President Bush, as a key element in his open borders’ mantra, has long argued that illegal aliens are here in our country doing the work that Americans are unwilling to do. And, accordingly, by his politically expedient, contorted logic, the “free flow” of peoples across our southern border thereby benefits American society and the economic engine that sustains it. That’s his argument and he’s sticking to it.

Most Americans know that President Bush’s contention is pure, unadulterated nonsense and a contrived smokescreen for attracting cheap, exploitable labor. Fact is, Americans are willing (and historically performed it themselves) to do the work that 20+ million illegal aliens are doing here in our country provided, of course, the wages paid for such work constitute a “living wage.” Moreover, and I firmly believe this, the majority of Americans would recoil from purchasing goods and services provided by exploited illegal alien labor if they knew unequivocally that that is what they were buying. If that were not the case, they wouldn’t overwhelmingly be in favor of strict border enforcement.

A case in point: the raid this week by federal immigration agents on a Koch Foods chicken processing plant in Fairfield, Indiana Ohio, where 180 illegal alien workers were rounded up — workers being paid $8.00/hour with no health benefits.

Imagine this: you’re looking at a package of chicken breasts in the meat/poultry section of your local grocery store (or considering ordering the grilled chicken breast entree on the menu at a local restuarant) and you see a label reading:

This chicken was processed by illegal aliens being paid sub-standard wages and without health benefits in order to bring you, the consumer, the best possible value for your food dollar!

Would you put that package in your shopping cart or order that particular entree from the menu? I suspect not. Mull that question over for awhile and think about what the Bush Administration, and administrations before it, are perpetrating upon unsuspecting Americans and in the interest of wooing votes and campaign contributions from industries (and the companies in them) hellbent on reducing their direct wages and benefits costs in ways that federal law specifically proscribes. 

And ask yourselves, as well, if you think for a minute that a chicken processing plant could unknowingly hire 180 illegal aliens without any suspicion whatsoever of the documentation being provided by these lawbreakers in order to obtain work in America’s heartland. After all, if George Bush is right, Koch Foods’ personnel department was undoubtedly unable to fill 180 production slots with bona-fide American workers, so it had no choice but to turn to  “undocumented immigrants” (or those border-jumpers sporting forged documentation) in order to meet its production quotas and wages/benefits budgets, right?

Truth be known, and this needs saying, the Koch employees may have been earning sub-standard wages at that Indiana chicken processing plant, but they most certainly were nonetheless enjoying healthcare and many other benefits that millions of Americans do not share in. How is that, you ask?

You provide them!

For, in point of fact, illegal aliens regularly leverage a vast social safety net of taxpayer-subsidized services, from healthcare to education to food stamps to housing to Medicaid (and on and on it goes).

Still skeptical?

Well, then, read the following from American Chronicle:

Illegals can’t live on illegal pay reported without government subsidies.

… illegal immigrants drawn by greed and treasonous wartime profiteering only come here for:

Illegal government handouts (provided without determining legal status, identification, residency or need) for: local health department care, emergency health care, prenatal care, catastrophic disease care, tuition, education, food, subsidized housing, public transportation, Medicaid, WIC, food stamps and numerous other social stipends, provide financial incentive to come to this country.

And square that reality with the fact that poorly educated, unskilled, low-wage, illegal alien laborers performing marginal jobs in this country were nevertheless able to send $45 billion back to their countries of origin in 2006. From whose pockets do you think that kind of money came from, Folks? They damn sure didn’t get it from cutting up chicken parts for $8.00 an hour.

Follow-Up: From this story published at IndyStar.com and this story published by the Washington Post, it appears the Koch Foods plant refernced in this post was in Fairfield, Ohio, not Fairfield, Indiana, as was reported by Axcess News, my original linked source.

Follow-Up II (08/31/07): The Cincinnati Post has published a follow-up story on the upshot of a raid conducted on Tuesday of this week by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents on the Koch Foods poultry processing plant in Fairfield, Ohio. Here are excerpts:

Twenty illegal immigrants taken into custody during a federal raid at a poultry processing plant in Fairfield face state charges, including forgery, authorities said.

The raid at the Koch Foods plant by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday resulted in the arrests of 161 illegal immigrants.

The 12 men and eight woman are facing state charges of forgery and taking the identity of another, Butler County Sheriff Richard K. Jones said Wednesday. The illegal immigrants from Guatemala, Mexico and Peru are being held in the Butler County Jail.

In addition to the 20 illegal aliens charged criminally, all 161 were served with notices to appear before an immigration judge for removal proceedings, 80 remain in ICE custody. The remaining 61 were released on alternatives to detention for humanitarian purposes such as medical issues and sole care-giver situations.

In addition to Mexico, Guatemala and Peru, illegal immigrants detained came from the Dominican Republic, Ghana, Honduras, Lithuania and Senegal.

Note the “countries of origin” in that last paragraph I excerpted from reporter Lauren Pack’s account. Quite a comment on our porous borders and unsecured ports. You can enter this country nearly at will from any continent on the globe and wind up working in the middle of America’s heartland owing to the confluence of an indifferent federal government and no lack of employers willing to disregard the law in the interest of cheap, taxpayer-subsidized labor.

Yesterday, in this post, I provided a simple equation (PI + SC = HC/ND) for what’s befalling too many hapless American citizens living in 31 cities and 3 states in our nation that have declared themselves “don’t ask/ don’t tell sanctuaries” for those here illegally — heinous crimes and needless deaths. The situation is as unconscionable as it is misguided.

Americans are being victimized daily! As WorldNetDaily reports:

While the military “quagmire” in Iraq was said to tip the scales of power in the U.S. midterm elections, most Americans have no idea more of their fellow citizens – men, women and children – were murdered this year by illegal aliens than the combined death toll of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan since those military campaigns began.

Though no federal statistics are kept on murders or any other crimes committed by illegal aliens, a number of groups have produced estimates based on data collected from prisons, news reports and independent research.Twelve Americans are murdered every day by illegal aliens, according to statistics released by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. If those numbers are correct, it translates to 4,380 Americans murdered annually by illegal aliens. That’s 21,900 since Sept. 11, 2001.

In that post of mine, I encouraged Americans to do something about these misguided Sanctuary policies:

Learn the math and help change the equation that currently favors non-citizen criminals over law-abiding Americans.

Well, here’s a good example of an American stepping up to the plate. In this case, the involvement comes in the form of a “Letter To The Editor” to the “Keizer Times” from a citizen in Keizer, Oregon, who is clearly fed up with the state of Oregon’s statewide “sanctuary” policy and its governor’s endorsement of such insanity:

To the Editor:

Thanks to Oregon’s governor it has happened again.It was late in the summer of 2002 when two Catholic Sisters were raped and one, Sister Helen Chaska, was murdered. Those deeds were accomplished by an illegal alien. Who, you might ask, is keeping score. I, among others, am. With a recent Portland rape and murder of 15 year old Dani Countryman and the alleged confession by the Gamboa cousins, illegal aliens, it appears to have happened again.There are many good people that are here illegally but unfortunately there are too many bad ones. Based on data from the U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Offender Statistics for 2001 and before, a case can be made that among those here illegally, crimes are four to five times more common than for the general population.In terms of crimes committed, these cases are just the tip of the iceberg. Almost any day one can look at those locked up and see that far too many did not enter our nation legally. Many have committed countless minor crimes but state law prohibits the police from having them deported. Failure to help the federal government enforce immigration laws, being a sanctuary state, and policies of giving driver’s licenses and countless other benefits to anyone that asks has made us a magnet state and I want it to stop immediately.
Roy Duncan
Keizer

Good for you, Mr. Duncan. Good for you, Sir!

