Current Weather

Cecil Calvert’s Google Search

Custom Search

Today In History

April 2014
M T W T F S S
« Mar    
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

Past Posts and Articles

Cecil's Tweets

Help Save Maryland – Action Alert – Thursday Feb 27, 1pm Hearing in Annapolis

Help Save Maryland – Action Alert – Thursday Feb 27, 1pm Hearing in Annapolis

ACTION ALERT! – SAVE THE DATE – HEARING IN ANNAPOLIS ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 1PM, SENATE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE 

 

SO-CALLED “MARYLAND LAW ENFORCEMENT TRUST ACT”  SB 554

 

 

BILL IS SPONSORED STATE SENATOR VICTOR “YES I’M LEGAL” RAMIREZ (D-PG COUNTY AND EL SALVADOR), WHO I BELIEVE MUST BE WORKING FOR CASA OF MARYLAND.  HE CERTAINLY DOES NOT WORK FOR HIS BLACK AMERICAN CONSTITUENTS IN PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY.  ALL VICTOR EVER DOES IN ANNAPOLIS IS SPONSOR GOODIES FOR CASA’S ILLEGAL ALIEN CLIENTELE:

 

 IN-STATE COLLEGE TUITION, DRIVERS’ LICENSES, FUNDING FOR CASA. 

 

NOW VICTOR AND THE USUAL SUSPECTS IN ANNAPOLIS WANT TO TELL THE FEDERAL IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT AGENCY (ICE) TO STAY OUT OF MARYLAND! 

THEY WANT MARYLAND TO BE LIKE CHICAGO AND CALIFORNIA IN NOT RESPECTING “DETAINERS” (REQUESTS BY ICE TO HOLD ILLEGALS FOR 48 HOURS SO THEY CAN BE PICKED UP AND DEPORTED).   

 

IT’S JUST NOT FAIR TO THE ILLEGALS TO HAVE THE FEDS COME TAKE THEM AWAY.   SO VICTOR AND HIS ANNAPOLIS POSSE, WITH HELP FROM DELEGATE ANA SOL GUTIERREZ (D-MONTGOMERY COUNTY) SPONSOR OF THE HOUSE VERSION HB 29, ARE TRYING TO RAM THOUGH THIS LAWLESS BILL.

 

SEE    http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frmMain.aspx?id=sb0554&stab=01&pid=billpage&tab=subject3&ys=2014RS

 

 

WE NEED TO BE IN ANNAPOLIS ON FEBRUARY 27, SENATE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS COMMITTEE, 1PM (ARRIVE AT 12 NOON)  TO TESTIFY AGAINST THIS BILL. 

 

 

**NEED ASSISTANCE ON HOW TO PREPARE TESTIMONY?  ARRIVE AND PARK IN ANNAPOLIS?  WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU ARRIVE?  SEE THE ARTICLE LINK BELOW PREPARED BY ANN MILLER OF BALTIMORE COUNTY EXAMINER.  ITS EXCELLENT.

 

 http://www.examiner.com/article/politics-101-the-logistics-of-testifying-on-bills-Annapolis

 

 

 

**NEED IDEAS FOR YOUR TESTIMONY?  SEE ATTACHED DOCUMENT PREPARED BY THE FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM (FAIR).  ITS ABOUT HB 29, THE SISTER BILL OF SB 554, SO THE POINTS ARE THE SAME.  MAKE SURE HOWEVER YOU MENTION “SB 554″ IN YOUR THURSDAY STATEMENT.

 

 

 

LET’S STOP THE LAWLESSNESS AND CRIME IN MARYLAND.  LET’S TELL OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS WHAT WE THINK OF THEIR PROPOSED LEGISLATION. 

 

THERE ARE NOT ONE SET OF RULES FOR HISPANIC ILLEGAL ALIENS AND ANOTHER FOR MARYLAND CITIZENS.  CALIFORNIA IS BEING OVERWHELMED FINANCIALLY AND CULTURALLY BY A TIDAL WAVE OF ILLEGAL ALIENS.  LET’S NOT LET THAT HAPPEN TO MARYLAND.

 

OH, I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT LAME (DUCK) GOVERNOR AND PRESIDENTIAL HOPEFUL (YES I AM LAUGHING) MARTIN O’MALLEY AND HIS LT GOVERNOR ANTHONY BROWN (CANDIDATE FOR GOVERNOR) SUPPORT THIS LEGISLATION AS WELL. 

 

O’MALLEY EVEN WROTE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ASKING WHY ICE IS TAKING AWAY HIS ILLEGAL ALIEN “NEW AMERICANS”!

 

SEE     http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1017391-letter-from-gov-to-dhs-re-secure-communities.html#docu

 

 

 

CAN’T MAKE IT TO ANNAPOLIS THURSDAY?  HERE ARE THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS YOU SHOULD SEND E-MAIL REGARDING SB 554

 

Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee

 

brian.frosh@senate.state.md.us

lisa.gladden@senate.state.md.us

jim.brochin@senate.state.md.us

jennie.forehand@senate.state.md.us

steve.hershey@senate.state.md.us

nancy.jacobs@senate.state.md.us

anthony.muse@senate.state.md.us

jamie.raskin@senate.state.md.us

christopher.shank@senate.state.md.us

norman.stone@senate.state.md.us

bobby.zirkin@senate.state.md.us

 

 

 

 

 

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS PLEASE CONTACT BRAD BOTWIN, DIRECTOR HELP SAVE MARYLAND   240-447-1884240-447-1884   BB67CHEV@AOL.COM 

 

SEE YOU IN ANNAPOLIS ON THURSDAY!   I WILL BE HANDING OUT “NO CASA OF MARYLAND” STICKERS

 

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

 

 

Did I move?

By Ann Coulter, Feb. 12, 2014    www.townhall.com

 

With all the smirking on the left about their electoral victories, it’s important to remember that Democrats haven’t won the hearts and minds of the American people. They changed the people. If you pour vinegar into a bottle of wine, the wine didn’t turn, you poured vinegar into it. Similarly, liberals changed no minds. They added millions of new liberal voters through immigration.

So why are Republicans like Trey Gowdy, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan and John Boehner making fools of themselves in order to spot the Democrats three more touchdowns?

The House Republicans’ “Standards for Immigration Reform,” for example, contains this fat, honking nonsense: “One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents.”

As the kids say: WTF?

That may be a pleasant-sounding sentiment, but it has absolutely nothing to do with our country’s history. Not the first thing. Did Republicans really think they could pawn off the idea that our forefathers fought and died at Valley Forge so that illegal aliens wouldn’t have to live in the shadows?

Yeah, it was a long shot. We didn’t know you guys had read the Constitution. We’ll be quiet now.

Apart from the fact that protecting children from the mistakes of their parents has not the slightest connection with the nation’s founding, it’s a ridiculous concept.

