been charged for targeting blacks by beating, robbing and threatening them."
The Judicial Watch article is available at:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/
The indictment is available at:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/
Utah's Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and others believe that we should not worry about illegal aliens until a serious crime is committed by an illegal.
We must ask ourselves, however, how the city of Azusa got to the point where a Latino gang is actively seeking to ethnically cleanse another ethnic group from its boundaries.
Did the attitudes of certain leaders in certain cities, i.e., "sanctuary cities," have anything to do with the situation as it has developed in Azusa?
Are many of our own leaders following the same logic in approaching the illegal alien issue in Utah?
Again, from the article:
"Latino gangs have for more than a decade targeted blacks in the sprawling southern California County, which is an illegal alien hotbed that has long offered sanctuary."
By looking the other way on illegal immigration and sugar-coating and downplaying the illegal alien elements that are not just "hard-working people looking for a better life," this part of our nation now has a problem that may be unsolvable without extreme measures being employed to clean up the crime and corruption.
By following the same logic and "look the other way" proposals that led to Azusa becoming a gang-infested hellish nightmare, our own local leaders will lead Utah into a future of increasing corruption, violence, and perhaps even intimidation of ethnic groups who are deemed to be outsiders by gangs.
And all so the money-powers selling HB116 and similar proposals can make money for themselves.
Senator Bramble, the Sutherland Institute, the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce, Governor Herbert and the rest of those promoting HB116 should be ashamed.
HB116 is, pure and simple, a cover for those making the money from cheap labor.
The true costs will be borne by the rest of society.
The gang, to show it's loyalty to the Mexican Mafia prison gang, engages in intimidation tactics and outright violence in an effort to push African-Americans out of the city. Judicial Watch describes it this way:
"To demonstrate its loyalty to the notoriously violent Mexican Mafia prison gang, an affiliate Latino street organization has worked to cleanse a southern California city of black residents by terrorizing, threatening and intimidating them."
Details of the criminal activities are available in the federal grand jury indictment which indicts over fifty Latino gang members. Judicial Watch comments on it as follows:
"Details of the decades-long genocide operation in the Los Angeles County city of Azusa are laid out in a huge grand jury indictment issued by the Department of Justice this week. More than 50 Latino gang bangers, many of them surely in the U.S. illegally, have been charged for targeting blacks by beating, robbing and threatening them."
The Judicial Watch article is available at:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/
The indictment is available at:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/
Utah's Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and others believe that we should not worry about illegal aliens until a serious crime is committed by an illegal.
We must ask ourselves, however, how the city of Azusa got to the point where a Latino gang is actively seeking to ethnically cleanse another ethnic group from its boundaries.
Did the attitudes of certain leaders in certain cities, i.e., "sanctuary cities," have anything to do with the situation as it has developed in Azusa?
Are many of our own leaders following the same logic in approaching the illegal alien issue in Utah?
Again, from the article:
"Latino gangs have for more than a decade targeted blacks in the sprawling southern California County, which is an illegal alien hotbed that has long offered sanctuary."
By looking the other way on illegal immigration and sugar-coating and downplaying the illegal alien elements that are not just "hard-working people looking for a better life," this part of our nation now has a problem that may be unsolvable without extreme measures being employed to clean up the crime and corruption.
By following the same logic and "look the other way" proposals that led to Azusa becoming a gang-infested hellish nightmare, our own local leaders will lead Utah into a future of increasing corruption, violence, and perhaps even intimidation of ethnic groups who are deemed to be outsiders by gangs.
And all so the money-powers selling HB116 and similar proposals can make money for themselves.
Senator Bramble, the Sutherland Institute, the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce, Governor Herbert and the rest of those promoting HB116 should be ashamed.
HB116 is, pure and simple, a cover for those making the money from cheap labor.
The true costs will be borne by the rest of society.
Saturday, June 4, 2011
The Salt Lake Chamber of Kings:
In an article briefly describing the vote in favor of repealing HB116 at the Washington County Republican Convention, the Salt Lake Tribune also described some elements of a new immigration plan by Ron Mortensen. Mortensen's plan warrants careful consideration and more details of the plan will certainly be forthcoming.
However, the most revealing aspect of the article was not about the very responsible and civic-minded vote asking for repeal of HB116 or the brief description of elements of a new approach to immigration, it was the unmitigated arrogance of the spokesman of the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce.
This is how the Trib presented it:
"Marty Carpenter, spokesman for the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce — which supported HB116 — said that bill was a balanced approach.
"We understand there will be enhancements to the legislation as we go forward,” Carpenter said. “We welcome input that adheres to the principles of The Utah Compact without retreating from the significant progress we have made as a state toward a workable solution.”'
Just for my curiosity, Mr. Carpenter, who are you representing when you say such things as:
"We understand there will be enhancements..."
"We welcome input..."
"...without retreating from the significant progress we have made as a state toward a workable solution."