And further to Mr. Duncan’s letter, this information from Free Republic on illegal alien crime statistics is germane, as too is this piece written by Heather Mac Donald.

Both should be read to better understand the magnitude of the problem and, most importantly, to become a well-informed citizen-activist.

As Mr. Duncan did, do something!

Oblige me, readers, and follow the math in this straighforward equation.

PI + SC = HC/ND

PI = Political Indifference

The biggest issue for voters of both parties is Iraq, although that much more true for Democrats than Republicans. For the former, that gets majorities or near-majorities in all five states. For Republicans, it never gets above 33% in any of them. For Republicans, immigration and terrorism fight with health care for second place, while for Democrats, neither immigration nor terrorism get hardly any mention as the most important issue.

SC = Sanctuary Cities

Likewise, the mayors of Portland, Oregon and Houston, Texas, both sanctuary cities, have explaining to do. In Portland Tom Potter is soft on illegal aliens, affording them every protection he can. Potter continues to do this, despite the murder of 15-year-old Danny Countryman, who was allegedly strangled by Alejandro Gamboa, an illegal with a drunk driving conviction.

Clackamas County authorities never reported Gamboa to ICE after his first conviction. That murder happened near Portland, not in the city. But Portland still refuses to alert ICE about criminal alien arrests in most cases.Likewise in Houston where Mayor Bill White watched as Juan Salinas was charged with killing a family of three in a drunk driving crash. Salinas, an illegal from Mexico, had two prior charges — assault and public intoxication. But ICE knew nothing about him.The soft system in Harris County released Salinas on $1,500 bail. That’s $150 cash. So he was free to kill the Williams family, including two-year-old Xavier.

HC/ND = Heinous Crimes and Needless Deaths (committed against bona-fide American citizens by illegal aliens)

Yesterday, a family member of one of the slain victims, Iofemi Hightower, described the level of savagery of the attack. He said the thugs used a machete to hack their victims.

“They cut my niece’s face off,” said John McClain, who is Hightower’s great-uncle, and the chaplain of the Newark Police Department. “They cut her from cheek to cheek. They left her head hanging.”

McClain said the mortician told him he had to work for three days to put his grand-niece’s face back together.

“Most people couldn’t tell, when he was done, but the family could tell,” he said.

I have written and published posts in recent days on misguided ”Sanctuary City” policies here, here, and here.

I have written and published posts in recent days on our “porous borders” president, George W. Bush, here, here, and here.

Learn the math and help change the equation that currently favors non-citizen criminals over law-abiding Americans.

Michelle Malkin tells you where to start (scroll down her post for contact names). Become a citizen-patriot and get involved and do something.

And remember this and be reasured by it: it hasn’t always been the case that this country has had a president (George W. Bush) unwilling to do the job that this previous president (Dwight David Eisenhower) was willing to do. Nor did America not always have a president (Theodore Roosevelt comes immediately to mind), who understood what the correct parameters of immigration ought to be.

Follow-Up: Sobering commentary from the prestigious Claremont Institute:

Cities began adopting sanctuary laws in the 1980s, supposedly to foster trust between illegal immigrants and police. Proponents argued that crimes would not be reported, witnesses to crime would not come forth and immigrants wouldn’t cooperate with police if they feared deportation. Yet the policies adopted reflect the power of
immigration advocacy groups more than concerns about crime prevention. Politicians in large cities with significant immigrant populations simply surrendered to the demands of immigrant rights groups that sought to minimize—if not extinguish—the distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens. Nor is it only immigrants’ rights groups that promote sanctuary cities. Business interests want a steady source of cheap, compliant and exploitable labor; the minions of the welfare state want to magnify their power by extending the largess of the administrative state to those who will, in all likelihood, take their place in the so-called “underclass.”The resulting policies not only tolerate crime—after all, illegal immigrants are lawbreakers—but actively abet and protect criminal activity by handcuffing the powers of the police.Currently over 400,000 illegal immigrants within our borders have received final deportation orders from a federal judge but have failed to show up for deportation. Nearly a quarter of these absconders are convicted criminals. In sanctuary cities police may not inquire into the deportation status of these aliens or apprehend them until they have committed another crime.

Follow-Up II: Take the time to read Heather Mac Donald’s testimony before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security, and Claims. Here are excerpts:

Sanctuary laws are a serious impediment to stemming gang violence and other crime. Moreover, they are a perfect symbol of this country’s topsy-turvy stance towards illegal immigration.Sanctuary laws, present in such cities as Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, Austin, Houston, and San Francisco, generally forbid local police officers from inquiring into a suspect’s immigration status or reporting it to federal authorities.  Such laws place a higher priority on protecting illegal aliens from deportation than on protecting legal immigrants and citizens from assault, rape, arson, and other crimes.Though the numbers of illegal gang members remain elusive, the evidence for the destructive effects of sanctuary laws is incontrovertible.  In 2002, for example, four illegal Mexicans, accompanied by one legal immigrant, abducted and brutally raped a 42-year-old mother of two near some railroad tracks in Queens, New York. The New York Police Department had already arrested three of the illegal aliens numerous times for such crimes as assault, attempted robbery, criminal trespass, illegal gun possession, and drug offenses. But pursuant to New York’s sanctuary policy, the department had never notified the INS.The standard argument for sanctuary laws is that they encourage illegal aliens to work with the police or seek government services.  This argument is based on myth, not evidence. No illegal alien advocate has ever provided a shred of evidence that sanctuary laws actually accomplish their alleged ends.  Nor has anyone shown that illegal aliens are even aware of sanctuary laws.  The evidence for the destructive effects of sanctuary laws is clear, however.

Follow-Up III: And here’s a classic example of “PI” — i.e., political indifference — from the vigilant folks at Corruption Chronicles (referencing a piece in The Washington Times):

According to the Washington Times, government agencies “are among the biggest employers of the half-million persons in the U.S. illegally using ‘non-work’ Social Security numbers [numbers previously issued by the Social Security Administration to legal aliens who were not authorized to work in the United States.]”And herein lies the real issue: while taxpayer dollars are being used to implement ICE raids, the government entities should be working with ICE are, rather, engaging in a tug-of-war, using the very illegal immigrant labor they should be fighting.While the nation is locked in a battle to end the illegal immigration crisis, it is a travesty that our government agencies are failing in their most basic duty: to follow the rule of law.

And here’s more on this outrage — your federal tax dollars at work — from The Dan Stein Report.

Follow-Up IV: And you absolutely must read this eye-opening piece from Free Republic entitled: “Illegal Aliens’ Contributions to the U.S.” Let’s see now, what was it our “compassionate conservative,” open borders president instructed the country on? Oh, I think it was this: “Family values don’t stop at the the Rio Grande.” Right, Mr. President; right. Apparently neither does crime or don’t you care?

Follow-Up V: See, things can change for the better; but, too bad three defenseless college students had to be brutally slaughtered before New Jersey got its act together.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) has sent a pointed letter to President Bush expressing concern that to date, and since the president’s signing of the Secure Fence Act of 2006, only 17.9 miles of an 854 mile border fence have been built.

Here’s are excerpts from that letter:

It is my understanding that approximately $800 million is currently available for the installment of border infrastructure. Despite this funding, only 17.9 of the 854 miles of fencing called for in the Secure Fence Act have been completed as of August 10, 2007. This lack of progress is unacceptable, especially when adequate funding is available to earnestly proceed with fence construction.

Not only is our open and unprotected Southern land border a major exposure in the War on Terrorism, but large and increasing numbers of illegal aliens, as well as dangerous criminal populations, continue to move freely across the border. For the security of the United States and safety of our nation’s citizens, I respectfully request that border fence construction be immediately accelerated.