Yes, children suffer when their parents break the law. Also when their parents get divorced, become alcoholics, don’t read to them at night, feed them junk food and take them to Justin Bieber concerts. None of that is the child’s fault.

But it’s not the country’s fault either.

If we have to excuse lawbreaking so as not to “punish the children,” there’s no end to the crimes that have to be forgiven — insider trading, theft, rape, murder and so on.

How do you think kids feel when their father has to “live in the shadows” because he committed a rape? The kids did nothing wrong, but they have to go to bed every night wondering: Is tomorrow the day Dad is going to be caught?

How do you function like that? And how awful it must be when their dad is sent to prison! How do you think Jack Abramoff’s kids felt? What about Martha Stewart’s kid?

Why not just forgive the crimes of all perpetrators who have kids? At a minimum, shouldn’t we allow criminals to defer their sentences until their kids turn 26 so they can stay on Dad’s health insurance? Or at least until their kids have gone to college? Chris Christie can give them in-state tuition!

“It’s not the kids’ fault” proves too much. People can get away with anything if they’re willing to use their children as trump cards to avoid the force of law.

The once-respected Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., compared illegal aliens brought here as kids to children who steal a grape or scream in a restaurant:

“When children wander into neighborhood yards, we don’t call that trespassing. When children cry and yell and scream at restaurants or on airplanes, we don’t call that a violation of the noise ordinance. When children eat a grape at the grocery store or eat a piece of candy waiting in line before Mom or Dad pays for it, we don’t have them arrested for petty larceny.”

Yes, but in those cases, both the child and his parents had a right to be where they were — the yard, restaurant or grocery store — when the child suddenly behaved like a child. With illegal aliens, the parents are more like gypsies teaching their kids to beg and pick pockets. The parents forced the kids into being lawbreakers.

Similarly, Palestinians use their children to commit acts of terrorism against Israel, so that when Israel responds, the parents can wail, “They’re bombing children!”  (I thought only liberals couldn’t do analogies)

Americans are under no moral obligation to admit huge numbers of people who have no particular right to be here just because the Democrats need 30 million new voters.

Why shouldn’t Republicans oppose mass immigration on the grounds that immigrants will vote Democratic? The only reason the Democrats want mass immigration is because they know immigrants will vote Democratic. (Also for the cheap nannies and gardeners)

Immigration is the “single issue” that decides every other issue. If this country were the same demographically today as it was in 1980, Romney would have won a bigger victory in 2012 than Reagan did against Carter. And we wouldn’t have to hear about soccer all the time.

We’re living in a different country now, and I can’t recall moving! Had I wanted to live in Japan, I could have moved there. Had I had wanted to live in Mexico, Pakistan or Chechnya — I could have moved to those places, too.  (Although maybe not. They all have stricter immigration policies than we do.)

I’m sure they’re lovely, but I wanted to live in America. Now I can’t. At the current rate of immigration, it won’t exist anymore. The Democrats couldn’t win elections there, so they changed it.

With the repeal of Obamacare in the balance, I have argued that it’s insane for Republicans to waste resources primarying their own guys in 2014. Even the most heinous Republican can usually argue, “Would you really rather have a Democrat in this seat?”

But any Republican who supports mass immigration — whether with Marco Rubio’s amnesty bill, or idiotic arguments about “not punishing the children” — has forfeited that claim. If the country is going to be ruined anyway, it could not matter less who wins any particular seat on this Titanic.

Help Save Maryland – CNN and Boehner- Expect It -But CASA’s Torres is Priceless!

 CNN NEWS IN ACTION!  HOW DESPERATE ARE THEY?

 

 

Americans overwhelmingly favor a bill that would give most undocumented immigrants a pathway towards citizenship, according to a new national poll.

 

 (54% SOMEHOW EQUALS OVERWHELMINGLY FAVORS????)
The CNN/ORC International survey also indicates that a majority of the public says that the government’s main focus should be on legalizing the status of the undocumented rather than on deporting them and beefing up border security.

The poll was released Thursday, the same day that House Speaker John Boehner signaled any action on immigration is unlikely this year (BUT HIS HOPES ARE HIGH FOR THE SPRING!) because House Republicans don’t trust President Barack Obama on the issue.

 

 

 MORE CNN NEWS    YET ANOTHER PROBLEM WITH THE FACTS

 

The percentage of Americans who rate current economic conditions as good now stands at its highest level in six years, according to a new CNN/ORC International survey.  (SOUNDS GOOD RIGHT?)

Thirty-six percent of those questioned rate the current economic conditions favorably. That’s up four percentage points from December and is the highest level since January 2008.

Sixty-four percent continue to say the economy is in poor shape.  (MUST NOT FORGET TO REPORT THIS!)

 

 

I DON’T BELIEVE THE HOUSE (OR CNN)

 

 

 The House GOP leadership is claiming to be reversing the push for House amnesty legislation because YOU are demanding the House GOP stop the push for amnesty legislation.  

 

House GOP cannot be trusted on the topic of amnesty legislation as reports claim GOP leaders continue to promote amnesty principles. 

 

 

 

 

 

 KEEP CALLING! 

Speaker John Boehner (202) 225-0600   

Majority Leader Eric Cantor (202) 225-2815  

Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (202) 225-2915
VISIT SPEAKER BOEHNER’S WEBSITE WHERE THE GOP HOUSE AMNESTY PLAN IS POSTED AND LEAVE A COMMENT:

http://www.speaker.gov/general/draft-standards-step-by-step-immigration-reform

 

Immigration will kill GOP, but only if it goes along with amnesty

By Charles Hurt, Tuesday, February 4, 2014  Washington Times

Immigration as a top concern for American voters polls somewhere around 2 or 3 percent, according to the latest Gallup survey. That is right down there with “lack of respect for each other” and “hunger.”

And remember, a good portion of that 2 or 3 percent who consider immigration their most pressing issue do so because they want the federal government to simply do its job and enforce its own immigration laws and protect the borders.

So, why is it that Republican leaders in Washington have suddenly thrust immigration into the spotlight and made it the most pressing issue in the land?

Even more alarming, why have these Republican leaders suddenly become seized with the illegal desire to make an illegal grand bargain with Democrats in Congress to grant illegal amnesty to some 12 million illegal aliens residing illegally in our country right now? (Notice a theme here?)

With the war on terrorism winding down and the “war on women” over, has the GOP launched a war on Republicans? So it would seem.

Republican leaders in Congress would have you believe that if they do not embrace amnesty for all these millions of illegal aliens, then the only (slightly) sane political party left in America will be washed away. It will be overcome by waves and waves of new Hispanic voters who shun the xenophobic and glaringly white Republican Party. The Grand Old Party will become the Extinct Old Party.

