Amnesty Vote Today!

On Monday at 5:30pm, the United States Senate will vote on the most sweeping immigration reform proposal it has considered in almost 3 decades – and it will do so having only seen the nearly 1200 pages of text for approximately 72 hours.  Americans – including myself, my fellow senators and our staffs – are still trying to figure out exactly what is in the new Schumer-Corker-Hoeven “deal.” 

Sound familiar?  Pass it to find out what’s in it?  Reminiscent of Obamacare, the lengthy amendment to replace the Gang of 8’s original bill was crafted behind closed doors and introduced late on Friday, after many members had left town.  In the 2007 immigration debate, close to 50 amendments were considered.  But this year, we have only debated 9 – with some of us being completely shut out. 

Given only a weekend to review the language, we will now vote on whether to end a debate that never really began.   To be clear – this is not a difficult vote.   On process alone, we should all vote “no.“  This was by design – the President, Harry Reid and the Gang of 8 preferred all along to ram through a “deal,” and not have a real debate – just like Obamacare.  Worse, just like Obamacare, the “deal” involved lots of horse-trading and buying off of votes at the last minute – a display of everything that is wrong with Washington, and one of the things I specifically campaigned against.

But, on substance – the vote is even easier.   There are too many troubling provisions of the bill to list, such as de facto affirmative action hiring for current illegal immigrants due to Obamacare and huge amounts of discretion for the DHS Secretary to waive deportation and inadmissibility.   And for all the talk, the new Schumer-Corker-Hoeven “deal” is nothing new at all.  It’s the same amnesty-before-false-promise-of-security of the Gang of 8 and the bills of debates past. 

That is why we started this petition, so that Americans can speak out and let Senators know that they oppose the legalization-first bill offered by the Gang of 8 and Schumer-Corker-Hoeven.

Here’s what we know that the bill does:

Grants Immediate Amnesty with Empty Promise of Border Security

Although we are told that it fixes border security, the Schumer-Corker-Hoeven amendment maintains the Gang of 8’s flawed framework of guaranteed and immediate legalization, followed by an empty promise of eventual border security.  This structure repeats the mistakes of the 1986 amnesty, which, as noted by former Attorney General Edwin Meese, is precisely the same as this “deal,” and only encourages more illegal immigration.

Continue Reading

Sharia…Coming to a City Near You?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

Imagine this scenario. A husband-and-wife are married in the Catholic Church. The wife gets pregnant. They have a falling out and get divorced. The now ex-wife wishes to have an abortion but her ex-husband wishes her to have the baby.

Putting aside our views on murder abortion, the husband decides to challenge her decision. Rather than take her to civil court, he and she go before a Catholic tribunal. The tribunal rules that the woman must carry the baby to term and upon the baby’s birth relinquish he/she to the father who will have full custody.

The woman doesn’t stand for this ruling and takes the matter to her state court, but the state court upholds the Catholic ruling.

Now how many liberal organizations would have a cow over this? Naturally all of them. And might the Obama justice system inject themselves into this case? You bet they would.

Surprise. I would agree with the libs. This case should be decided in state court and a tribunal ruling should have no bearing on its outcome. Why? Because there is no place in this country for a parallel judicial system.

Yet with the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood and our overwhelming political correctness, how long will it be before Sharia law becomes that parallel system?

Another surprise. It’s already here, in a manner of speaking. Liberal judges are and have been deferring to Sharia law for years when adjudicating cases.

You may ask how prevalent it is, or more to the point, just how bad it could get?

Well, whenever you wish to predict the future, one merely has to find a similar situation that has already occurred and walk it back. Knowing that liberals and progressives follow the same patterns no matter where or when they reside, you can, with a fair amount of certainty, predict our future.

Political correctness coupled with fear is strangling Europe. As bad as it is here, it’s much worse in European countries. Predictably, France is at the politically correct forefront.