Jerome R. Corsi, in an article published today in WorldNetDaily, warns:

His criticism that the Bush administration is making no significant progress constructing a fence takes added importance given Bush’s refusal to deny that a hidden SPP agenda was in the works to advance North American economic and political integration with the goal of creating a European Union-style North American Union.

That reference, of course, is to the “Security and Prosperity Partnership” meeting held in Quebec this week among the “Three Amigos” — President Bush, President Felipe Calderon (Mexico), and Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Canada). Throughout his two-term, 6 1/2-year stint to date in the Oval Office, President Bush has convinced most of us that the free, unimpeded movement of so-called ”cheap labor” is more important to him than border and port security, and that is being demonstrated once again and with the DHS’ Michael Chertoff a witting accessory after the fact in the all-too-obvious federal foot-dragging in getting a border fence constructed.

Writes Corsi:

Hunter’s letter points out the Secure Fence Act calls for completing 392 miles of fencing from Calexico, Calif., to Douglas, Ariz., by May 30, 2008.

Additionally, the act mandates 30 miles of fencing be completed in the Laredo, Texas, sector by Dec. 31, 2008.

Hunter emphasized, “This lack of progress is unacceptable, especially when adequate funding is available to earnestly proceed with fence construction.”

But what else is new? When the majority of American voters made clear their desire for “enforcement first” vis-a-vis comprehensive immigration reform, the president, arm-in-arm with Senator Ted Kennedy, tried to ram-rod amnesty and a path to citizenship for illegal aliens (”undocumented Americans,” as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid termed them) through the Congress. And all indications are that he remains defiant, despite much-ballyhooed announcements to the contrary. That’s precisely why Congressman Hunter’s back is up.

And no wonder. What the Bush administration is actually doing in contrast to what it is saying is namely this: pulling National Guardsmen from the border prematurely; prosecuting and imprisoning U.S. Border Patrol agents; and, saying preposturously that if a border fence is ever going to be erected, than the undermanned U.S. Border Patrol will have to provide the manpower!

Don’t kid yourselves. There’s no comprehensive war on terror. If there were, our borders would be sealed by now, our maritime ports secured by now, and those with tempoary visas would be monitored assiduously by now to assure they cannot purposefully overstay their welcome.  What there is, in point of fact, is a comprehensive effort by the Bush administration to rub America’s noses in the fetid aftermath of the confluence of two key political initiatives: first, feeding exploitable, undocumented, immigrant labor to certain conscienceless segments of American industry; and, second, creating a large new base of potential voters for the two political parties to fawn and dote over.

It’s that simple and that reprehensible. American sovereignty be damned; American citizenship be damned; American taxpayers be damned; the English language be damned; the Rule of Law be damned; the American Founding be damned; the United States Constitution be damned.

Meanwhile, the President of the United States gets a fence, but Americans do not.

Follow-Up: Representative Ron Carter (R-TX) has asked the same question of the president:

Representative John Carter (R-Texas) says he has asked President Bush and his staff on numerous occasions why the Homeland Security Department has made little progress in building a 700-mile fence along the southern border. So far, Carter says he has not received a satisfactory response.

“They claim that they’re building fence,” he explains. “I was in a meeting with Karl Rove less than a month ago and he was bragging on the fence. [I asked him to] tell me where it is so I can go see it — because I haven’t seen it, and I can’t find anybody who has.”

Follow-Up II: The Bush Administration — blue smoke and mirrors personified:

The U.S. Border Patrol is asking for volunteers among its agents to build fences on the U.S.-Mexican border, even as President Bush is withdrawing half the National Guard troops he sent there last year to build fences. Rich Pierce, executive vice president of the National Border Patrol Council, said that while the Bush administration “on the one hand is trying to convince the American public it is serious about immigration enforcement,” it has failed to provide the needed funding and manpower. “Meanwhile, the other hand reduces the National Guard by 50 percent, whose job to build the border fence has hardly started,” he said. “Now the border Patrol agents who were meant to replace the National Guard are pulled from border enforcement and tasked with building the fence.” In May 2006, Mr. Bush ordered 6,000 National Guard troops to the Southwest border as part of “Operation Jump Start” to give the Border Patrol time to recruit, train, hire and assign 6,000 new agents. “The president’s game of pretending to enforce our border continues,” he said.

Follow-Up III: Here’s Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), via YouTube, speaking to the issue of getting the border fence built and responding to an interviewer’s questions; and, and it’s actually anything but funny, here’s the proof of the pudding in terms of today’s border reality (via YouTube myspacetv.com).

Two prominent Republicans, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo, both campaigning for the GOP’s presidential nomination, have assailed mindless ”Sanctuary City” policies on the heels of the recent execution-style murders in Newark, New Jersey — a Sanctuary City – of three teenagers by illegal aliens.

The Boston Herald has published an Associated Press (AP) story on Mitt Romney’s outrage over policies that columnist Mark Steyn has appropriately characterized as tantamount to “the active collusion by multiple cities and states in the subservsion of U.S. sovereignty.”

AP quotes from a new radio ad by the Romney campaign:

“Immigration laws don’t work if they’re ignored. That’s the problem with cities like Newark, San Francisco and New York City that adopt sanctuary policies,” an announcer says in the ad, which runs in New Hampshire and Iowa. “Sanctuary cities become magnets that encourage illegal immigration and undermine secure borders.”

The AP account continues:

Romney has pledged to cut federal funds from cities that adopt what he calls sanctuary policies and ignore federal immigration laws. The ads also say that as governor Romney ordered state police to enforce existing immigration laws, opposed driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants and insisted children be taught English.

Joe Murray, writing for Philadelphia’s The Bulletin, reports on Rep. Tom Tancredo’s (R-CO) reaction to the gruesome murders in Newark:

“The fact that the Newark, New Jersey is a ’sanctuary city’ for illegal aliens is now well known,” stated Colorado Congressman and GOP presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo, who was in Newark on Monday to help educate city officials in hopes that other sanctuary cities will learn a sobering lesson from the Newark slayings.

“Sanctuary cities are safe havens for all illegal aliens, including gang members, drug dealers, rapists and murderers, further exposing the law-abiding citizens of such cities to greater crime,” explained Tancredo.

During his 15-minute statement in front of Newark City hall, he told the gathering of reporters that Newark officials cannot wash their hands of this matter.

“If the alleged assailants are found guilty of these brutal crimes, Newark and its political leadership share a degree of culpability. They have established a sanctuary city policy in violation of federal law, [they have] harbored illegal aliens, and their actions have directly contributed to the deaths of three promising young American kids,” Tancredo said. The congressman also urged the victim’s families to file a civil lawsuit against Newark.

As Frosty Wooldridge acurately depicted them in an important piece published in NewsWithViews.com, Sanctuary City policies deny “application of the ‘Rule of Law’ to illegal aliens.”

It’s inexcusable that bona-fide American citizens in three states (Alaska, Maine, and Oregon) and 31 cities and counties across this country of ours are made even more vulnerable than they already are to the escalating illegal alien crime wave because of the misguided, holier-than-thou, liberal-progressive insanity of elected government officials and the Latino-rights activists, editorial boards, and self-styled civic do-gooders who abet them in the subversion of the Rule of Law.

Houston, are you listening?

Follow-Up: Here’s a link to Mitt Romney’s new radio campaign ad that’s referenced above. Tom Tancredo, of course, has not had a religious conversion on the issue of illegal immigration and Sanctuary Cities. He’s been a long-standing, vocal opponent. Here’s a link to a WorldNetDaily piece on Tancredo’s opposition to sanctuary policies.

Follow-Up II: And here’s a germane post from James Fulford at VDARE Blog that I encourage you to read.