Such are the scary, noxious potions that Republican strategists, pollsters and demographers have been whipping up for years. Then they make gazillions of dollars by unveiling them to party leaders in private and scaring the living hell out of them.

 

They are the global warmists of the Republican Party.

And, just like with the global warmists, it all comes down to power. These people would rather maintain their grip on a shattered party than lose control of an ascendant party. And, of course, scaring the crap out of people is a very good way to make lots and lots of money. Just ask Albert Gore Jr.

If the Republican Party really is headed over a cliff to certain annihilation, why does it appear set to continue picking up seats in the U.S. Senate this year? And why is it that the Republicans whom voters have been sending to the Senate in recent years have become increasingly conservative?

If the party is on the precipice of doom, why are so many veteran Democratic lawmakers, including some of Nancy Pelosi’s most trusted lieutenants, bailing from Congress? Is it because they think they are poised to resume the committee chairmanships that took them decades to earn in the first place?

No.

The sad truth is that Democratic voters are ably represented by their party’s leaders in Washington. Large corporations hungry for cheap labor are brilliantly represented by Republican leaders. Hell, even the illegal aliens who are not allowed to vote are amply represented in Washington — by both parties.

The only suckers who don’t have a seat at the table are the American people, the taxpayers and workers.

Workers are doubly cheated because their union leaders long ago abandoned them to get into bed with the Democratic Party and now Republican leaders want to get into bed with the Democrats to grant amnesty to 12 million illegal competitors.

So, while the issue of immigration falls far, far behind truly urgent issues such as jobs, the economy, gas prices and how Obamacare is screwing everybody over, there is a way to reverse it.

If Republican leaders go along with Democrats to pass this crazy amnesty plan, the issue of immigration will quickly become one of the most urgent issues in the country, especially among Republican voters.

And then it really will become the Extinct Old Party.

Charles Hurt can be reached at charleshurt@live.com and @charleshurt
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/4/hurt-immigration-will-kill-gop-but-only-if-it-goes/#ixzz2sbG5Y5Uq
THIS IS WHAT AMNESTY GETS US -  GUSTAVO TORRES OF CASA OF MARYLAND – THIS CHUMP REALLY THINKS HE IS THE SECOND COMING OF CHE GUEVARA!  LOL

For Latinos, It’s an Economic Imperative

 

Gustavo Torres is the executive director of CASA de Maryland, a community organization that works with low-income Latinos and their families.

Updated January 5, 2014, 6:30 PM  NEW YORK TIMES

 

As Nelson Mandela once said: “Like slavery and apartheid, poverty is not natural. It is man-made and it can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings.” And yes, today more than ever the United States needs another war on poverty; indeed, we need to eradicate poverty, and immigration reform and an increase in the minimum wage are steps in the right direction.

The fight for comprehensive immigration reform, in addition to bringing respect and dignity for Latinos, is primarily an antipoverty policy.

For Latinos especially, the struggle against poverty is an economic imperative. This fight is not an easy one. Hence, community actions carried out by families every day are becoming more intense and radicalized. Some of the peaceful methods chosen by the Latino and immigrant movement include strikes, civil disobedience, rallies and fasting.

 

It is worth learning from the experience of South Americans in their war against poverty in the midst of democracy. Brazil, with its “Zero Hunger” program, is the most extraordinary example. Brazilians have managed to move 40 million people out of poverty into the middle class in the last 10 years. The same experience is occurring in Ecuador, Uruguay and Venezuela.

 

The fight for comprehensive immigration reform, in addition to bringing respect and dignity for Latinos — which is no small thing — is primarily an antipoverty policy. A study by the University of California, Los Angeles, found that legalized immigrants earn higher salaries, obtain better jobs, start businesses and buy houses. Projecting forward, the study found that immigration reform “will add $1.5 trillion to the gross domestic product over 10 years”. More specifically, the report found that “immigrant workers would have full labor rights, which would result in higher wages — and greater worker productivity — for all workers in industries where large numbers of immigrants are employed.” That’s not a takers’ approach!

 

Last month in the Washington metropolitan area we made history. The minimum wage will increase gradually starting in 2014 until it reaches $11.50 by 2017. About 2.5 million people will benefit with this development. We must work to mobilize and energize the Latino community to see the same policies implemented around the nation.

 

Finally, investment in health and education as an effective antipoverty tool for future generations is essential. Investment in early child education is critical to remove Latinos from poverty and discrimination.

But it’s true, “poverty can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings,” and we will make it happen.

Website is currently being reconfigured

I apologize for the mess right now, but I am currently changing the theme to my website due to a glitch with my previous theme.  Please bear with me as I update the site for your further reading pleasures.

 

Jeff

Help Save Maryland – Early Xmas Gift for Illegals in Maryland

Early Xmas Gift for Illegals in Maryland

 

What a wonderful sight when I entered the Metro Rail station Monday morning on my way to work in DC.  A large color advertisement on the wall, in Spanish of course, calling out to “Immigrants” that they are now eligible to obtain Drivers’ Licenses in Maryland.  These expensive ads, being paid for by the Maryland’s Motor Vehicle Administration (actually MD taxpayers) are part of a series of advertisements to spread the word to all Maryland’s illegal immigrants hiding in the shadows that its time to get your drivers’ license.  

 

I’m willing to wager that CASA of Maryland received a grant from the Maryland MVA to educate/train Hispanic illegals about the opportunity to get a license.

 

No more public transportation to work, now illegals can drive to their place of employment.  Forget the fact that these same illegal immigrants should not be working in Maryland as they do not have legal presence in the United States and can be rightly deported.    But that did not stop the Maryland legislature or Governor O’Malley/Lt Governor Brown from passing this unnecessary law.

 

It is bad enough that we are subjected to alternating English/Spanish announcements in the Metro Rail system — I can’t wait for a real emergency when the vast majority of riders must wait to hear emergency instruments from Metro in English AFTER the Spanish emergency instructions finish their cycle.  Now we will have to share the roads with non-English speaking/reading, mostly Hispanic illegal immigrants. 

 

Shame on concerned Maryland citizens and our conservative leaders for not implementing a petition drive to bring the issue of Drivers’ Licenses for Hispanic and other illegal immigrants to a referendum and a vote by all Maryland citizens in November 2014

 

Will the O’Malley/Brown dynamic duo push next for Spanish signage on all our roadways to accommodate the illegal immigrant community?  Stay tuned!

 

 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

 

 

“Resisting Immigration Reform” 

  

Identity politics rejects ending illegal immigration and reforming legal immigration.

By Victor Davis Hanson

                       

We are fast approaching what promises to be the year of “comprehensive immigration reform.” In the manner of the “Affordable Care Act,” it will not be comprehensive nor will it reform immigration.

