Republicans vs. Conservatives

 

One difference between the two major parties is that Democrats harness the energy of their base to fight legislative battles; Republicans make end-runs around their base to obviate their energy.

Let’s examine the GOP’s strategy for dealing with immigration.  Instead of harnessing their energy to fight amnesty and hang it around the necks of Democrats in the red state electoral landscape next year, they are trying to outflank the conservative base with subterfuge in order to pass amnesty.  National Journal has an inside story of the strategy:

House Republicans head home for the August break having done little to pass immigration reform, falling well short of Speaker John Boehner’s goal of voting on legislation before next week’s monthlong recess begins. But far from a failure of leadership, top House Republicans are casting the inaction as a tactical play designed to boost reform’s chances.

Keeping immigration on the back-burner helps avoid a recess filled with angry town-hall meetings reminiscent of the heated August 2009 protests where the backlash against health care reform coalesced. Doing nothing also starves Democrats of a target, Republicans argue.

“August was a central part of our discussions. People don’t want to go home and get screamed at,” a House GOP leadership aide said.

Continue Reading

No Fault Immigration

by: the Common Constitutionalist

We must pass “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”. If not for us, than for the children. No, not our own, but the children who are in this country through no fault of their own.

I’m speaking of the children of illegal aliens, undocumented aliens, undocumented immigrants, undocumented workers, undocumented citizens.

A report called “Shattered Families” (dun-dun-dun), from the Applied Research Center concluded that 5000 children of illegal immigrants (I added illegal) are in U.S. foster care due to the deportation of their parents.

The report contends that if current trends hold, 15,000 kids will be “ripped” away from their parents.

The LA Times wrote that law enforcement often doesn’t allow detained illegal immigrant parents (I added illegal, again) the opportunity to make arrangements for the care of their children. The Times article concluded by saying: “We live in a country defined both by its proud immigrant heritage and by its enduring commitment to families. Ultimately, immigration reform will not be successful unless it protects children, prevents families from being torn apart and shows the world America means what it says when it speaks out on the importance of respecting human rights.”

Pardon my callousness, but I have a solution. A) If you sneak into our country and get caught be prepared for the consequence (not that there are any consequences. I’m not buying that centers study). B) It’s a novel idea, but if you’re deported, take your kids with you.

There is such an outcry over this illegal immigrant family “unification”. Have they given any thought to actual American children?

What happens when a child gets “ripped” away from a single parent that goes to prison?

The DOJ estimates that 2.3% of American kids and a whopping 6.7% of black American children have at least one parent in prison. Where are all the bleeding heart advocates for these poor kids? They are left parentless through no fault of their own. Where are the lawmakers to waive parents sentences in order to reunite families?

How is breaking into a home and stealing a TV different than breaking into a country and stealing a Social Security number, not to mention thousands of taxpayer dollars every year?

If you wish to talk real heartbreak, think of the single military moms and dads that have to leave their children behind as they are deployed overseas.

Estimates are upwards of 30,000 single moms have been deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Often times, during deployment, they must also fight to retain custody of their children, with often no one state side to fight on their behalf.

But they chose that life. They chose to join the military. They must’ve known this could happen.

True, but the same could be said of someone who chose to commit a crime. It’s a choice. It’s also a choice to sneak across our border.

I can’t blame someone for doing so, but don’t whine if you get caught and are sent packing.

But fear not, unlike the children of the military or American criminals, you potential “New Americans” have the President, the Senate, Congressional leaders and La Raza advocating for you.

Smuggler Deported 11 Times

FLORENCE, Ariz. (TheBlaze/AP) — Authorities along the Arizona border say a man accused of driving a car carrying 220 pounds of marijuana had been deported to Mexico 11 times.

The Pinal County Sheriff’s Office says 21year-old Daniel Jupa-Fino was arrested Tuesday after he ran from the car after a deputy made a traffic stop on Interstate 8.

Suspected Arizona drug smuggler had been deported 11 times before

Fox has more:

Both men fled on foot into a nearby trailer park following the initial stop, authorities said. Gonzalez-Tempura, who was injured while trying to climb over barbwire fencing, was taken into custody a short time later, but Jupa-Fino eluded responding authorities.

Continue Reading

Bill O’Reilly, the Republicans Kevorkian?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

So Bill O’Reilly, great defender of folks is officially on the immigration bandwagon. Hooray! Another conservative bites the dust. Although I guess that’s not accurate. O’Reilly has never described himself as a conservative. I’ll second that. He’s not. But even if he had after coming out in favor of “immigration reform” he could no longer wear that moniker.

His claim is that if Republicans don’t line up behind the RINOs (my words, not his) and support the bill, all will be lost and Hillary Clinton will waltz into the White House in 2016. Of course he mentioned nothing of the importance of the 2014 midterms.