Follow-Up III: And likely entrant to the campaign mix for the GOP’s presidential nomination, Fred Thompson has weighed in on Sanctuary Cities with this piece published at Townhall.com. Writes the former senator from Tennessee:

We have the right to keep criminal predators out of our home. Those who want to immigrate into America need to knock, identify themselves, and ask permission first. They will not do so though if we can’t even ask who they are, which is prevented in sanctuary cities. Now I am a strong federalist, but immigration is a responsibility of the federal government, and the failures of local officials to enforce our national laws have a direct impact on communities around the country. So federal law must be enforced, or our neighborhoods will continue to be the scene of chilling and lurid crimes committed by those who broke the law in the first place to come to America.

Jim Boulet, Jr., author of the Martinez Watch blog and Executive Director of English First, as well as a freelance contributor to National Review Online (NRO), sent me the following e-mail for which I subsequently received permission from him to re-publish it below:

I was shocked to learn that the National Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Senator Mel Martinez (R-Florida) is now publicly scolding his fellow Republicans for opposing amnesty for 12 to 20 million illegal aliens.

In August, Martinez even demanded that all Republican Presidential candidates support an amnesty proposal Martinez himself helped write as a U.S. Senator.

Keep in mind that on Januay 18, 2007, Martinez explicitly promised the members of the Republican National Committee he would not do precisely what he is now doing, impose his pro-amnesty views upon the Republican Party.

I hope you will join me in signing a petition to the Republican National Committee to remove Martinez from his elected post as General Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

Thank you, in advance, for your help on this vital effort to reclaim the Republican Party from a handful of pro-amnesty extremists.

Here is the link to that petition, which I encourage readers of ACSOL to sign, as I did. I also ask fellow bloggers who visit my site to publish a link to the petition on their sites or to link to this post of mine. Either way, please get behind this effort, as it is vital.

I published a post on Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) on August 17th, in which I wrote in part:

I think Republican voters and particularly the small doners among them (and we are fewer in numbers these days for all the obvious reasons) ought to pressure President Bush to force Martinez out at the RNC. “The Decider” will no doubt dig his heels in, as he is want to do when it comes to his “friends” in high places, but the hue and cry from the GOP’s grassroots ought to be voiced nonetheless. We’ve proven before that we can be deafening!

Mr. Boulet’s petition drive is a good start in that direction. Martinez has got to go and to accomplish that a grassroots’ groundswell to force him out at the RNC must ensue!

A Kansas Court of Appeals decision, reports CNS News in this story out today, holds that while it is illegal to enter the United States without the proper documents and permissions, it is not against the law, once here, to be in the country. In other words, successfully storm the Bastille and you’re home free. Sneak into Disneyland and have the run of the park.

As CNS reports:

In its opinion, the court explained that Congress had implicitly created the distinction: “While Congress has criminalized the illegal entry into this country, it has not made the continued presence of an illegal alien in the United States a crime unless the illegal alien has previously been deported,” said the opinion.

The court also cited previous cases, including a 1958 Supreme Court case, which found that laws regarding illegal entry into the country “are not continuing ones, as ‘entry’ is limited to a particular locality and hardly suggests continuity.”

To borrow from an oft-repeated line of George W. Bush’s, it would appear that this three-judge panel was willing to do what the Congress of the United States has been unwilling to do. What else is new?

So let me get this straight (and I’ll use a movie analogy, if it’s all the same to my readers): the “Witch’s Dorothy” illegally entered the Land of Oz when the cyclone tossed her (and Toto, too) and her Auntie Em’s house smack dab in Munchkinland; but, from there on out, during her angst-ridden peregrinations on or about the Yellow Brick Road, she was undeniably and reliably legal.

Of course, once back home in Kansas, having tapped the heels of her ruby slippers three times and been magically deported by the screenplay writer, should she have ever migrated back to the outskirts of Munchkinland and unceremoniously jumped its borders, she would have been in serious do-do with “Nikko” (i.e., Michael Chertoff) and his flying monkeys at DHS.

Much as the Wicked Witch of the West lamented after receiving an ill-timed ablution from Dorothy, all I have to say is:

Oh, what a world — what a world.

A “Sanctuary City,” writes Mark Steyn, in this column published by the Orange County Register, is one in which, like Newark, New Jersey, public officials who ought to know better and care more have “… formally erased the distinction between U.S. citizens and the armies of the undocumented.”

The money-quote from Steyn:

This is the active collusion by multiple cities and states in the subversion of U.S. sovereignty.

Houston’s mayor, Bill White, and its police chief, Harold Hurtt, ought to commit that sentence to memory and reflect on it in light of their ongoing, misguided support of Houston’s Sanctuary City status. And so should the editorial board of the Houston Chronicle.

And they all ought next to read and digest (and soberly reflect upon the implications cited by its author) this “must-read” piece published by The Claremont Institute: “Sanctuary Cities — A New Civil War.”

An excerpt:

Across the nation cities from New York to Houston to San Diego forbid city officials—including police—from inquiring into anyone’s immigration status or cooperating with immigration officials. The police may not stop or detain persons solely due to their immigration status or even inquire into their status while making routine traffic stops or misdemeanor arrests. These policies have, in effect, created safe havens for illegal immigrants, including criminal aliens.

Cities began adopting sanctuary laws in the 1980s, supposedly to foster trust between illegal immigrants and police. Proponents argued that crimes would not be reported, witnesses to crime would not come forth and immigrants wouldn’t cooperate with police if they feared deportation. Yet the policies adopted reflect the power of
immigration advocacy groups more than concerns about crime prevention. Politicians in large cities with significant immigrant populations simply surrendered to the demands of immigrant rights groups that sought to minimize—if not extinguish—the distinction between legal immigrants and illegal aliens. Nor is it only immigrants’ rights groups that promote sanctuary cities. Business interests want a steady source of cheap, compliant and exploitable labor; the minions of the welfare state want to magnify their power by extending the largess of the administrative state to those who will, in all likelihood, take their place in the so-called “underclass.”

The resulting policies not only tolerate crime—after all, illegal immigrants are lawbreakers—but actively abet and protect criminal activity by handcuffing the powers of the police.

And this even though such policies are patently illegal:

What is most remarkable about sanctuary cities is that they are illegal. In 1996 Congress passed two laws dealing with the subject: the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. Under both statutes state and local governments could no longer prohibit employees from inquiring about immigration status or tipping off immigration authorities. The Court of Appeals upheld both provisions in New York v. U.S. (1999).

The upshot, according to the prestigious Claremont Institute (with my emphasis):

The ghost of John C. Calhoun still stalks the land. Calhoun, of course, was the leading architect of nullification—and secession. Almost everyone believes the issues of nullification (the doctrine that federal law can be negated by state laws) and secession were resolved by the North’s victory in the Civil War and the passage of the Reconstruction Amendments. But nullification has once again reared its hoary head, this time in the guise of “sanctuary cities.”

As Mark Steyn asks in the aftermath of the gruesome, execution-style murders of Iofemi Hightower, Dashon Harvey, and Terrance Aeriel:

… tell me why, no matter how many Jose Carranzas it spawns, the nationwide undocumented-immigration protection program erected by this country’s political class remains untouchable and ever-expanding.

Mark Steyn should also ask his question of Fred Barnes, editor, The Daily Standard, who had the audacity to publish this idiocy in the wake of the monstrous murders in Newark:

By dwelling, often emotionally, on the problem of illegal immigration as a paramount issue and as if nothing is being done to deal with it, Republicans are alienating Hispanic Americans.

Right, Mr. Barnes, the wide-ranging, deleterious effects of porous borders, 20+ million illegal aliens, and an egregiously mismanaged Department of Homeland Security do not deserve any grassroots’ response from riled American citizens lest we be branded natavists and bigots by you self-styled, libertarian, Washington elites.