 

All sorts of new trends have emerged in the American Southwest to address the fact that federal immigration law does not really apply to those who arrived here illegally from Mexico or Latin America. In-state tuition discounts at public universities are now customarily extended to those without citizenship — in effect, privileging the foreign national over the U.S.-citizen student from out of state who helps subsidize the cost. Cities establish sanctuary zones that protect illegal immigrants from the enforcement of federal immigration laws — and the taxpayer picks up the additional tab in social services. Imagine what might happen should a city declare in similar fashion that it was exempt from enforcing federal gun-control laws.

 

Another trend is the effort to end penalties for past use of multiple Social Security numbers. Many who crossed the border illegally adopted various — and thus fraudulent — identities and acquired numerous Social Security numbers. When they later obtained green cards or citizenship, their poly-personas were found out. But isn’t it discriminatory to count such illegal behavior against the job applicant, if such criteria apply disproportionately to a particular ethnic group?

 

In other words, there is an effort to make the idea of immigration law per se mostly irrelevant, and instead to focus only on the immigrant in terms of his ethnic makeup and place of origin. Otherwise, who would oppose simply closing the border? Many Latinos, of course, would object should Kenyans, Slovakians, and Koreans be coming by boat by the thousands and landing illegally on the coast near San Diego. Like other Americans, they would probably demand enforcement of common-sense federal immigration law.

 

If the present political conundrum were not about identity but only about the issue of immigration per se, then compromise would be rather easy. For example, in regard to the several million foreign nationals estimated to be residing in the U.S. illegally, but without arrest records, not on public assistance, and with a record of residence going back several years, many Americans would be willing to offer some sort of path to citizenship that would entail paying a fine, demonstrating English proficiency, and passing a basic citizenship test — while in the meantime allowing the applicant provisional legal residence on a green card.

 

Unfortunately, open-borders advocates would object to the idea that the borders should be closed and thus illegal immigration from Latin America and Mexico, as we have known it, should essentially end. Especially bothersome would be establishing criteria to determine whether those who broke the law to enter the U.S. at least have not arrived only recently on rumors of amnesty, have been able to avoid arrest, and have worked steadily and not gone on public assistance.

 

Who would oppose deportation for those who did not meet such reasonable requisites? After all, would any country in the world allow foreign nationals to cross illegally into its territory, commit crimes, draw public assistance — and then be rewarded with citizenship?

 

If there were good-faith efforts to reform legal immigration, again compromise would be easy. We would simply establish criteria that would privilege those with educational degrees and skill sets, make completely crime-free backgrounds mandatory, and ignore ethnic and racial makeup. Yet in the topsy-turvy world we live in today, such reasonable criteria would be anathema to the open-borders lobby, which will fight ferociously against the idea that conviction for a crime or public dependency should be grounds for not extending amnesties to those who came illegally and broke laws to remain in the United States. This, after all, might result not, as is the case at present, in the vast majority of new immigrants coming from Latin America and Mexico but, instead, in classically liberal fashion, in a true diversity of immigrants from Asia, Africa, and Europe as well as our own hemisphere.

 

If the illegal-immigration debate is not just about providing amnesty for long-residing aliens who, after once breaking immigration law, have avoided arrest and who have been gainfully employed, and if the legal-immigration controversy is not about establishing meritocratic criteria that would promote diversity and ignore race and ethnicity, then what drives the current acrimony?

 

Identity politics. The crux of present-day immigration, both legal and illegal, is the agenda of demography and politics. In crude terms, that translates into absorbing a large pool of mostly liberal future voters who look to government to provide themselves some sort of rough parity with their hosts. If someone comes from Oaxaca to Fresno without English, a diploma, and legality, then soon in his life a government program will have to offer him some sort of assistance, whether for legal advice, food, housing, education, or health care.

 

More important, a vast cadre of Spanish-speaking citizens is needed to serve the illegal-immigrant community, whether as translators in emergency rooms or to facilitate licensing at the DMV. They too are invested in expansions of state and federal government — as are left-wing politicians.

 

The only hindrances to rapid assimilation of Mexican and Latin American nationals are numbers and illegality. When, just a half-century ago, immigration was measured and largely legal, Latinos were following roughly the Italian-American paradigm of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Had illegal immigrants not flooded into the United States in the last 30 years, the so-called Hispanic community would by now be largely amorphous and mostly assimilated, integrated, intermarried, and English-speaking.

 

After 50 years, La Raza would have resonated as much as Italian Studies now does. A politician with the name Lopez would have been as hard to peg politically as one named Arpaio, Ferraro, Cuomo, or Giuliani — given that ethnicity would have become largely irrelevant to political outlook. Long ago, affirmative action for third- and fourth-generation Latinos would have been seen to be as ridiculous as providing such an edge to Italian-, Punjabi-, or Arab-Americans.

 

In contrast, massive yearly illegal immigration has ensured that assimilation has been protracted. Only the steady insertion of millions of impoverished Mexican and Latin American nationals into the so-called Latino community could ensure that, as a whole, the group did not reach educational and economic levels commensurate with other communities. The result is another paradox, as middle-class people with Hispanic last names piggybacked on statistics that mostly reflected the ordeal of illegal immigrants, and thus found enhanced opportunities for government employment and college admissions.

 

In short, the point is not to envision the problem as a 30-year aberration but to find ingenious ways to make the traditional border irrelevant and to ensure a steady stream of Latin American and Mexican immigrants, whose presence, at least in theory and in the short term, serves the Democratic party, liberal elites, and the ethnic industry.

 

The result is bitter irony. Homogeneity, not diversity, is the aim of amnesty advocates. In illiberal fashion, racial and ethnic identification are to be essential, not incidental, to immigrant identities. Elites, both in the United States and in Mexico, are the prime beneficiaries of the influx of the abject poor from south of the border.

 

There is a final paradox.

 

The subtext of the movement toward blanket amnesty is that Mexico has failed millions of its own citizens — most recently, indigenous peoples without the influence and advantages of the Mexico City elite. In response, the illegal immigrant votes with his feet de facto to reject the culture and protocols of Mexico and to accept their antitheses in the United States.

 

Such a radical gamble is not just for the sake of economic opportunity. America, after all, still struggles with persistently high unemployment. Rather, the unmentioned catalyst is dignity — the fact that an impoverished resident of central Mexico is not treated equally under Mexican law and battles a veritable caste system in which upward mobility is nearly impossible. Yet the moment he crosses the border, he enters a society far more meritocratic for the foreigner than his homeland is for the native, with far more social and cultural opportunities that are not pegged to race, class, appearance, and ancestry. Indigenous ancestry can be a plus for an Oaxacan applying for college in the United States, while it remains mostly a minus in Mexico City.