To date there are over 750 “No-Go Zones” in French cities, containing over 5 million Muslims. What’s a No-Go Zone? The PC name for it is “Sensitive Urban Zone”. Ah, that sounds nice, does it not?

What they are is whole swaths of a city where French law enforcement has virtually no presence. It’s a separate country within the city. These areas are controlled by Muslims and the law they follow is Sharia, not French. These neighborhoods erect mosques to further radicalize their population, all financed by governments such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In other words, the Muslim brotherhood.

Oops. Not all the financing comes from Middle East. A lot comes from public assistance provided by the liberal French government. Assistance such as welfare benefits, etc., similar to those provided to Tamerlin Tsarnaev in Boston.

And it’s not just France. This is happening all over Europe. Even Germany has a growing number of court cases where judges defer to Islamic Sharia law. Islamic “Shadow Courts” operate in every major German city.

So if we wish to see our future, whether it be our swift march to socialism and all the joy it creates, or the rise of Sharia, we have only to look across the pond.

Obama Closes More Federal Land to Drilling

The Obama administration is calling for cutting the amount of federal lands open for oil shale and tars sands development in the Western states, a plan that industry officials say may force companies to look overseas for opportunities.

A new Bureau of Land Management plan calls for allowing 700,000 acres of land for development, reports Fox News. This is a drastic cut from the Bush administration, which had set aside 1.3 million acres, and the oil industry is outraged by the change.

“What they basically did was make it so that nobody is going to want to spend money going after oil shale on federal government lands,” said Dan Kish, Senior Vice President of Institute for Energy Research.

Oil shale drilling is different from the hydraulic fracking process being used in places like the Bakken shale region in North Dakota or the Niobrara in Colorado. Fracking breaks through lwyers of shale rock and pumps out oil.

But oil shale refers to the rock itself. When companies subject the rock to pressure or high temperatures, either by leaving it in place or removing it, oil develops.

Colorado Wildlife Federation Spokesman Todd Malmsbury said the process raises a great deal of concerns about the impact on the region’s water and land.

Continue Reading

Terrorist Photos are Racist

Always-unfiltered Rep. Jim McDermott penned a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller Wednesday claiming a Joint Terrorism Task Force ‘Faces of Global Terrorism’ ad is racist.

McDermott, a Democrat from Washington state, voiced his “deep concern” about the ad, which shows mug shots of international terrorists, and asked the FBI chief to “reconsider publicizing” it.

According to McDermott, the “ad featuring sixteen photos of wanted terrorists is not only offensive to Muslims and ethnic minorities, but it encourages racial and religious profiling.”

McDermott continued, “Representing terrorists, however, from only one ethnic or religious group, promotes stereotypes and ignores other forms of extremism. The FBI’s ‘Most Wanted Terrorists List‘ includes individuals of other races and associated with other religions and causes, but their faces are missing from this campaign.”

Continue Reading

Misguided Colorado

During Colorado’s 2012-2013 General Assembly legislative session, multiple restrictive gun control measures were passed and signed into law. The legislation package, which was backed by the liberal Bloomberg group Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG), is set to take effect on July 1 and includes 15 round limits on magazines, expanded background checks, firearm exchange regulation, and other new red tape implementation.

MAIG has taken the lead in the advance of gun control legislation in Colorado and across the nation, while Mayor Bloomberg has personally donated large sums to organizations that defend embattled Colorado State senators, Giron and Morse.

According to the New Hampshire Union Leader, MAIG recently went so far as to claim Tamerlan Tsarnaev, one of the terrorists involved with the Boston Marathon attack, was a victim of gun violence.

Meanwhile, Colorado now faces a variety of negative economic impacts as a result of the legislation supported by MAIG, passed by the Colorado legislature, and signed into law by Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper.

1. Magpul Leaves Colorado

 

 

 

2. Canceled Shooting Sport Competitions 

 

Continue Reading

Senate Kills Bill

WASHINGTON — The Senate rejected a border security amendment proposed by Sen. John Cornyn Thursday, as senators touted bipartisan agreement on a different border security package sponsored by Republican Sens. John Hoeven and Bob Corker.

