At first blush, an Op-Ed piece in today’s edition of the Houston Chronicle by Dr. James Bankston, Archbishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, Rev. William A. Lawson, and Rabbi David Rosen, all members of the Anti-Defamation League’s Coalition for Mutual Respect, is a noble effort at quieting those elements of raw discord in the illegal immigration debate within the Houston community that may have provoked, owing to their extreme tone and tint, acts of racism and violence. For their call for calm, reason, and faith, these men deserve the appreciation of everyone in America’s fourth largest city.

However, on closer analysis, their importunity that we excise hatred and bigotry in our midst — the appropriateness of that message — is surely compromised by their second theme which is clearly a bias for “immigration reforms” that are “comprehensive” and “serve our security and economic interests.” That broad-brush statement more than suggests an unmistakable preference for the provisions captured in the Senate’s S-2611, CIRA legislation (i.e., the so-called Hagel-Martinez “compromise” measure), rather than for the border-security-first provisions in the House-passed Sensenbrenner bill, which the majority of Americans, particularly its “likely voters,” prefer. The majority of Americans, you see, are not for amnesty, or amnesty-lite, or the “regularization” of lawbreakers, but favor instead border security first and then want to see evidence of the enforcement of current federal immigration laws before they’re prepared to accept on faith that new laws passed by the Congress would be enforced any better or be any more manageable.

(Continued…)

Timothy P. Carning, writing for The American Conservative, exposes the Bush claim of “jobs Americans won’t do” for the red herring it is in the illegal immigration debate by revisiting the history of sugar cane production in this country and focusing on one of the most grueling harvesting methods manual stoop labor has ever taken on.

In this well-done piece, Carning shows how the federal government under FDR came to collude with “Big Sugar” in the 1940s to erase the economic principles of supply and demand in South Florida’s cane fields and supplant them with a labor force caught in the grip of indentured servitude and fearing deportation if it didn’t comply with substandard pay and working conditions. It’s a stunning look at how government and business can combine to freeze out willing American workers in favor of cheap labor from foreign countries.

(Continued…)

Our nation’s Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, is clearly against any legislation that might be passed by Congress and signed into law by the president (Gonzales, in this regard, has really nothing to fear, but fear itself) that would codify English as the “national language” of this country. To which George Will responded in his regular, nationally-syndicated column:

To understand why millions of conservatives do not trust Washington to think clearly or act reasonably about immigration, consider bilingual ballots. These conservatives, already worried that both the rule of law and national identity are becoming attenuated because of illegal immigration, now have another worry: The federal government’s chief law enforcement official might need a refresher course on federal law pertaining to legal immigrants.

In 1906, the year before a rabbi in a Passover sermon coined the phrase “melting pot” during torrential immigration from eastern and southern Europe, Congress passed and President Theodore Roosevelt signed legislation requiring people seeking to become naturalized citizens to demonstrate oral English literacy. In 1950, the requirement was strengthened to require people to “demonstrate an understanding of the English language, including an ability to read, write and speak words in ordinary usage in the English language.”

Hence, if someone needs a ballot written in a language other than English, that need proves the person obtained citizenship only because the law was not enforced when he or she sought citizenship. So one reason for ending ballots in languages other than English is that continuing them makes a mockery of the rule of law, including even the prospective McCain-Kennedy law that pro-immigration groups favor.

(Continued…)

There are a baker’s dozen of excellent posts this morning on the border security/illegal immigration debate that continues to rage in this country and more so than ever now that the United States Senate has shirked its responsibility of “representative government” and turned a deaf ear to the vast majority of American citizens in passing the egregiously incomprehensible S-2611 amnesty first bill.

01) John Hawkins of Right Wing News speaks to the issue of a tone deaf Senate in taking issue with an incongruous poll that cuts against the grain of everything he has read (and knows) on the subject of this GREAT DEBATE in our country.

02 & 03) Next, John Hawkins brilliantly enumerates the “22 problems” with the Senate’s Hagel-Martinez (S-2611) bill. If you add this gem with this previous post of John’s, you’ll have taken the quintessential short course on the contentious issue of illegal immigration and everything else you read on the subject will make more sense and inform you, and, more importantly, allow you to separate the grain from the chafe.