His lecture was in response to an e-mail from one of his viewers who was against the bill and said that Congress should make no concessions. In effect they must reject the entire bill.

Well bully for you Nettie the e-mailer. I agree 100%. Bill did not agree. He said: “When Hillary Clinton is elected president in 2016, will you say the same thing, Nettie? Because that’s what’s gonna happen if the GOP does not begin to put forth smart solutions to the country’s problems.”

Well Mr. O’Reilly, I read the bill, or at least the long-winded summary and there’s not a single “smart solution” in it. Feel free to review my critique here.

At this point, as often happens, O’Reilly got on a roll. E-mailer Jim was his next victim. Foolish Jim had the temerity to suggest we merely adhere to and enforce current laws. Bill’s rebuttal: “So that means federal agents will begin forcibly rounding up millions of illegal people, entering their homes and removing men, women, and children, taking them to holding pens, where they will be awaiting deportation. Is that your vision, Jim? Because that’s what enforcing existing laws would mean.”

What an absurd statement Mr. O’Reilly. You just stated that if the government doesn’t care for a law or set of laws they just don’t have to enforce some. That is what you said, correct? Does that apply to us, or just the government? How ridiculous!

Of course now that I think of it, that’s what many administrations have done, the current being one of the worst offenders.

Whatever happened to the law is the law? There are many antidiscrimination laws on the books. If an employer won’t hire someone because he’s black or fire him for the same reason, would you be okay with that Bill? After all, the employer disagrees with the current law so why follow it.

As an aside, I would agree with the employer. It’s his business. He should be able to hire and fire whom he wants for whatever the reason.

But I’m sure Mr. O’Reilly meant that because current immigration law is “mean” it shouldn’t be enforced. I guess it’s all about being nice to the people that snuck into our country illegally.

No, actually it’s only about winning the next election. The ruination of America will be worth it to keep Hillary out of the White House.

Mr. O’Reilly, you and every other wrong thinking middle-of-the-roader will surely lose us the next election with cowardly acts like passing this bill.

O’Reilly stated: “For years I’ve called for a more secure southern border, you know that. And now it looks like the secure border is in reach. At least somewhat. So I hope this bill does become law.”

Has anyone actually read this bill? I reiterate, I’ve read what I needed of the bill and there is no more security in it! And how do you have somewhat of a secure border? Is that like being kind of pregnant?

It really sounds to me as if Republicans are so terrified of this issue they will pretend to see something that isn’t there.

And as I’ve stated before, we will not receive any more Hispanic votes due to its passage. In fact, if history repeats, as often happens, we’ll get less.

In 1980 Republicans received 38% of the Hispanic vote. In 1984 it was 37%. 1986 brought us mass amnesty. In 1988 Republicans garnered only 30% and in 1992 it was down to 29%. What a winning strategy and Bill wants a repeat.

Someone explain to me how the outcome will differ from post 1986, because I don’t see it. Putting aside the reality of the logistical and financial nightmare, politically, it’s suicide and like Jack Kevorkian, Bill is ready to assist.

I Read the Bill…Well, Not Quite

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

I had a goal this past weekend. It was rather ambitious but one I thought I could tackle. It was to read the Immigration Bill, but after finding a copy online, I quickly discovered if I wanted to not have my eyes bleed or head explode I’d better develop a new tact.

I also concluded that due to the bills length, 1274 pages, there isn’t a government official, elected or otherwise that know what is in this monstrosity.

As a matter of fact, a member of Congress, representative John Carter (R-TX) admitted just that last Friday. He said: “there are things in the bill that I don’t know what they mean because I’m not an immigration lawyer.”

As a matter of principle, all these politicians should be thrown out on their derrières for not reading these bills or understanding them, yet still voting for them. The sad truth is that most of them simply don’t care.

Back to it. So back online I went and found a summary of the bill. The summary was 72 pages, 4803 sections!

I knew early on I would not get through the whole document. Frankly I wanted to prove to others and myself wrong; that the bill wasn’t as bad as I had heard.

I was wrong. It’s worse and I only made it to section 2551 out of 4803.

Here are some of the gems I found. Some you may have already heard, some not. Due to the language, I will paraphrase. My comments will be italicized.

Section 3: No one will be granted RPI (Registered Provisional Immigrant) status until Big Sis (Sec. Napolitano) submits a border security plan to Congress.

So nothing actually has to be done – just a plan submitted. Rubio already admitted that.

Section 4: If after five years high risk border sectors haven’t been controlled, a “Southern Border Security Commission” will be established.

After five years? Oh, and the commissioners are appointed by Obama (or the next president), Reid and Boehner. Terrific! I feel safer.