 

And the irony still continues. Whereas the immigrant senses the fact that millions of people seek northward passage, while almost no American citizen seeks to immigrate southward — wealthy retirees excluded — the ethnic industry apparently does not. The advocates of illegal immigration almost never explain why there is illegal immigration in the first place. Instead, their politics assumes resentments and claims against the majority culture and politics of the United States. Given that incoherence, it is no wonder that the majority of Americans oppose illegal immigration and the assorted amnesties that are offered as its remedies.

 

The incoherent message of far too many open-borders advocates distills down to little more than this: “Millions have fled Mexico to America — historically an insensitive, racist and unfair place. Yet it nonetheless must extend amnesty to millions of Mexican nationals who prefer the morally suspect United States over their native Latino culture in Mexico.”

 

What the immigration debate is not about is ensuring that illegal immigration ends and that legal immigration becomes liberal, meritocratic, and ethnically blind.

 

Remember that, and all the absurd rhetoric of the upcoming 2014 debate will make sense.

 

NRO contributorVictor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author, most recently, of The Savior Generals.

 

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

 

ENJOY THE HOLIDAYS, AS WE HAVE BATTLES TO FIGHT IN EARLY 2014

 

 ”Pelosi calls for Obama to halt deportations”

 

By Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times, Monday, December 16, 2013

 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi privately has urged the Obama administration to halt deportations for some illegal immigrants, saying that President Obama needs to use more “discretion” to reduce the number of people he’s kicking out of the country.

In an interview with Telemundo over the weekend, Mrs. Pelosi said that just being in the country illegally is not enough of a reason to be deported, and she said illegal immigrants must have something more serious on their records.

 

“Our view of the law is that it — if somebody is here without sufficient documentation, that is not reason for deportation,” she said in the interview, which an immigrant-rights group posted on its website. “If somebody has broken the law, committed a felony or something, that’s a different story.”

 

Drew Hammill, Mrs. Pelosi’s spokesman, said her comments are “a restatement of her long-held belief that being an undocumented immigrant is not a basis for deportation.”

He said Mrs. Pelosi would prefer, however, to pass a new law legalizing illegal immigrants in order to clear up the legal status.

 

Federal law generally does say that those who are in the country without authorization — either because they jumped the border or have overstayed their visas — are deportable.

But Mr. Obama has claimed broad discretion to decide whom to deport out of the 11 million illegal immigrants estimated to be in the country, arguing that Congress only appropriated enough money to deport about 400,000 people a year and so he must pick and choose whom to deport.

 

Homeland Security officials argue that nearly all of those they deport do meet one of their priority categories of having a criminal record or having previously been deported and returned to the U.S. in violation of that removal.

 

In her interview with Telemundo, Mrs. Pelosi said she disputes that, saying she’s appeared alongside some of those she said shouldn’t have been deported.

 

“We have seen the personal stories, and we presented them to the administration,” she said. “I’m hopeful that with the documentation that we are providing to counter what others may be saying about who’s being deported, that we will see action from the president.”

 

Still, Mrs. Pelosi said she is not sure whether Mr. Obama has the authority to grant a broad suspension of deportations for parents of so-called Dreamers, the illegal immigrants whom the president already carved out of danger of deportation in an executive action last year.

 

“I don’t know whether he has the authority,” Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, said. “But I think that there is discretion in the law as to the implementation, enforcement of the legislation that is calling for these deportations.”

 

 

 

Michael “Mike” Folk, Delegate from the 63rd District, is introducing “Constitutional Carry” in the upcoming West Virginia Legislative Session

PRESS RELEASE

December 9, 2013

For immediate Release

Contact: Delegate Mike Folk

Phone: 304-279-6797

Martinsburg, WV- Michael “Mike” Folk, Delegate from the 63rd District, is introducing “Constitutional Carry” in the upcoming West Virginia Legislative Session.

Constitutional Carry, also knows as the “Alaskan Model” does not require legal gun owners to pay for training and government permits to exercise your right to keep and bear arms, while still allowing permits to be issued for those seeking reciprocity with other states.

“Does exercising your right to keep and bear arms mean you should have to pay government fees?  Do you have to get a government permit or training to ‘open carry’ in West Virginia? No,” said Delegate Folk,” A pure Constitutional Carry bill would not require you to beg for permission from the government to carry a firearm, nor require you to spend hundreds on government-mandated, training classes”

West Virginia currently has “open carry” which means you can carry without a permit, as long as the weapon is visible. “Permits and their associated fees are a coat tax. Open carry is legal without a permit”, continued Folk, “so by simply wearing a coat and concealing your firearm, you must pay the ‘coat tax’ to carry concealed.”

“The second amendment says that we have the right to bear arms; it does not say only if it’s visible or only if you are hunting.”

Help Save Maryland – Even A Blind Sow Finds An Acorn Now & Then

Even A Blind Sow Finds An Acorn Now & Then

 

The Washington Post Editors, usually supporting every type of social service, assistance program, non-enforcement of immigration laws and a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, has somehow seem the light on denying illegals the right to vote. 

 

They even go so far as to call out the Village of Takoma Park, MD (you know that nuclear free zone in Montgomery County)  – “There is no logic to justify at the local level what is expressly forbidden at the state and local level.”

 

 

“D.C.’s wrong- headed move to extend the vote to noncitizens”

By Washington Post  Editorial Board, Published: December 6

NO PREROGATIVE conferred by a democracy is more central to citizenship than the right to vote. It should not be taken for granted nor casually tinkered with or diluted.

That’s why we oppose a bill before the D.C. Council that would, at a stroke, grant voting rights in District elections to noncitizens. Any green-card holder age 18 or older who has lived in the city for as little as a month would be granted the franchise, without regard to command of English, knowledge of or length of residency in the United States, or intent to apply for citizenship.

 

With the exception of a handful of villages in Montgomery County and (in the case of school board elections) Chicago, we are unaware of any locality in this country where noncitizens can exercise the right to vote. New York City allowed noncitizens to vote for the school board until the mayor took control of its schools in 2002.

 

Under a law signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996, it is a crime for noncitizens to vote in a federal election. Similarly, no state permits voting by green-card holders, as legal permanent residents are known. There is no logic to justify at the local level what is expressly forbidden at the state and federal levels.

 

The Constitution is silent on the subject of voting by noncitizens, which was widely permitted before waves of European immigration began to reshape the nation more than a century ago. More recently, the cause has been taken up by some advocacy groups and scholars, who note that green-card holders are taxed and governed as full members of U.S. society in every other sense.

In fact, extending the franchise to noncitizens, as the legislation in the D.C. Council would do, is antithetical to a broad consensus of public opinion that for years has regarded voting as the essence of citizenship.

As a rule, most green-card holders are eligible to apply for citizenship after five years, and many do successfully. They should be encouraged to do so. By allowing them to vote before citizenship has been conferred, the D.C. Council would be providing a disincentive to applying, or an invitation to refrain from making a full commitment to their adopted country. Five years does not seem such a very long time to wait in order to obtain the full array of rights accorded to Americans.