04) Jay Tea of Wizbang! makes the connection between SPAM and Mexico’s Vicente Fox, which is all it should take to draw you to this clever dissection of Mexico’s purposeful campaign to export its abject poor and illiterate to America in return for a bounty of remittances from its nationals there illegally — a bounty that presently totals $20+ billion annually. And, as Jay Tea correctly observes, the economics of illegal immigration — an “immoral” economic model – are all in favor of Mexico.

(Continued…)

I did not write this on a past Memorial Day, but rather in the summertime; but, on reflection, I think it is an appropriate tribute to our nation’s fallen heroes. I hope you think so as well.

And, at the risk of commingling political commentary with a day set aside to honor and memorialize those who have given their last full measure of devotion to preserve our country and its freedoms, I’m moved to remind readers of this post in which I challenge Americans to exercise their right to vote and participate directly in our country’s grand experiment in personal freedom — a process for which countless American freedom fighters have died and for which thousands of Iraqi civilians went into harm’s way to do what so many of our own have apathetically disengaged from. When you vote, you honor our fallen and make their sacrifices eminently worthwhile. Think about that, please, I beg you.

Now, then, to continue …

(Continued…)

It’s instructive, I think, to understand just who the man and his policies are, which have, incredulously, many business and political leaders deferring to him obsequiously (save for a courageous few) and despite a roaring debate in this country over illegal immigration and border security – a debate fueled in large part by the duplicity of the corrupt and corrupting government of Mexico, which has encouraged 10% of its abjectly poor and woefully illiterate population (and 15% of its workforce) to emigrate illegally to the United States.

Joseph Contreras writes in Newsweek (June 5th edition):

As tough as the United States can be for workers who slip in from south of the border, Mexico is in a poor position to criticize. The problem goes far beyond the predatory gantlet of thugs and crooked cops facing defenseless transients like Moisés. There’s ample precedent in Mexico for just about everything the United States is—or isn’t—doing. Calling out the military? Mexicans may hate the new U.S. plan to deploy 6,000 National Guard troops on the border, but five years ago they cheered President Vicente Fox for sending thousands of Mexican soldiers to crack down on their southern frontier. Tougher laws? Hispanic-rights groups are enraged over U.S. efforts to criminalize undocumented aliens—yet since 1974, sneaking into Mexico has been punishable by up to two years in prison. Foot-dragging on amnesty? Fox has spent the past five years urging the United States to upgrade the status of millions of illegals from Mexico. Meanwhile, his own government has given legal status to only 15,000 foreigners without papers.

(Continued…)

The president’s speech to the graduating class of West Point may be as fitting a tribute there is this Memorial Day weekend to the men and women of our Armed Forces who have given their lives honorably in the defense of freedom.

From it, I quote:

The field of battle is where your degree and commission will take you. This is the first class to arrive at West Point after the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. Each of you came here in a time of war, knowing all the risks and dangers that come with wearing our nation’s uniform. And I want to thank you for your patriotism, your devotion to duty, your courageous decision to serve. America is grateful and proud of the men and women of West Point.

The reality of war has surrounded you since your first moments at this Academy. More than 50 of your fellow cadets here at West Point have already seen combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. And 34 times since your class arrived, you have observed a moment of silence in Washington Hall to honor a former cadet fallen in the war on terror. Each loss is heartbreaking — and each loss has made you even more determined to pick up their mantle, to carry on their fight, and to achieve victory. We will honor the memory of these brave souls. We will finish the task for which they gave their lives. We will complete the mission.

God bless our nation’s fallen heroes and God bless our Commander-in-Chief.

(Continued…)

As a long-standing fan of Notre Dame Fighting Irish football, I found this poignant news story, linked and quoted by James Joyner at Outside The Beltway, particularly touching.

Head Coach Charlie Weis can be even prouder today of what he did for the departed woman’s son. She must have taken great comfort in that man’s humanity and generous gesture.