Section 1105:… The secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture must conduct an environmental impact study of security activities.

That way they can provide cover for Big Sis to shut down border security due to environmental concerns.

Section 1107: DHS will provide sat phones (satellite phones) to those in high-risk rural areas without cell service.

For what? Who will they call? Some law enforcement entity that couldn’t get to them in time to do anything? And if they tried to defend themselves they would probably be charged with a hate crime.

Section 2101: an alien granted RPI status may be issued a Social Security card.

Is it just me, but aren’t Social Security cards reserved for American citizens only? This section states that they receive the card so that they may enlist in the armed services. It does not specify any other purpose. Use your imagination; they will.

Observation: while reading this summary, I noticed throughout the bill, the “Secretary” has a lot of discretion to do things or not, to change things or not and to waive requirements as she sees fit. I thought it interesting.

Section 2104: if an aliens RPI application is denied (not that it ever would be) they can appeal the decision in US District Court or an appellate court.

That won’t clog up and already overburdened court system much.

Section 2106 you have probably heard. DHS doles out millions of dollars to liberal nonprofits like La Raza to teach aliens English, the Constitution and American history (and register them as Democrats). What you may not have heard is the same program is repeated in section 2535 under a different program name.

The newly named “Office of Citizenship and New Americans” heads it up.

Section 2232 allows the feds to tell the agricultural industry how much they must pay their workers and the USDA Secretary is charged with forcing annual pay raises between 1.5 and 2.5% per year – regardless of the economy.

At this point I started running out of gas, but I couldn’t resist this one last gem.

Section 2551: waiver of English requirement for senior “new Americans”. If you’re over 60 and have lived in the US for 10 years or more – you don’t have to learn English.

10 years and they can’t speak our language? That’s an immigrant that will really help our economy. I also noticed about halfway in, the word “alien” disappeared and was replaced with “new Americans”.

Well that’s about as much as I could stand. Just know that these examples were just a fraction of what is wrong with this bill. This Bill from front to back is a disaster, chock-full of benefits and no enforcement. Don’t be fooled by any of the rhetoric!

Left Wing Writer Opposes Immigration Bill

While the U.S. Senate easily passed the immigration bill Thursday, the measure is expected to encounter resistance from GOP House members before it ever lands on President Obama’s desk in the Oval Office.

The battle shaping up looks to be fierce. But in the midst of this political fight is one voice you just don’t hear that much about:

A liberal encouraging other liberals to oppose the immigration bill.

He’s not an elected official, but a writer for the left-leaning New Republic magazine.

And T.A. Frank knows his article, Why Liberals Should Oppose the Immigration Bill: It’s about low-wage American workers, won’t garner him kudos from his political tribe:

The consensus among decent people in favor of the immigration bill making its way through Congress is so firm that expressing dissent feels a bit like taking the floor to suggest we chop down the Redwood National Park. People don’t want to hear it, and they also think you’re a nut. That makes this article one of the hardest I’ve ever had to write. It’s not that I’m afraid people will get angry; it’s that I can’t imagine anyone on my side (liberal) is open to persuasion.

Frank’s objection to the immigration bill has its roots in future concerns:

Continue Reading

Illegals Will Pay Their Fair Share

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

Boy would I like to speak about something other than immigration, but it is the hot topic and it’s one of my major hot button issues. My friends don’t bring it up any longer for fear of… “Don’t get him started” 

It just really angers me that so many are feeding us such crap and asking us to believe them and trust that they will do the right thing for our country.

Take the whole “learning English” lie. All the advocates including Ryan and Rubio say learning the English language will be a requirement toward the “pathway to citizenship”. That’s a lie and they must know it.

First, it’s already part of current immigration policy and we see how well it’s being followed now. Second, they say illegals must demonstrate their knowledge of English. What will they have to do to accomplish this? Will they have to master the English language? Will they just have to demonstrate a rudimentary understanding of our language? Nope. They merely have to sign up for class. Check that. They merely have to claim that they signed up. No one is going to check.

Well, the illegals will still have to pay a fine. So how much is the fine? It must be punitive, right? Well according to the conservative sage Karl Rove, the fine will be a whopping $1000, payable over six years or about $14 a month. Whoa, step back!

If I recall, didn’t Rubio say we would build the border fence with all that fine money rolling in? 14 bucks would go a long way toward that.

But wait, as if that punitive fine wasn’t enough punishment, the illegals will have to pay back taxes. Now we’re talkin. After a decade or more “in the shadows” they’ll have to pay what we are owed. And who better to determine what they owe than the IRS.