Here in Houston (i.e., Harris County), 400,000+ illegal aliens, and the Latino advocacy groups, government officials, and major city newspaper, which do their bidding, hold 3.9 million bona-fide American citizens hostage. It’s not right, it’s not fair, it’s not legal, and it’s un-American. 

Follow-Up: Voter sentiment (versus that of the political class) on Sanctuary Cities.

Follow-Up II (08/20/07): Citizen-patriot Frosty Wooldridge, writing in NewsWithViews.com, points to the vicious murders in Newark, New Jersey, and offers the following observations (with my emphasis added):

Two weeks ago, in Newark, New Jersey, illegal alien child rapist Jose Carranza and MS-13 gangbanger Rodolfo Godinez along with two other suspects—executed three black American teenagers. A fourth victim hangs on for dear life.

At the same time, New Jersey Governor Corzine and Newark Mayor Cory Booker support “Sanctuary Policy” that protects illegal aliens from arrest–which resulted in the killings. Both illegals featured lengthy arrest records including attempted rape of a five year old girl—but jumped bail. As to the murdered teens, those families cannot stand proudly when their kids graduate from college, get married, have kids or live the American Dream.

Where is the outrage?

Americans no longer tolerate criminal pimping by elected officials.

I’m outraged at Bush, Corzine, Booker, Baldacci, Senator John McCain, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, Kyl, Specter, Martinez, Salazar, all 50 governors and every elected official responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans thus far—and the thousands of deaths yet to happen—because they won’t stop this deadly illegal alien invasion of our country. They support and we pay for 37,000 US troops guarding Korea’s borders, but none on ours!

Which one of our children will be the next victim? Will it be yours? If you live in one of the 30 plus sanctuary cities for illegal aliens, your chances escalate as thousands overrun our borders nightly.

Captain Ed has published this sobering post about what may be a serious medical problem that has sent “The Anchoress” to the hospital today.

Ed advises:

I received a note from her a few minutes ago, telling me she has to go to the emergency room for a serious medical complication that just occurred this morning. I don’t want to get more specific than that, but it is quite serious and needs immediate attention.

I am a long-standing fan of The Anchoress and one who has benefited from her kind and continued support of my blogging, her patient answers to my questions of faith, and the numerous e-mail exhanges we have shared. She’s as fine a human being and as dear a Cyber-Friend, as she is a gifted writer, wife, and mother. And, goodness, what a writer she is!

She’s most certainly in my thoughts and prayers and I thank Captain Ed for the heads-up.

Bless her heart, she just wrote this days ago in this post of hers:

Bernard is back to writing A Certain Slant of Light. Although he and I disagree strongly on some issues, he’s always one of my favorite blogfolk.

On August 10th, I sent the following e-mail to her:

DEAR ANCHORESS,

Thanks for the link to my blog that you posted yesterday and for the kind mention of me.

You’re among just a handful of top-tier conservative (trust I can use that adjective) bloggers who regularly links to those of us with much smaller followings. And, believe me, that generosity doesn’t go unnoticed. It’s a credit to you.

Now, if I may segue abruptly. I’ve just begun reading “Opened Ground,” a collection of poems by the Irish poet Seamus Heaney. Are you familiar with his work? My guess is that you are given your love of poetry. Anyway, I’m really impressed. I keep returning to the book.

Hope your telephone line/Internet connection issues get resolved.

Best wishes to you,

The Anchoress loves poetry and opera, as I do, and writes with a craft, insight, and compelling sensitivity that I only wish in my wildest dreams I could muster. She’s a top-tier blogger and a thoroughly classy lady and I’m flat worried about her.

I hope she comes home well and soon, and that she can hoist a Guinness and return to her keyboard and the magic that are her words.

Follow-Up (08/18/07): I am pleased and relieved to find this brief post today from “The Anchoress” indicating that she’s back home and in the process of recovering from what sounds like a really painful ordeal. Typical of her and her good soul, she felt compelled to write to her readers! This fan of hers is grateful for that courtesy and appreciative of God’s blessings in answering our prayers. Do get well, Anchoress, and take the time to rest and get your strength back.

John Perazzo, writing for FrontPageMagazine.com, has published not only the “must-read” column of the day, but perhaps one of the seminal columns on the whole issue of illegal immigration, its rampant, deleterious effects, and of the misguided propagandists who portray it as something other than it is — a pox upon America and its legitimate citizens.

Here’s an excerpt, but take the time to read and digest the entire piece, as it merits your review:

Just a week prior to the publication of Rev. Edgar’s piece, four African Americans (two male, two female) aged 18 to 20 were accosted in a Newark, New Jersey parking lot by a quartet of murderous savages, two of whom proceeded to sexually assault the women before forcing all four victims to kneel on the ground and shooting them in the head, execution style. Three of the four victims died. The two primary suspects are 28-year-old Jose Lachira Carranza and 24-year-old Rodolfo Godinez — illegal aliens from Peru and Nicaragua, respectively. At the time of the attack, Carranza was free on $150,000 bail despite 31 pending indictments related to his having committed repeated sexual assaults over a four-year period against a girl who “was in his care” beginning when she was four years old.

Rev. Edgar, of course, sees absolutely nothing in the bestial cruelty exhibited by Carranza and Godinez that invalidates the sentiments he expresses in his most recent article. Similar anecdotal anomalies could be cited about members of any demographic group, he would argue. But what Edgar and the rest of the religious Left invariably fail to address in any meaningful way are the staggering aggregate facts that go far beyond anecdotal observations of illegal immigrants’ criminality.

For the reasons cited by Mr. Perazzo and for the many other issues I’ve researched, written about, and linked to here at A Certain Slant Of Light in the context of the illegal immigration nightmare in our country, I stand by this statement published yesterday vis-a-vis the question of amnesty for illegals.

First came this last year:

President Bush recently announced that the Federal government would make it easier for employers to verify employment eligibility and continue to hold them to account for the workers they hire.  To that end, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced today the release of two Federal regulations to help businesses comply with current legal hiring requirements intended to reduce the employment of unauthorized aliens.  

The first proposal would permit U.S. businesses to digitize their I-9 employment forms, which are used to verify eligibility to work in the United States.  The other proposed regulation would set forth guidance for U.S. businesses when handling no-match letters from the Social Security Administration (SSA) concerning submitted employee Social Security numbers or from DHS concerning documents submitted by employees during the I-9 process.

 Followed recently by this:

The Bush administration Friday announced a range of measures currently underway to crack down on illegal immigration, amidst Congressional inaction.

Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff and Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez announced the reforms, which they said go as far as the executive branch is able to within the confines of existing law.

A 26-point press release issued jointly by the two agencies focuses primarily on punitive measures, including vamped up border security, workplace enforcement and training additional local authorities to identify and detain undocumented immigrants.

All of this is in addition to a DHS regulation, issued Friday, that will fine employers who fail to comply with a “no-match letter” mandating the removal of employees with unverified social security numbers.

Now comes this today:

Days after unveiling a major crackdown on businesses that hire illegal immigrants, the Bush administration is now quietly admitting that its most heavily touted weapon in pursuing employers will be virtually useless.

At the heart of the new rules announced last week is toughened Homeland Security enforcement of so-called “no match” letters - which the Social Security Administration sends to companies when employees have questionable identification numbers.

But Homeland Security officials acknowledged this week that because of a privacy provision in the IRS code, immigration officials will actually have no way of knowing which employers have received “no-match” letters, which have complied and which have not.

We need a “surge” all right — in competence and candor, rather than in continuing political cunning.

Follow-Up: Now this post from The Dan Stein Report just popped up on Bloglines.