(Continued…)

Today’s edition of the Houston Chronicle carries a front-page, below-the-fold story by James Pinkerton and John Gonzalez that confirms this writer’s suspicions that President Bush’s commitment to send “up to 6,000″ National Guardsmen to the border is more bombastic bromide and political ruse than an effective way of materially reversing his long-standing open borders’ mindset.

Worse, this well-done Chronicle piece appears to underscore that the same lack of planning “to win the peace” in Iraq and the same lack of timely response in dealing with the devastation to New Orleans and the Gulf Coast in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, now marks the Bush administration’s dawdling implementation and coordination of its much-heralded “Guardsmen To The Border” prescription for interim border security.

As Pinkerton and Gonzalez write:

Less than a week before the National Guard plans a rare deployment on the U.S.-Mexico border, officials aren’t sure how many troops will go to each state, where they will be housed and when they will arrive.

The rules of engagement, guidelines on such issues as use of weapons and lethal force, have yet to be finalized. And it’s doubtful that the Guard will meet a June 1 target deadline for its initial deployment all along the border, some officials concede.

Instead, the deployment is likely to unfold in fits and starts as the Guard scrambles to meet a tight — and as some see it, unrealistic — schedule.

(Continued…)

First, I want to thank the regular readers of ACSOL, as well as the hundreds of newcomers to my blog, who have read my posts, the posts of the special people who I have linked to, the sites in my blogroll under the “Illegal Immigration” heading, then left their well-thought ”Comments” here and, I have no doubt, in turn written to or called their Congressmen — both Representatives and Senators — to express their irrevocable insistence on border security first and enforcement of existing federal immigration laws.

In doing so, you have been PATRIOTS and Americans to the core. You have done your civic duty. You have fought the good fight — a fight that is not by any means over.

May I ask you, please, to read the following from Roy Beck, president, NumbersUSA, published in an important post by my good friend Frank Laughter of Common Sense Junction. It’s important because we all need a boost in the wake of passage yesterday of the incomprehensible, amnesty-first, Mexico-first bill — S-2611.

Keep the faith. Remember: 32 Republican senators voted against S-2611. And there is strong Republican leadership in the House that’s not going to be bowled over, Frist-style, by President Bush, Vicente Fox, and their Democratic allies in the Congress.

(Continued…)

If you were watching C-SPAN this past hour, the United States Senate, just prior to passage of S-2611, the comprehensive immigration reform bill that President Bush has been salivating over, approved a provision that, were it signed into law, would require that the United States government first consult with Mexico before erecting any border wall or fence. This has been confirmed by Lou Dobbs of CNN. Need I say anymore? A sense of betrayal and outrage hardly defines my feelings presently.

More to follow …

(Continued…)

Click on the image of Senator John McCain (RINO-AZ) and, courtesy of Michelle Malkin’s “HOT AIR,” you will be provided with a glimpse of John McCain showing his true colors in the Senate floor debate on S-2611 — the Hegel-Martinez “compromise” bill, which is the incomprehensible outgrowth of the original McCain-Kennedy bill on so-called comprehensive immigration reform legislation.

John McCain will never get the GOP’s presidential nomination in 2008. For were that to happen millions of ghosts — Goldwater and Reagan conservatives all, in red, white, and blue — would (to borrow from Douglas MacArthur) “rise from their white crosses, thundering those magic words, Duty, Honor, Country,” while seeing to the undoing of a Republican Party gone mad.

(Continued…)

The United States Senate, determined to foist its will on the majority of American citizens for whom it is supposed to provide representation, will likely vote today to follow the pied pipers of the Praetorian Guard — Ted Kennedy and John McCain — on an earned path toward legislative infamy. There should be no amnesty quartered by American voters for those who vote “Yea” today for S-2611, the Hagel-Martinez bill.

Instead, the rascals, Republicans and Democrats alike, should be voted out of office when they come up for re-election and subsequently shipped off to Mexico City to become “Guest Legislators” there, since the interests of Mexico take precedence in their minds over the interests of the United States of America. Voting out a host of incumbents should become the “common and unifying language” of American voters come the midterm elections in November and, again, in 2008 and beyond. If these tone-deaf betrayers of representative government later want back into the Senate, then let them get in line behind more able and worthy candidates.