Well, the illegals will have to pay what the IRS assesses they must according to the “Internal Revenue Code”, unless of course they just happened to be paid under the table or using a fake or stolen Social Security number. If that’s the case the IRS can’t assess or determine what they owe so I guess they just won’t have to pay anything. But remember, they still have to pay that huge fine hanging over them.

I wonder if they’ll be able to use their new EBT (food stamp) card to pay the fine? Just asking.

But despite all the nonsense, they will at least have to go to the back of the line behind those who played by the rules. Boy, I’ll bet those law-abiding rubes feel pretty foolish, eh?

Well, as Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly said, how long will it be before camera shy Chucky Schumer holds a presser pleading for the poor illegals, that in good faith came “out of the shadows” just to be saddled with debt and thrust to the back of the bus? It’s just not fair that these poor immigrants should be treated this way. They should be granted citizenship immediately.

I guarantee that speech had been written long ago, sitting in his desk, just waiting for the opportunity to trot it out. I would bet he’d be out in not more than 24 to 48 hours after the bill was signed into law.

Maybe it’s high time the liars are brought out of the shadows and into the light.

Marco’s Feelin the Heat

by: Matt K. Lewis of the The Daily Caller

with comments by yours truly [ ]

Sen. Marco Rubio took to the floor of the U.S. Senate Wednesday afternoon, to address concerns that have arisen from some grassroots conservatives over his support of immigration reform.

[ Concerns?! How about betrayal. And he not only supports it, he appears to be the head betrayer.]

“I have received numerous emails and calls from conservatives and tea party activists,” he said at the beginning of his remarks.

[ From what Ted Cruz has said, the senate phone lines have been on fire. Senate aids are apparently getting a bit tired of fielding the less than complimentary calls]

“To hear the worry, anxiety, and growing anger in the voices of so many people who helped me get elected to the Senate, who I agree with on virtually every other issue, has been a real trial for me,” he confessed.

[ Evidently it is not enough to sway you to change your position. Those who supported you understand that this is truly a game changer. If this gets pushed through, nothing else will matter. We can’t believe you don’t see it]

But he said he told them that he would go to Washington to “fight to stop what is bad for America,” and that what we have now is, in fact, hurting America. ”I simply wasn’t going to leave it to Democrats alone to try to figure out how to fix it.”

[ That’s what we thought you would do, fight for us and the Constitution. And name one thing the “Government” has ever fixed, democrat or republican?]

“I got involved because I knew that if conservatives didn’t get involved in shaping this legislation, it would not have any border security reforms our nation desperately needs,” Rubio said.

[ Well, I’ll be kind and won’t call that a lie, but it sure isn’t the truth. There is no security, but there are hollow promises of maybe some security sometime…maybe]

Rubio asked tea party conservatives who are upset to understand that he honestly believes “it is the right thing for our country.”

[ If  that is truly what he believes than he has been lost to the dark side. That or he never was anything but a slick talker. I don’t know which and frankly I don’t care]

And he assured them he would continue to fight along side them for “real tax reform, lowering the debt, balancing our budget, reducing regulations, rolling back job-killing environmental policies and repealing the disaster of Obamacare,” and to defend “the sanctity of life and traditional marriage.”

[ Senator Rubio…the bottom line is that none of  those other things will matter at all if we allow, by some updated estimates, upwards of 40 million illegals to become legalized. Our already fragile economy will be overwhelmed (Cloward and Piven) and the country we knew will be unrecognizable in as little as 5 years, give or take. I’m stunned you don’t see it. Or worse, maybe you do]

 

Napolitano – The Doorman for Illegal Invasion

 

Another 1200 page Senate bill is coming up for a vote. This time it is the Gang of Eight “Immigration Reform” bill. And, once again, none of the Senators has read the bill in its entirety. The bill has morphed through so many crony-capitalist additions and changes that it would make the frequency of Nancy Pelosi’s face lifts look minimal. Key among the recent changes was that the requirement for border security first, was demoted to second place in importance and, finally, jettisoned altogether. Border security is, in fact, being actively been campaigned against.

The latest amendment originates from Republican Senators Bob Corker (TN) and John Hoeven (ND). In a despicable stab at marking their territory Republicans made a flagrant push to outdo Democrats, despite their constituency’s majority wishes. The Corker-Hoeven amendment opens the floodgates of America’s borders and ushers invaders in. Worse, it forever buries security considerations. A fence building plan is required but Big Sis can nix building the fence at will.

According to Breitbart, the Corker-Hoeven bill introduced a “border surge amendment.” On page 35, line 24 of the new bill “… a provision was inserted that says Napolitano–who already believes the border is secure–can decide against building a fence if she chooses not to erect one…” Big Sis and those that follow her would now have the authority to deny a border security fence…she gets to decide whether or not it is a good use of resources.

Continue Reading