 

In California, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) recently vetoed legislation that would have allowed green-card holders to serve on juries, on the sensible logic that sitting in judgment of one’s peers is a responsibility conferred by citizenship. Voting is a similarly weighty responsibility.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dcs-wrong-headed-move-to-extend-the-vote-to-noncitizens/2013/12/06/be5d9fc6-5d27-11e3-be07-006c776266ed_story.html

 

 

————————————————————————————————————————————–

 

 

Another Blind Sow In Action

 

 

Who can forget the lovely and talented Janet Napolitano, former DHS Secretary.  I can’t remember one time during her reign of lawlessness where she tried to do anything to stand up to the White House and actually enforce immigration laws.  Now that she has left DC for sunny California as President of the University of California system, Janet has actually found the nerve to contradict Obama on the issue of college rankings.  But she still loves to hand illegals in-state tuition and financial aid at the expense of American citizens. 

 

 

December 06, 2013, 05:25 pm

“Napolitano ‘deeply skeptical’ of Obama’s college rankings”

By Justin Sink, The Hill

 

Former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who left the Obama administration to take over the University of California school system, told The Washington Post she is “deeply skeptical” of President Obama’s proposal to rank colleges and universities based on value.

“I am deeply skeptical that there are criteria that can be developed that are in the end meaningful because there will be so many exceptions, once you get down to it,” she said. “It’s not like, you know, you’re not buying a car or a boat. And so I hope to have the opportunity to engage in a productive way in this discussion.”

This summer, Obama announced that the Department of Education would create a new ranking system that grades universities on their value to students, providing applicants with a clearer idea of which schools give students the best bang for their buck.

He also proposed tying federal aid to the rating system, arguing that the federal government should not subsidize schools “who have higher default rates than graduation rates.”

“It is time to stop subsidizing schools that are not producing good results,” Obama said.

But Napolitano said she did not believe there were a lot of “apples to apples comparisons” to be made.

The Department of Education is still developing and fine-tuning the rankings system, which isn’t expected to be unveiled for another year.

White House officials said the rankings would grade universities on their ability to hold down tuition and student loan debt, and measure costs against post-graduation employment rates. They have also promised to solicit input from students and educators as they develop the system.

Obama argued the rankings would empower “students and families to make good choices,” while also incentivizing schools to hold down costs — much as popular rating systems like the U.S. News and World Report rankings lead universities to prioritize certain programs and goals in order to gain an edge on competitors.

Napolitano said she had not yet spoken to Education Secretary Arne Duncan about the plan.

Napolitano took over the California university system at the beginning of October. She last publicly met with President Obama during an immigration rally in California late last month.

 

 

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

 

 ”Immigration advocates bank on budget deal to rescue overhaul”  The Hill, Russell Berman 12/7/13

 

 

Few in Washington want to see House and Senate negotiators strike a budget deal more than advocates for immigration reform.

<strong><font size="3"></font></strong>

Their interest is not so much in the policy as the timing. The unending fiscal battles have repeatedly stolen the spotlight from immigration in the House, and the government shutdown in October sapped the legislative push of both time and political good will.

With Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) taking steps to revive immigration reform, advocates now see one remaining window for action in the early part of 2014, before election season begins.

But that opportunity will be lost, lawmakers and aides say, if yet another budget fight erupts in January and February.

Current federal funding runs out on Jan. 15, but House and Senate leaders are hoping to finalize a modest budget deal before lawmakers head home for the holidays.

An agreement would clear the legislative calendar in the New Year, and combined with an expected push from President Obama in his State of the Union address, immigration reform could have the moment its advocates have been waiting for.

“If some of those obstacles could get out of the way, I do think there is very much a desire to get something done, to put it behind them, to come up with a good answer,” said Tamar Jacoby, a Republican advocate who is president of ImmigrationWorks USA.

Jacoby said the support for some action on immigration in the House exists “way into the depths of the Republican conference, not just the leadership and not just the people who sound like liberals on this.”

“So I do think clearing away some of those hurdles could allow that ferment to come to the fore,” she said.

Yet timing is not the only obstacle in the House GOP. While several narrow bills have emerged from the Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, party leaders need a proposal addressing the legal status of undocumented immigrants that can pass with a combination of Republican and Democratic votes.

Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) and Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) are working on separate legalization proposals, but it isn’t clear whether either can win the necessary support.

And while a fresh push by Obama in the State of the Union could thrust immigration reform back atop the headlines, a hectoring speech could backfire among Republicans who deeply distrust the president.

House Republicans have taken note in recent weeks that Obama has said he is open to the piecemeal legislative approach that Boehner has demanded, as long as the group of bills addresses all major aspects of reform. But many in the GOP still believe that Obama wants to use immigration as a political cudgel in 2014 rather than make significant concessions to win passage of legislation.

“My advice to Republicans would be to ignore the president,” said former Rep. John Shadegg (Ariz.), a conservative member of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s immigration task force who is advocating for the House to act on the issue.

While a budget agreement would remove one hurdle, it would not end another major political fight that is capturing the attention of both GOP legislators and the media: ObamaCare.

Republicans have latched onto the troubled implementation of the president’s healthcare law, and many lawmakers argue it would be politically foolish for the GOP to turn to a divisive issue and take attention away from problems that are damaging Democrats.

“As long as that is kind of alive [as an issue], that’s going to take up a lot of oxygen,” Jacoby said.

Eliseo Medina, a former labor leader who fasted on water only for 22 days to protest the House’s inaction on immigration, said Boehner could bring up legislation any time he wants.

“Our campaign has not been driven by the legislative calendar, it has been driven by the urgency of the issue,” Medina said.

 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

 

 EVENT IN DC, TUESDAY DECEMBER 10, 10:30am – 11:30am

 

 

“Judicial Watch Announces a Special Presentation: “Amnesty Update”

 Please join us as Congressman Steve King (IA-04), U.S. House of Representatives; Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies; and Rosemary Jenks, Director of Government Relations for NumbersUSA discuss the status of amnesty efforts in Congress, as well as President Obama’s controversial decisions to suspend deportation for entire categories of illegal aliens.

Moderator:

Tom Fitton
President, Judicial Watch

Confirmed Panelists:

Congressman Steve King (IA-04)
US House of Representatives

Mark Krikorian
Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies

Rosemary Jenks
Director of Government Relations, NumbersUSA

Judicial Watch Headquarters

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

 Panel from 10:30-11:30 am ET

425 Third Street, SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024

(One block south from the Federal Center SW Metro station on the Orange/Blue lines)

Join us in Washington, DC, or watch live online beginning at 10:30 am ET    http://www.judicialwatch.org/live/?utm_source=EmailDirect.com&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=amnesty+panel+Campaign

 This event is free of charge and open to the public.