The impression I get is that the Chamber sees itself as some sort of quasi-government that is in charge of immigration laws for the state of Utah.
Where does that leave our actual elected officials?
In the Chamber worldview, I suppose, as subordinates to the royal will of those who have anointed themselves as our rulers without the inconvenience of an election.
In short, the Chamber seems to see itself as our master and king and us as serfs.
No doubt, royalty finds the questioning of motives and the questioning of the wisdom of its preferred program initiatives inconveniences thrust upon them by the rabble.
Only in the case of immigration, the rabble is correct and those with the royal attitude, wrong.
The good citizens of Washington County know the true costs of illegal immigration and voted to reject it.
It is time for the Chamber to see themselves as part of society and not as its master and follow the wisdom of the electorate.
The Trib article and quote from Mr. Carpenter ("Guest-worker bill encounters more resistance") are located at:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
However, the most revealing aspect of the article was not about the very responsible and civic-minded vote asking for repeal of HB116 or the brief description of elements of a new approach to immigration, it was the unmitigated arrogance of the spokesman of the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce.
This is how the Trib presented it:
"Marty Carpenter, spokesman for the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce — which supported HB116 — said that bill was a balanced approach.
"We understand there will be enhancements to the legislation as we go forward,” Carpenter said. “We welcome input that adheres to the principles of The Utah Compact without retreating from the significant progress we have made as a state toward a workable solution.”'
Just for my curiosity, Mr. Carpenter, who are you representing when you say such things as:
"We understand there will be enhancements..."
"We welcome input..."
"...without retreating from the significant progress we have made as a state toward a workable solution."
The impression I get is that the Chamber sees itself as some sort of quasi-government that is in charge of immigration laws for the state of Utah.
Where does that leave our actual elected officials?
In the Chamber worldview, I suppose, as subordinates to the royal will of those who have anointed themselves as our rulers without the inconvenience of an election.
In short, the Chamber seems to see itself as our master and king and us as serfs.
No doubt, royalty finds the questioning of motives and the questioning of the wisdom of its preferred program initiatives inconveniences thrust upon them by the rabble.
Only in the case of immigration, the rabble is correct and those with the royal attitude, wrong.
The good citizens of Washington County know the true costs of illegal immigration and voted to reject it.
It is time for the Chamber to see themselves as part of society and not as its master and follow the wisdom of the electorate.
The Trib article and quote from Mr. Carpenter ("Guest-worker bill encounters more resistance") are located at:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
Must See Video of 10-Year Old Singing National Anthem at NBA Finals:
At game 2 of the NBA finals, the national anthem was sung by a 10-year old!
Her rendition is inspiring and a must see.
From the Yahoo sports blog site, "Ball Don't Lie":
"When 10-year-old Julia Dale was rehearsing the Star-Spangled Banner before Game 2 of the NBA Finals in Miami, her soaring rendition caught the ear of the man who would be directing the game later that night on ABC. She had done so well, he decided, that the performance would be carried live on the national broadcast."
The link to the story with the video is:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/
Her rendition is inspiring and a must see.
From the Yahoo sports blog site, "Ball Don't Lie":
"When 10-year-old Julia Dale was rehearsing the Star-Spangled Banner before Game 2 of the NBA Finals in Miami, her soaring rendition caught the ear of the man who would be directing the game later that night on ABC. She had done so well, he decided, that the performance would be carried live on the national broadcast."
The link to the story with the video is:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Utah Amnesties and the Utah Corruption Question:
Will HB116 bring corruption to Utah?
Will Paul Mero and the Sutherland Institute's new proposal to resurrect the Robles-Amnesty plan bring corruption to Utah?:
http://www.deseretnews.com/
In the past month, Utah has seen the arrest of individuals connected to the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico:
http://www.fox13now.com/news/
We have also seen the arrest of an individual who was running what was described as "one of the most sophisticated fake ID mills" in the history of Utah:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
We have also learned that several members of Sheriff Arpaio's department in Maricopa County, AZ have been arrested for drug and human-smuggling:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/
The article about the Arizona situation tells us:
"Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio said a deputy and two female detention officers at the sheriff's largest jail facility were among 12 people taken into custody and accused of being in a Phoenix-based international drug smuggling ring."
The information also shows just how close one of the individuals is to the Sinaloa Cartel:
"One of the detention officers, Marcella Hernandez, told authorities that she is eight-months pregnant with the child of Francisco Arce-Torres, the alleged drug ring's leader who court documents say is also a member of the Mexican Sinaloa cartel."
The allegations against one officer include that he passed information to the ring about the sheriff's departments crime prevention operations. The officer also worked with a separate human smuggling operation.
Arpaio's reaction:
"We have enough violence without having moles in my own organization that put my deputies in danger," Arpaio said."
The County Attorney, Bill Montgomery, had this to say about the situation:
"No one is above the law, and apparently no one if [is]beyond the reach of drug trafficking organizations in Mexico," Montgomery said. "It's just one more illustration ... that the border is not secure. We have cross national transportation of drugs and illegal aliens that has now involved law enforcement officials here. And they've been able to do this and be ongoing in their efforts."