Follow-Up II: Speaking of blue smoke and mirrors, just how much credibility can you put into the president’s sudden and avowed commitment to border and immigration law enforcement when you read this sort of patent asininty. Does the president have a handle on anything anymore?

Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL), chairman of the Republican National Committee and yet another in President Bush’s pantheon of misguided “friends,” and further, as you no doubt recall, a vocal proponent of the failed Senate Shamnesty bill, blasted the GOP’s two top presidential aspirants this week. Now there’s a role for the RNC’s top dog in the fight.

As commented on in an editorial by The Washington Times:

In a sign of serious Republican disarray, Sen. Mel Martinez, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, has just lambasted his party’s two top presidential candidates over immigration positions which most Americans regard as reasonable. The junior senator from Florida is wrong on more than the substance. This is a case of Mr. Martinez putting his own personal views and his loyalty to President Bush above the serious responsibilities of his chairmanship.

Now National Review Online’s editorial board has returned fire, as well:

It is bad enough that Sen. Mel Martinez, the national chairman of the Republican party, is out of step with a large majority of the party’s voters and volunteers on immigration. What’s worse is that he is now attacking the party’s presidential candidates for being in step with them. Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani have turned against the “comprehensive” reform that Martinez has tried to push through the Senate, so Martinez is accusing them of not “leading on the tough issues.” Neither is Martinez: To be a leader, you have to have followers; and the country does not want to follow him down the path to amnesty. Romney and Giuliani are right to seek another route.

And here’s the money quote from NRO:

The recent debate over immigration reform revealed broad support for securing our borders and strong opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens. While GOP Chairman Martinez counsels politicians to ignore this popular sentiment, politicians should and will be rewarded for listening to voters.

I think Republican voters and particularly the small doners among them (and we are fewer in numbers these days for all the obvious reasons) ought to pressure President Bush to force Martinez out at the RNC. “The Decider” will no doubt dig his heels in, as he is want to do when it comes to his “friends” in high places, but the hue and cry from the GOP’s grassroots ought to be voiced nonetheless. We’ve proven before that we can be deafening!

Meanwhile, and while we’re at it, isn’t it high time that Michael Chertoff, the ineffectual head of the Department of Homeland Security, gets his marching papers too? Maybe with Martinez and Chertoff out, we could get the border fence built and an enforcement first mindset at work in the Congress and in the Oval Office — you know, to match the will of the majority of America’s bona-fide citizens.

Follow-Up: Backpedaling or CYA-style rationalizing? I guess we can add Mel Martinez to the growing list of RINOS who are finding (more like faking) religion on the heels of a grassroots’ uprising over the Senate’s Bush-Kennedy-Kyl-McCain-Graham immigration reform bill that was “comprehensive” in its sweeping efforts to secure amnesty and citizenship for lawbreakers.

Regardless, Martinez ought to go!

Follow-Up II: This is perfect — so apropos!

Follow-Up III (08/18/07): The link in my “Follow-Up II” first “Follow-Up” is to a post by Jim Boulet Jr., a freelance writer writing editor for NRO’s ”The Corner,” and he has been kind enough to write to me to advise that, while I presumed his reference was to a current statement by Mel Martinez, in point of fact the statement (made back on January 18, 2007) actually predates Martinez’s ascension to the chairmanship of the Republican National Committee. In his e-mail, Mr. Boulet suggests a look at the following post published at “Martinez Watch.” I thank Jim Boulet for bringing this to my attention!
 

Ramesh Ponnuru, writing for National Review Online’s popular “The Corner” blog, frames a question on amnesty for illegal aliens:

Some folks opposed to amnesty are against it on principle: They think it’s wrong to reward lawbreakers. Others, however, would be open to an amnesty if illegal immigration were first brought under lasting control. They’re against it now because they fear it would act as a magnet for new illegal immigration. I’m not quite sure how many people are in each camp. If you want to weigh in, I’ve opened a discussion at the Washington Post on the topic.

Well, I’ll weigh in for my readers.

I oppose amnesty for illegal alien lawbreakers. I believe the “Rule of Law” is the cornerstone of our great nation. It’s maintenance is paramount. The lawlessness of the border-jumpers and the patent indifference of our federal government and a succession of presidents, including George W. Bush, to enforcement of our land borders, maritime ports, and current federal immigration laws, which have led, I should add, to a population in this country of 20+ million illegal aliens, are unconscionable and should neither be rewarded, nor forgiven.

I favor enforcement first — enforcement that secures our land borders, our maritime ports, and identifies and deals effectively with visa overstayers. And to be sure, enforcement that identifies employers who knowingly employ, or contract with, or make off-the-books cash payments to illegal aliens in violation of federal law.

In the context of such vigorous and sustained enforcement, I favor induced self-deportation — i.e., getting the message to illegal aliens that America is not a “welcoming society” for those who jump our borders, enter our ports, or purposefully overstay their tempoary visas illegally. No jobs, no welfare, no education, no freebies — i.e., the end of a government-imposed, taxpayer-subsidized, safety net — will make the message clear that the United States of America, a nation founded by immigrants, is indeed a “welcoming society,” but only to those who abide by our immigration laws, get in line, await their turn, and, once here legally, assimilate and switch their allegiance to this country and learn its language, English.

I am not in favor of mass deportation, as that is just as impracticable politically, as it would be in identifying all who are already here illegally and their whereabouts, and I know it and most reasonable people do as well. But, self-deportation is viable, should be encouraged, and is already happening in the wake of the defeat of the Senate Shamnesty bill. There are ways to get them to voluntarily go back home that are not draconian or inhumane.

Bottom-line, foreigners have no right to breech our borders and ports or willfully overstay their visas, no more than foreign governments, such as Mexico, have a right to encourage their citizens to enter our country illegally in order to export poverty, illiteracy, crime, and disease, while receiving in return for their nefarious efforts billions of dollars in annual remittances. An invasion is an invasion and it can come in many guises. And it must be resisted and checked and zealously so, and most particularly in an age of international terrorism.

Amnesty does not just wash away the sins of the lawbreaker and encourage more lawlessness in its aftermath; it serves further to exculpate those in government who are culpable for having allowed our nation’s sovereignty to be undermined, its culture rented, its citizenship devalued, its citizens safety and well-being violated, and its national priorities upended. Neither illegal aliens, nor the government officials who cater to them, deserve a pass.

Citizen-patriot Frosty Wooldridge, in this must-read piece published today in NewsWithViews.com, unmasks the cruel civic-minded masquerade of Sanctuary City policies — the misguided offshoots of a policy enacted in 1979 by former Police Chief Daryl Gates of Los Angeles in Special Order 40.

Writes Mr. Wooldridge:

That decree allowed illegal aliens immunity from law enforcement. No matter how heinous their crimes, their immigration status could not be determined, which meant they could not be deported. It created an avalanche of ‘protected’ and ‘ignored’ crime. It mandated two-tiered justice.

He continues:

“Sanctuary Policy” denies application of the ‘rule of law’ to illegal aliens. From that policy, aliens now command ID forgery networks that give them new identities, social security cards, green cards, birth certificates, drug smuggling gangs, people smuggling, child sex rings and unlimited drunk driving without driver’s licenses or insurance. Maryland and Oregon hand out driver’s licenses to illegal aliens like cotton candy.

In reality, what has sanctuary policy created? Greater than 20 million illegal aliens now operate lawlessly within America.

And he points to some of the major cuplrits, among them Houston:

Today, dozens of cities practice “Sanctuary Policy.” City councils voted that policy into law in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Newark, New York, Miami, Detroit, Denver, Atlanta, Houston and Portland–and dozens more give immunity from prosecution for illegal aliens.