Please RSVP only if you’re attending by emailing us at JWEvents@JudicialWatch.org  or by calling (202) 646-5172

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

 

INTERESTED IN BECOMING A BOARD MEMBER  FOR HELP SAVE MARYLAND (POSITIONS INCLUDING TREASURER)? 

 

SEND AN E-MAIL EXPRESSING YOUR INTEREST TO BB67CHEV@AOL.COM

 

 

Please make a tax deductible donation to Help Save Maryland at www.HelpSaveMaryland.org  or by postal mail at HSM, PO Box 5742, Rockville, MD  20855.  Thank You!

Delegate Larry Kump and our 4th Amendment Rights – Letter to the Editor from a friend – More on Our 4th Amendment Rights – Delegate John Overington does not know What This Stands For

More on Our 4th Amendment Rights

From a letter to the editor of a local newspaper:

 

“Our 4th Amendment protects us from unlawful and unreasonable search and seizure of our persons, houses, papers and effects.

Larry D. Kump, West Virginia delegate, District No. 59, has introduced an amendment to WV House Bill 2513, requiring that law enforcement officers obtain a court warrant, through due process, before they can remove a citizen from their car, drive them to a hospital and force them to undergo a blood test or immediately lose their driving privileges.

House Bill 2513, which was passed in the 2013 session of the West Virginia House of Delegates and signed into law by Gov. Tomblin does just that. Those who wrote and voted for this law, including our governor, are bypassing and ignoring their Constitutional oath of protecting West Virginians against the tyranny of our own government.

Del. Kump voted against HB2513. His amendment would protect us.

“We are a nation of laws, and the Constitution is the highest law of the land. Until a warrant is obtained, the citizens of West Virginia have Constitutional protection of their person, property and possessions, and if your blood is not your possession, I don’t know what is.” said Delegate Kump.

“No one wants people to drive drunk or drugged,” continued Kump, “However the Constitution is clear. A very similar law in Missouri was judged unconstitutional by the Supreme Court earlier this year, as it is a clear violation of the 4th Amendment.”

Elections matter in West Virginia. Who is really supporting your freedom? We know it isn’t Manchin. We know it isn’t Tomblin. It’s time for each of us to decide who we vote for in 2014 – but remember – a vote for liberals is a vote for Obama and his agenda.

Vote for men and women who support your freedom. Larry D. Kump is doing just that. He fights for us every step of the way. Email him – ask him anything that concerns you. He’ll answer your questions honestly and promptly.

Stephanie Robinson
Martinsburg, West Virginia”



  Working Together to Stay Independent!
  Delegate Larry D. Kump
  West Virginia House of Delegates District #59
  Berkeley-Morgan Counties (Eastern Panhandle)
  P.O. Box 1131
  Falling Waters, West Virginia 25419-1131
  (304) 274-3104
  Visit www.LarryKump.com for my legislative news and views.
  May God bless you all real good!

Help Save Maryland – A Step Closer To Revolution? Event in DC!

A Step Closer To Revolution?

 

The Illegal Immigrant Radicals, both in and out of Congress, are realizing that chaining themselves to fences and buses, protesting at the homes of elected officials, going on hunger strikes and the lot will not provide Amnesty to their flock.  So these leftists are once again putting the screws to President Obama, not that he needs much encouragement regarding Amnesty for illegals.

 

 Most recently, the Mexican Government Congressman from Arizona, Raul Grijalva (D-AZ),  is demanding that Obama expand the amnesty for illegal immigrants beyond students, their parents, families of U.S. military, illegals that overstay their visas (mostly European countries), etc.  Raul wants a complete stop to all deportations, including criminal deportations of illegal immigrants.  Short of that, he now wants the president to disregard the 10-year bar of admission to those who enter the country illegally. 

 

Sounds like a treasonous request to me.  Just how much more of this lawlessness will the American people tolerate??

 

“Supporters urge Obama to act on his own authority”       http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/5/activists-encourage-obama-to-circumvent-congress-u/

 

————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

 

 EVENT IN DC, TUESDAY DECEMBER 10, 10:30am – 11:30am

 

 

“Judicial Watch Announces a Special Presentation: “Amnesty Update”

 
Please join us as Congressman Steve King (IA-04), U.S. House of Representatives; Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies; and Rosemary Jenks, Director of Government Relations for NumbersUSA discuss the status of amnesty efforts in Congress, as well as President Obama’s controversial decisions to suspend deportation for entire categories of illegal aliens.

Moderator:

Tom Fitton
President, Judicial Watch

Confirmed Panelists:

Congressman Steve King (IA-04)
US House of Representatives

Mark Krikorian
Executive Director, Center for Immigration Studies

Rosemary Jenks
Director of Government Relations, NumbersUSA

Judicial Watch Headquarters

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

Panel from 10:30-11:30 am ET

425 Third Street, SW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20024

(One block south from the Federal Center SW Metro station on the Orange/Blue lines)

Join us in Washington, DC, or watch live online beginning at 10:30 am ET    http://www.judicialwatch.org/live/?utm_source=EmailDirect.com&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=amnesty+panel+Campaign

This event is free of charge and open to the public.

Please RSVP only if you’re attending by emailing us at JWEvents@JudicialWatch.org or by calling (202) 646-5172

 

 

 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

 

 IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM THE FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION REFORM

Speaker Boehner Hires Senator McCain’s Former Chief of Staff
to Run Immigration Policy!

      

Yesterday, House Speaker John Boehner’s office announced that it had hired McCain’s former chief of staff Rebecca Tallent to manage immigration policy for the Speaker.  Tallent, a long-time amnesty advocate, has been involved in numerous immigration battles over the years, including pushing Senator John McCain’s amnesty guest worker bills in 2006 and 2007.  (National Journal, Dec. 3, 2013)

 

FAIR quickly criticized the hiring of Tallent to manage immigration policy for the Speaker, and said it confirms that Boehner’s refusal to conference on S.744 is purely a matter of procedure, not a repudiation of the Senate bill itself.

 

Yet, the Speaker’s office defended the move.  ”The speaker remains hopeful that we can enact step-by-step, common-sense immigration reforms — the kind of reforms the American people understand and support,” spokesman Michael Steel said. “Becky Tallent, a well-known expert in this field of public policy, is a great addition to our team and that effort.”  (Washington Times, Dec. 2, 2013)

 

Now we need you to make your voice heard!  Call House Speaker John Boehner today and tell him you want the House to pass TRUE immigration reform, not amnesty and not massive guest worker bills that undermine American workers. 

 

Tell him:

 

• Granting any legal status to illegal aliens unfairly rewards law-breaking.  Any form of legal status, including DREAM Act-style proposals, are just as much of an amnesty as a “path to citizenship,” and will do nothing but encourage more illegal immigration, just like it did after the 1986 amnesty.