(Continued…)

Doug Gross of the Associated Press (AP) reports that former president Jimmy Carter is in agreement with President Bush’s overarching desire to win amnesty and citizenship for millions of illegal aliens.

No mention was made of the Hagel-Martinez provision that illegals would only have to pay three of their last five years in back income taxes, but, presumably, Mr. Carter would view this as profoundly humanitarian.

FOLLOW-UP: Richard at Hyscience is on the same wavelength as I, but is more expansive in his venting!

Jimmy Carter, President Bush, Immigration, Immigration Reform, Illegal Immigration, Border Seurity, Border Enforcement, Politics, Hagel-Matinez Bill, Earned Citizenship, News, Current Events

The American Conservative Union has provided a transcript of a speech made by Congressman Mike Spence of Indiana, in which he seeks to present a legislative alternative to the extremes of a general amnesty for or a massive, government-conducted deportation of illegal immigrants.

It’s worth our attention and I encourage readers of ACSOL to study it, as I will.

An important excerpt follows:

There is no support back home in my district for amnesty, and this has nothing to do with race or ethnic discrimination. It has everything to do with the fundamental belief of every American in law and order. America is, and always has been, a welcoming society. This sentiment is essentially an expression of a moral principal. The ancient words, “Do not mistreat an alien or oppress him for you were aliens in Egypt,” reflect the sentiment of millions of Americans who share this compassionate view of the illegal aliens in our midst. But, there still is no support back home for amnesty.

Amnesty is allowing people whose first act in America was an illegal act to get right with the law without leaving the country. Allowing twelve million illegal aliens to stay in our country instead of leaving and coming back legally is amnesty, no matter if fines or back taxes are paid, or how it is otherwise dressed-up or spun by its proponents. The only way to deal with these twelve million people is to insist that they leave the country and come back legally if they have a job awaiting them.

But people ask, “Congressman, if you’re not going to provide amnesty, what are you going to do with twelve million illegal aliens”?

They recognize it is not logistically possible to round-up twelve million illegal aliens, put them on buses and conduct a mass deportation. It also is not realistic to think that some American businesses can operate without these workers. And, it is unreasonable to think that people who came to America illegally and found jobs will voluntarily leave those jobs and opportunities without knowing whether they can return legally.

Therefore, the solution is to setup a system that will encourage illegal aliens to self-deport and come back legally as guest workers. This may sound outside of the box, and it is. It may sound far-fetched and unrealistic, but it isn’t. It is based on sound, proven conservative principles. It places reliance on American enterprise and puts government back into its traditional role of protecting its citizens.

H/T: Free Republic

(Continued…)

Read it here and here. Regrets to bona-fide American citizens/contestants, Katharine McPhee and Taylor Hicks.

The winning number, I am told, was a Spanish version (replete with special changes in the lyrics) of America’s national anthem. His other two numbers were sung in “the common and unifying language” of America: English. They were: “Call It A Banana” (lyrics and melody by John McCain), an up-tempo, fun kind of song, and “There’s No Specter Like Arlen Specter” (lyrics and melody by Lindsey Graham and Edward Kennedy), a rousing, patriotic number in honor of the United States’ Praetorian Guard that echoed a famous Ethel Merman tribute to Hollywood.

Fox hit the stage at the Kodak Theatre wrapped in the flag of Mexico and with custom-made boxer shorts crafted from a tattered American flag used in Latino street rallies and given to him as a memento by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of the efficacy of his incessant meddling in United States immigration policy (The Arnold being an immigrant himself).

A chorus of illegal aliens appeared onstage with El Presidente (Mexico’s, not ours), and with the following as an anything-but-subdued choral backdrop to Fox’s vocals.

Paula Abdul gushed over Fox’s performance and pronounced: “You owned the stage tonight, Senior!” Randy Jackson said, “You’re HOT, Fox!” (but noted that the background singers were a bit “bitchy”). Simon Cowell, true to form, observed acidly: “Listening to you, Vicente, was akin to eating one of those disgusting worms in a bottle of Mezcal.”

(Continued…)