If this is the level of infiltration and corruption of a department run by one of the best law enforcement officers in the nation, what will be the level of infiltration and corruption of law enforcement agencies in Utah - especially one run by the naive Chief Burbank of Salt Lake City?
Let's add up the information and see where it leads us:
1. Utah has HB116, which will allow illegals to remain and work in Utah when it takes effect. If HB116 doesn't do the job, we still have the Robles-Amnesty plan (to be pushed, it seems, should HB116 get too bogged down in challenges). The Robles-Amnesty plan will accomplish the same thing as HB116 - allow illegals to remain in Utah and work.
2. The Utah Amnesties will provide a cover for those who can fool the system into thinking they meet the requirements of the amnesties to remain and work in Utah.
3. Sinaloa cartel operations are already linked to criminal operations in Utah.
4. Producing fake documents appears to be on-going in Utah.
5. Pulling law enforcement officers into cartel influence has already been demonstrated in the department run by one of the most astute individuals in terms of understanding how to deal with the crime problems associated with illegal aliens.
6. The Sinaloa Cartel and other criminal operations will surely be looking for ways to advance their operations in Utah. The Utah Amnesties will help to facilitate their ability to operate through providing a legal cover for their presence in Utah.
7. To further protect their operations, criminal organizations will start to corrupt individuals at key points in the legal system to aid them, cover for them, and to even work for them.
The type of corruption that will be brought to Utah through the folly of our amnesty-minded leaders and self-appointed public spokespersons will be violent and aggressive.
If law enforcement can be corrupted in Arizona, it can be corrupted in Utah.
Will Paul Mero and the Sutherland Institute's new proposal to resurrect the Robles-Amnesty plan bring corruption to Utah?:
http://www.deseretnews.com/
In the past month, Utah has seen the arrest of individuals connected to the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico:
http://www.fox13now.com/news/
We have also seen the arrest of an individual who was running what was described as "one of the most sophisticated fake ID mills" in the history of Utah:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/
We have also learned that several members of Sheriff Arpaio's department in Maricopa County, AZ have been arrested for drug and human-smuggling:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/
The article about the Arizona situation tells us:
"Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio said a deputy and two female detention officers at the sheriff's largest jail facility were among 12 people taken into custody and accused of being in a Phoenix-based international drug smuggling ring."
The information also shows just how close one of the individuals is to the Sinaloa Cartel:
"One of the detention officers, Marcella Hernandez, told authorities that she is eight-months pregnant with the child of Francisco Arce-Torres, the alleged drug ring's leader who court documents say is also a member of the Mexican Sinaloa cartel."
The allegations against one officer include that he passed information to the ring about the sheriff's departments crime prevention operations. The officer also worked with a separate human smuggling operation.
Arpaio's reaction:
"We have enough violence without having moles in my own organization that put my deputies in danger," Arpaio said."
The County Attorney, Bill Montgomery, had this to say about the situation:
"No one is above the law, and apparently no one if [is]beyond the reach of drug trafficking organizations in Mexico," Montgomery said. "It's just one more illustration ... that the border is not secure. We have cross national transportation of drugs and illegal aliens that has now involved law enforcement officials here. And they've been able to do this and be ongoing in their efforts."
If this is the level of infiltration and corruption of a department run by one of the best law enforcement officers in the nation, what will be the level of infiltration and corruption of law enforcement agencies in Utah - especially one run by the naive Chief Burbank of Salt Lake City?
Let's add up the information and see where it leads us:
1. Utah has HB116, which will allow illegals to remain and work in Utah when it takes effect. If HB116 doesn't do the job, we still have the Robles-Amnesty plan (to be pushed, it seems, should HB116 get too bogged down in challenges). The Robles-Amnesty plan will accomplish the same thing as HB116 - allow illegals to remain in Utah and work.
2. The Utah Amnesties will provide a cover for those who can fool the system into thinking they meet the requirements of the amnesties to remain and work in Utah.
3. Sinaloa cartel operations are already linked to criminal operations in Utah.
4. Producing fake documents appears to be on-going in Utah.
5. Pulling law enforcement officers into cartel influence has already been demonstrated in the department run by one of the most astute individuals in terms of understanding how to deal with the crime problems associated with illegal aliens.
6. The Sinaloa Cartel and other criminal operations will surely be looking for ways to advance their operations in Utah. The Utah Amnesties will help to facilitate their ability to operate through providing a legal cover for their presence in Utah.
7. To further protect their operations, criminal organizations will start to corrupt individuals at key points in the legal system to aid them, cover for them, and to even work for them.
The type of corruption that will be brought to Utah through the folly of our amnesty-minded leaders and self-appointed public spokespersons will be violent and aggressive.
If law enforcement can be corrupted in Arizona, it can be corrupted in Utah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)