 

• Granting amnesty and increasing the number of guest workers unfairly adds millions of workers to compete for scarce jobs when over 20 million Americans are either unemployed or underemployed. 

 

• Guest workers benefit employers, not the U.S. economy or out-of-work Americans. Rather, guest worker programs lower wages and increases dependence on cheap, foreign labor.

 

• America needs jobs—not increased immigration!  The U.S. already has the most generous immigration system in the world, admitting over 1 million legal immigrants annually, along with bringing in 800,000-900,000 guest workers each year.

 

Call Speaker Boehner TODAY!

Speaker Boehner’s Washington, D.C. Office: (202) 225-0600

 

Sincerely,

-FAIR  www.fairus.org

 

P.S. If you can’t make a phone call, please take a few minutes to write a short message on Speaker Boehner’s Facebook page      https://www.facebook.com/OfficeofSpeakerBoehner

 

 

My Letter to the Editor is posted in the Journal News – Tomblin should stop attacking working families

Tomblin should stop attacking working families

http://www.journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/601683/Tomblin-should-stop-attacking-working-families.html?nav=5061

From Help Save Maryland, Director, Brad Botwin – Happy Thanksgiving and Hanukkah!

Wishing All A Happy Thanksgiving and Hanukkah!  

 

 

Compassion for the ‘stranger’ can’t outweigh the nation’s best interests

Is there a moral approach to immigration reform?

 

Some in religious circles are invoking the Biblical verse “Thou shalt not afflict the stranger” as justification for awarding illegal immigrants a full basket of ongoing social services, as well as a “fast track to citizenship,” which others think is but a euphemism for amnesty.

 

In all matters, the Bible teaches discernment, and there is a distinct difference between not afflicting another and requiring that we subsidize an entire life, especially when the burden of that support falls on the shoulders of already overtaxed families, themselves not beneficiaries of such “entitlements.” Basic respect and kindness is one thing — it is a sign of our humanity; onerous sacrifice and national bankruptcy is a quite another.

 

The Bible’s primary interest in this matter is a moral one: We all start out as children of God and should thus be treated with civility. In contrast to the biblical community, many ancient societies viewed strangers as fair game to be robbed, incarcerated or as fodder for harsh sport and brutality. This, the Bible points out, was the way of Sodom. Even today there are cultures and nations where “infidels” and strangers are oppressed and treated as subhuman.

 

The Bible is adamant: “One law shall prevail for all.” Basic justice regarding one’s property, personhood and right to trial is universal and transcends tribe. However, what serious American citizen would claim “affliction” if not provided complete subsidy? Neither, then, should such a claim be made by political activists on behalf of illegal immigrants.

 

In ancient Israel, some immigrants entered as workers and opted to remain resident aliens. Others embarked on the long road toward full citizenship, which meant learning the mores and attitudes of the country, culminating in absolute commitment to the nation and its people. In those days, full citizenship meant religious conversion, whereas in modern societies, it is obtained by pledging allegiance to the laws of the land.

 

 

Both the resident alien and new citizen were entitled to courteous and dignified treatment and could participate in many aspects of civic life. One’s background was not an impediment. However, the full array of benefits was provided only to those who had made a total commitment to the society providing those benefits. New citizens were not “fast-tracked” or hurried and herded into citizenship; each candidate’s sincerity was of utmost importance. Requiring that normative and historic standards for citizenship be applied is not a form of affliction.

 

The Bible is a compassionate document, but also a cautious one, asking that we eschew hyperbole and employ discernment and balance. No value, not even compassion, is set in a vacuum or regarded as so open-ended as to be blind to reality. No gesture can ignore the impact of how what may be good for one is harmful and unfair to thousands of others.

 

The requirement of charity, for example, was capped at 10 percent, and while field owners were asked to leave the corners of their field to be gleaned by the poor and strangers, they were never asked to plow, seed and harvest additional fields as a “second job” so as to satisfy the needs of an expanding receivership class. Charity, as taxation, should not devolve into servitude or serfdom. Nor were citizens asked to forfeit portions of their fields or deliver the leftover grain to the mailbox of those classified as poor or strangers. Undoubtedly, God has equal compassion for those who work hard and play by the rules. Compassion is a two-way street, something demanded even from the stranger for the citizen-provider. The double emphasis on justice — as in “Justice, justice shall ye pursue” — implies that both parties receive that which is just and fair.

 

What the Bible, and Jesus, had in mind was maintaining a person’s dignity on a subsistence level, not a full array of 2013 cradle-to-grave amenities.

 

Nor did the Bible request that the decency we extend to strangers result in national suicide. It never encouraged a virtual open-border situation, where the host country is overrun and loses its indigenous culture, its laws, or its ability to flourish as a unique and sovereign entity. Indeed, so paramount was the ideal of protected borders, and what it means to a country’s economic and cultural viability, that God said, “And I shall protect your borders so that strangers and enemies will not fill your camp and become a thorn in your side.” There are even reports that jihadists are among those who are entering the United States illegally.

 

None of this should be construed as anti-immigration per se. What separates our current circumstance of immigration from previous ones is precisely the welfare state America has become and massive immigration’s hefty burden on taxpayers and basic services. Furthermore, the anti-assimilationist fervor among today’s multicultural ideologues raises the question of whether America’s historical cultural ethos can survive this huge foreign influx.

 

Nor is this an issue of race; indeed, many of us admire the industrious qualities of those coming from south of the border.

 

Over the years, many in the social-justice crowd have boasted that they “comfort the uncomfortable and discomfit the comfortable.” How ironic that those who urge us not to afflict the stranger exhibit a knee-jerk instinct to afflict the comfortable, including most middle-class Americans who work hard daily just to remain afloat. It sounds more like vengeance than it does social justice.

 

During the past 50 years, every social issue has been framed as a referendum or “test” of whether the American people are “good.” We don’t need to prove our goodness, though. This transformative immigration issue should be decided on common sense and what is good for taxpaying citizens, our cultural future, and what constitutes compassion and justice for middle-class America.

 

Rabbi Aryeh Spero is author of “Push Back: Reclaiming our Judeo-Christian Spirit” (Evergreen Press, 2012) and president of Caucus for America.
 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/24/spero-seeking-a-moral-approach-to-immigration-refo/

 

 

 

 

THIS HOLIDAY PLEASE THINK ABOUT THOSE TAKEN FROM US BY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN OUR COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE NATION

 

www.theremembranceproject.org

 

 
Illegal Immigrant Disrupts Obama Event – Probably Part of President’s Routine to Show He Cares For His “Democrats in Waiting”

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/25/obama-heckled-over-immigration-rebukes-protester/