Ed Koch, Rudy Giuliani, Michael Bloomberg of New York City, Chicago’s Daley, Denver’s Hickenlooper and Webb–and most big city mayors endorse the policy. Bush I, Clinton and Bush II support sanctuary with non-enforcement of our borders.

But one tragic, unconscionable result of the convoluted thinking of elected officials (and the civic leaders and editorial boards that support them) in enacting and retaining these outrageous policies is pointed to by Frosty Wooldridge (as it similarly was by Newt Gingrich this week):

Last week, illegal Jose Carranza and his side-kick MS-13 gangbanger Rodolfo Godinez executed three black students in a parking lot. How could they do it? They enjoyed “Sanctuary Policy” while both sported rap sheets as long as a football field. Those criminals benefited from protection against deportation.

Read the entire column by Mr. Wooldridge and kindly revisit my recent posts on the subject here and here. Then write your Senators and Representatives! As Mr. Wooldridge rightly concludes:

Does any U.S. Senator with a three digit IQ understand that our citizens suffer, endure and die at the hands of the “Sanctuary Policy”? Why would city councils across the nation enact it? Why would Governor Baldacci of Maine and Oregon’s governor promote sanctuary?

Follow-Up: Albuquerque, New Mexico — a case in point. Ridiculous and unconscionable! And this preposterous policy of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” right on the heels of the sobering, tragic impact of a similarly senseless policy in Newark, New Jersey, where police officers are proscribed from reporting the immigration status of the people they arrest. Where’s the outrage?

Follow-Up II: Ilana Mercer, writing for WorldNet Daily, hits the nail on the head: “… sanctuary cities have abandoned crime prevention.” The article touches, by way of example, on the Sanctuary Policy in Houston, Texas, America’s 4th largest city and home to 400,000+ illegal aliens:

Houston’s sanctuary policy goes beyond the call of duty – to illegal aliens, that is. Paraphrased, it instructs that unlawful entry into the U.S. not be treated as an ongoing offense; that its police officers not stop or apprehend individuals solely on the belief that they are in the country illegally; and that officers not make inquiries as to the citizenship status of any person. It gets worse. “Officers [can] contact the Immigration and Naturalization Service regarding a person only if that person is arrested on a separate criminal charge and the officer knows the prisoner is an illegal alien.”

Follow-Up III: The bona-fide citizens of Newark, New Jersey (in contradistinction to the illegal alien population there) ought to be incredulous and outraged over this report from WNYC News:

Newark’s Mayor, Cory Booker, says he has no plans to change police policy, in the wake of a triple murder where two undocumented immigrants are the prime suspects.

Ace of Spades HQ links to the story. “Ace” speaks for me and all thoroughly fed-up American citizens (people of consummate humanity, but well-grounded common sense) when he writes:

I wonder what the families of the dead might think about that. Perhaps they have a different opinion on the relevance of this detail.

Let us start referring to the “ever-increasing casualties of the sanctuary city policy” and note each new “grim milestone” as it occurs.

 Or is that language only media-approved for use in the War on Terror?

Follow-Up IV: Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), writing in Townhall.com, assails Sanctuary City laws (i.e., “amnesty zones” or “zones of protection”) and those elected officials who implement and embrace them:

“Sanctuary cities” tell those who are here illegally that the laws of this country do not matter. Sanctuary policies create virtual amnesty zones for illegal immigrants. While amnesty was just defeated in the Congress, places like New York City offer a promise of amnesty to those who ignore our immigration laws. It is disturbing that some cities have intentionally decided that certain laws do not need to be enforced.

Furthermore, sanctuary city policies encourage illegal immigration and weaken our nation’s ability to secure our borders. There is very little doubt that sanctuary city policies are one contributing factor to why we have gone from 3 million illegal immigrants in this country in 1986 to more than 12 million illegal immigrants today.The policies that were implemented and embraced by mayors in places like New York City severely undermined the enforcement of our immigration laws and weakened our ability to secure our nation’s borders. The public officials who openly advocated the creation of “zones of protection” for lawbreakers are responsible for contributing to a flood of illegal immigrants in this country today. These policies have created an even bigger illegal immigration problem.

Follow-Up V (08/17/07): “Do Not Pass Go” without reading this compelling, hard-hitting post at Political Mavens on the utter idiocy of Newark’s Sanctuary City policy. An excerpt:

The abject degeneracy of political correctness has reached a high water mark in Newark, New Jersey.

In that city, four college-bound students were forced to kneel against a schoolyard wall where they were shot point-blank in the head. Three were killed outright. The fourth survived. One of the alleged perps? An illegal alien. But not just any illegal alien. One who had been arrested two previous times, once for assaulting bar patrons ten months ago, and recently for repeatedly raping a five-year-old relative and threatening the lives of her and her family.

Incredibly, this dirtbag made bail twice: $50,000 for the first incident and a whopping $200,000 for the second. Even more incredibly, it was reported by Fox News that Newark officials knew he was an illegal, and did absolutely nothing about it. Why?Because Newark–like many other cities where decent Americans are held hostage to political correctnes–is a sanctuary city. A sanctuary city is one in which the local political hacks have made it policy to defy federal immigration law by preventing police and other authorities from inquiring about a suspect’s immigration status–even if that suspect has committed a felony.

The peripatetic, thoroughly clueless Michael Chertoff, head of the ill-run government boondoggle known as the Department of Homeland Security — a misnomer, if there ever was one, in the wake of 20+ million illegal aliens afoot in our land, many of whom sport forged documentation and many of whom commit serious crimes — was in El Paso, Texas, this week pontificating again, as is his proclivity.

The United Press International (UPI) account serves to remind us that this gross incompetent is still begging off having to do his job:

 U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said he hopes Congress will soon revisit immigration reform for economic reasons.Chertoff told a border-security conference in El Paso, Texas, that his department was now faced with having to enforce immigration laws that not only pull resources away from dealing with security threats but also have a negative impact on agriculture and other economic sectors that have become dependent on illegal migrant labor.“I’m still hopeful that it may be revisited,” he said of the immigration bill, which died in the Senate this year.“In the long run, we all know that this problem has to be tackled comprehensively,” he said, by creating a channel for those who want to come to the country for work to do so legally.Meanwhile, Homeland Security found itself facing “a need to pursue people coming here (illegally) to work, taking time away from (pursuing people) who are coming here to do us harm” like drug smugglers and terrorists.

So border and interior enforcement are needless priorities, according to Chertoff, as they detract from DHS’ principal job, which is to thwart terrorism? Come again!

Since the president and his less than able DHS’ chief cannot seem to get a border fence built, perhaps the Oval Office occupant could get one built around Michael Chertoff’s office, so there’d be less time for Chertoff’s far-flung speech-making, interviewing, photo-oping, and negotiating amnesty legislation, and more time for doing his core job and the homework to do it effectively (for a change).

Frankly, it’s preposterous to keep this guy around. He’s out of his league and Americans are suffering for it.

Follow-Up: From the August 14th edition of CNN’s “Lou Dobbs Tonight,” the following (my emphasis added):

DOBBS: Well, and this entire administration and, frankly, this Congress, to put — I mean I love it when the president of the United States says we can’t enforce our boarders without a guest worker program?You know, I don’t know whether the administration is that stupid or this administration just thinks the American people are that stupid.It is — and to hear Michael Chertoff, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security now, almost six years after September 11th, talking about economics and labor dislocation within the economy instead of focusing on border security and port security in preparing this nation for terrorist attacks and preventing them, is talking nonsense at a border conference in El Paso and pandering at the same time — a magical political feat.SYLVESTER: That is, indeed, true. And we’ll have to see if Chertoff’s message — if they stay on message with this enforcement. But at this point, that’s at least what their talking points say to talk about and so that’s what they’re doing is talking a good game of enforcement — Lou.