The Texas Republican’s amendment was tabled by a vote of 54-43. Because it was a vote to table (to put the amendment aside without debating its merits), that means the 53 aye votes were votes against Cornyn’s amendment, and the 43 nay votes were votes in favor of it.

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio broke with the Gang of Eight on the amendment, voting not to table it. All other members of the Gang of Eight voted to table it.

Speaking on the Senate floor before the vote to table his amendment, Cornyn said: “I’m looking forward to seeing the language that’s being proposed, the alternative language. But for now, I believe my amendment deserves the support of the members of this chamber.”

Continue Reading

Ryan v Levin on Immigration

 

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Paul Ryan was on Mark Levin’s show on Tuesday discussing immigration. You know, the same Paul Ryan that with his tag team partner Marco Rubio, have been pushing for a “comprehensive immigration” bill. I’ll give him props for his courage at least.

Levin told Ryan that some new immigration numbers were just-released. He said that new CBO estimates are that the Senate bill will only reduce illegal immigration by 25%. Ryan responded by saying that the House will not focus or discuss the Senate bill and will only focus on their own bill.

Ryan said that “this problem” has to be dealt with. The “problem” being illegals but would not say the words illegal alien or illegal. He called them undocumented workers.

Ryan continued saying that we had a law in 1986 and it didn’t work nor did the ‘96 or 2006 laws. Ryan claimed, as Levin laughed out loud, that they in Congress want to get it right this time.

Naturally Mark asked him: “Why should we trust you [guys]?” Ryan said that this time they would have “real metrics” that would have to be met to secure the border. Not just DHS’s promise. He said the GAO would make the determination of border security. He then went on to explain the metrics that must be met regarding the undocumented workers.

Levin asked: “What if the illegal doesn’t meet your requirements. Are you going to deport them?” Ryan’s answer: “Yeah, then they are deportable, that’s the whole point.” Levin interrupted rather emphatically by saying that they’re not going to be deported!

Notice that Ryan said they are deportable, not that they would be deported. One has to listen very carefully as politicians throw out these code words.

Levin added that the president is in charge of who is deported and he simply won’t do it no matter what Congress insists on.

And of course Levin is correct. That’s why this argument is so specious. It sounds like tough talk but that’s all it is. I’m reminded of the Bumble Snow Monster that looked scary but was harmless after his teeth were removed.

Ryan’s response was if you write a law and they break the law, they are deportable. It can’t be fought or adjudicated. Huh? They already broke the law just getting here. What the heck do they care if they break another?

Could someone as intelligent as Paul Ryan really be this naïve, or is it something else?

Ryan then asked Levin: “Do you believe we will find 11 million or more people, round them up and kick them out?” Levin’s answer: “no, under this administration we won’t round up a half million people.” Ryan said that no administration could do that, even if they tried.

Frankly, how would we know? We’ve never tried. And I beg to differ. You won’t get them all, but you can get 70% within a few months time with the will and a few thousand agents. I live on the outskirts of a northeastern city. It’s a small city but a city nonetheless. I guarantee, you give me 1000 agents and a few days and I could find 75% of all illegals in my city. Why? Because they all settled in about 10-block area downtown and I’ll bet every city is the same. That’s why! 

All of what Ryan continued to promote was in the 1986 amnesty bill. Levin pointed this out to Ryan. Ryan didn’t really acknowledge it. He continued to drone on about metrics that have to be met regarding security and legal status of the undocumented workers. It didn’t convince Mark and it didn’t convince me.

Look, the bottom line is that all the metrics, the rules and new laws are not going to solve the illegal problem. We have been debating this current problem for over 25 years.

If they, Congress, were serious, they would simply state that we can live with our current situation for another year or two. Therefore Congress’s proposal should be to secure the border…period. Each border State would then verify to its security. When that is completed, we can revisit the rest. It’s that simple and that’s why it will never be done. It’s not “comprehensive” enough!