Follow-Up II: Humor me, dear readers, and go to this link and read Frank Laughter’s post at Common Sense Junction. Now then, and having done so, I next suggest the following: lets get the federal government to put up that fence around Michael Chertoff’s office at the Department of Homeland Insecurity to test whether or not, to borrow Mr. Laughter’s words, the DHS Secretary can “go around it, over it, under it, or through it,” as he and his yes-men claim will be the case with illegal alien border-jumpers should the Secure Fence Act of 2006 that George W. Bush signed into law in a grand photo-op ever gets funded and implemented.

By the way, and as a point of clarification, Representative Duncan Hunter (R-CA) wrote the following with reference to the Secure Fence Act of 2006:

“As a lead proponent of H.R. 6061, the Secure Fence Act, I am writing to clarify the intention of the legislation,” Hunter wrote. “Media reports have recently suggested that the directive for fence construction in the bill is optional. That is not the case. HR 6061 clearly states: ‘The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for at least two layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical barriers, roads, lighting, cameras and sensors.’ While I worked with House and Senate leadership in reaching an agreement that will allow your department flexibility on the exact location of the at least 700 miles of fencing, its actual construction is not in dispute.”

To ensure Chertoff moved forward with the fence, Hunter noted that the fiscal 2007 Homeland Security funding law included language that will withhold $950 million from the department unless it presents a plan for building the fence within 60 days.

The day after Hunter sent Chertoff this letter, Hunter called a press conference at the U.S.-Mexico border. “The fence will be built,” Hunter told reporters. “This is not a recommendation. It’s a mandate by Congress.”

To date, the president and his Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security have seen to it that only 13 miles of border fencing have been erected. As Rep. Hunter stated in a July 4th interview on CNN’s “The Situation Room”:

HUNTER: Well, he [Bush] is–he has not built the fence. I wrote that bill in October. It was passed by the Senate by a vote of 80-19. It was passed by the House overwhelmingly. That extends a double border fence 854 miles–mandates its extension across Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas. I checked the other day and the administration has only built 13 miles of the 854 miles. . . .

MALVEAUX: Have you talked to the president about this?

HUNTER: Yes, I have. I informed him the other day that it was only 13 miles. He expressed surprise at that. . . .

MALVEAUX: Did he know there was only 13 miles? . . .

HUNTER: It’s only 13 miles. No, he thought it was more than that. And who knows? I’m sure that the Department of Homeland Security has been telling him that things are great in terms of construction of that fence. But the fact–

MALVEAUX: But what did the what did the president think it was? . . .

HUNTER: Well, he didn’t have a–he didn’t have a number. He just expressed surprise that it–that that little, only 13 miles, had been accomplished at that point.

Follow-Up III (08/16/07): GOP presidential hopeful Duncan Hunter once again illuminates the border fence controversy in this report filed by Joe Murray of The Bulletin and, to be sure, calls them like he sees them in commenting on Michael Chertoff’s ineffectual reign at DHS:

“I am a very political guy and wear a political hat. … I am a partisan Republican,” Hunter said. But on the issue of immigration, specifically the extension of his border security fence that was passed by Congress and signed by the president, Hunter makes his dissatisfaction with the White House known.

“Last year, I wrote the law to extend that fence 854 miles. … Only 13.4 miles of the 854 miles has been built,” asserted Hunter. “As president of the United States we will build this entire fence … all 854 miles … in six months. That is my commitment to you.” Hunter told the crowd of border security activists that there was no reason for the delay and the excuses of Michael Chertoff, secretary of homeland security, failed to withstand scrutiny.

“When asked why he has not built the fence, Mr. Chertoff stated that the issue was complicated. I am sure glad that he is not part of the space program or we would never have gotten a man on the moon,” Hunter said.
While others try and shape the immigration debate in terms of xenophobia, Hunter told the audience that such arguments are red herrings and that border security is a matter of national security.

“In 2005, the border patrol captured 155,000 people crossing the southern border that were not from Mexico. … 1,100 were from China,” stated Hunter. “Everyone in the world knows the way to get into this country is not through an airport, but to cross the southern border.”

Prominent blogger Michelle Malkin has recently begun a grassroots’ campaign to bring about an end to the insane “Sanctuary City” policies that plague our country and contribute to the illegal alien crime wave. That campaign is called “Deport Them Now!” and you’ll find a permanent link to it in my site’s blogroll under the “Illegal Immigration” heading. I urge you to give consideration to joining forces with Michelle.

In this must-read VDARE column, Malkin writes:

From New York to Newark to Seattle to Portland to San Francisco to Los Angeles to San Diego to Houston to Miami, lawmakers have taken this go-with-the-flow attitude toward illegal alien border-crossers and visa overstayers and deportation fugitives. “Let ‘em come.”

But in the wake of the Newark murders and the illumination of illegal alien gang crime penetrating the country, a new rallying cry came from the lips of Newark Mayor Cory Booker: “Get this evil out of my city.” That won’t happen without a demonstrated commitment to cooperate with the feds to enforce immigration laws and deport violent and dangerous criminal aliens first.

A few weeks ago, I launched deportthemnow.com. Nearly 8,000 volunteers have signed up to make their voices heard. Our top priorities will be to push for the adoption of a program known as 287(g) to identify criminal illegal aliens in as many cities as possible; to repeal “don’t ask-don’t tell” sanctuary laws; and to support lawmakers like Newark City Councilman Ron C. Rice, who is pushing a resolution to coordinate efforts between law enforcement when an illegal immigrant is charged with a felony, and New Jersey Assemblyman Richard Merkt, R-Morris, who proposed prohibiting jail officials from releasing illegal immigrants and requiring them to be remanded to federal authorities.

Similarly, and with equal fervor, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has come out in opposition to Sanctuary City policies, as reported earlier this week by A Certain Slant Of Light. The Dan Stein Report took the hand-off from my ACSOL post and ran with the story, publishing the YouTube video of Gingrich’s It’s Time To Win The War At Home address. Do watch it.

Now Gingrich, in a column published at Human Events, amplifies his position, saying Enough Is Enough, and offers the following well-thought, legislative prescription on illegal immigration and the misguided “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell” Sanctuary City policies that exacerbate the illegal alien crime wave — this on the heels of, as Mr. Gingrich writes, the brutal deaths of  “three young college students who were murdered execution-style in Newark, N.J., last week.”

The President should call Congress back into special session for three days to pass a single, decisive bill.

It should be called the “Terrance Aeriel, Dashon Harvey, Iofemi Hightower Act” in honor of the three young students who lost their lives due to their government’s failure to protect them.

The Aeriel-Harvey-Hightower Act should be very simple and straightforward:

1. The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Homeland Security will jointly outsource the development of a virtually real-time identification system to check legal status of felons and have it up and running by Jan. 1, 2008. The system should be measured against the speed of automatic teller machines and should be run by private-sector companies who know how to build and maintain real-time identification systems and how to combat fraud.
2. Every person arrested for a felony will be checked against the federal data base, and unless there is positive proof they are American citizens or legal residents in America, they will be presumed to be here illegally and will be detained.
3. Any city, county or state that refuses to participate in checking every felony arrest will immediately lose all their federal aid.
4. No illegal alien criminal will be released back into the American population to prey upon Americans. After they finish time for their crime, they will be retained until deported. Retention and deportation will be the responsibility of the federal government, and every state and local authority that has criminals serving time who prove to be illegal aliens will turn them over to federal authorities when their local or state conviction is completed.
5. All current prisoners will be screened to identify who is in the United States illegally, and the illegal alien prisoners will be turned over to the federal government for deportation.

Follow-Up: I ask again: Houston, are you listening? These sorts of unnecessary tragedies cannot continue!