The DREAM Dies,....

DREAM Act Goes Down in Flames in Senate

An immigration bill that would blaze a trail to legal status for hundreds of thousands of undocumented students went down in flames in the Senate on Saturday, delivering a critical blow to Democrats and Hispanic activists.

Even though the House approved the DREAM Act last week, the Senate fell five votes short of the 60 needed Saturday to advance the bill past Republican opposition.

President Obama said in a statement it was "incredibly disappointing" that Senate Republicans blocked the bill.

The DREAM Act, which opponents have decried as a "nightmare," is now likely to languish for years with Republicans taking back control of the House and picking up an additional handful of seats in the Senate next month.

I know I'm a little behind the flow of things, but in between jumping for joy on this one, notice again the accompanying picture:

and the caption beneath it?

Undocumented students push for the DREAM Act at a New York rally

"Undocumented students?"  You mean "Illegal immigrants," right?  And where was the INS or ICE at this rally?? 

DREAM?? More Like National Nightmare,...

DREAM or Nightmare? Immigration Bill Clears House, but Appears Doomed

WASHINGTON -- Less than 24 hours after the House carved out a path to legalization for hundreds of thousands of foreign-born youngsters brought to this country illegally, their hopes of legal status are likely to be dashed in the Senate.

Democrats face an uphill climb to gather the 60 votes needed in a vote expected Thursday to advance the so-called DREAM Act over opposition by most Republicans and a handful of their own members.

The House passed the legislation Wednesday night after Democratic leaders painstakingly lined up the votes to push it through.

(snip)

Critics denounce the bill as a backdoor amnesty grant that would encourage more foreigners to sneak into the United States in hopes of eventually being legalized as well.

(snip)

The legislation would give hundreds of thousands of young illegal immigrants brought to the United States before the age of 16, and who have been here for five years and graduated from high school or gained an equivalency degree, a chance to gain legal status if they joined the military or attended college.

Great!  Let's give every nation that has an axe to grind against us an open opportunity to create another Fort Hood incident!!

That's TWO States, Mr. President...

Florida AG McCollum, Lawmakers Unveil Immigration Bill Modeled After Arizona's

Published August 11, 2010
FoxNews.com

Florida's attorney general and a group of state lawmakers moved Wednesday to push the Sunshine State into the forefront of the national illegal immigration debate with a bill modeled after Arizona's controversial law -- only, they claim, with a better shot of withstanding a court challenge.

State Attorney General Bill McCollum, following the lead of Virginia's top prosecutor, also issued an opinion saying state law enforcement already have the right to ask about immigration status in the course of their duties.

"This legislation will provide new enforcement tools for protecting our citizens and will help our state fight the ongoing problems created by illegal immigration," McCollum, a Republican, said in a written statement. "Florida will not be a sanctuary state for illegal aliens."

McCollum helped write the legislation, though Florida lawmakers will be responsible for pushing it in the legislature.

The move comes after a U.S. District Court judge blocked key provisions of Arizona's law. The battle between Arizona and the U.S. government, as well as civil rights groups, could make its way to the Supreme Court -- but while that fight plays out, several states are putting similar legislation on the table.

The Immigration Issue Isn't New,..and Republicans Aren't Racists!

Teddy Roosevelt on Immigration (confirmed via SNOPES):


'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.'
Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Yes, folks, a REPUBLICAN spoke out against the evils of racism more than 50 years before a Yankee Democrat forced Southern Democrat governors to accept equality.

Hmmm,..betcha the NAACP has long forgotten that one, huh?

Goliath Steps on David, Arizona Fights On!

Nice Town You Got There, Shame If Anything Happened to It [Mark Krikorian]

The other local immigration law that was set to go into effect tomorrow is in the town of Fremont, Nebraska. The ordinance was approved by voters last month and would have prohibited the hiring of, or renting to, illegal aliens.

But the town council there voted last night to suspend the measure because of the prohibitive costs of fighting the ACLU and MALDEF in court:

Fremont appears to be leaning away from a court fight for cost reasons – officials have estimated that implementing the ordinance, including legal fees, would average $1 million per year.

Legal experts say that sets a bad precedent.

Critics of the suits say they amount to intimidation. “The strategy is essentially, ‘You may want to take actions to deal with illegal immigration? It may be what the citizenry wants, but if you try, we’ll bleed you dry in the courts,’“ says Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

Breaking: Judge Blocks Part Of AZ Immigration Law
—DrewM.

It's not overturned but an injunction against the most important parts of the bill until a full trial takes place.

A federal judge on Wednesday blocked the most controversial parts of Arizona's immigration law from taking effect, delivering a last-minute victory to opponents of the crackdown.
The overall law will still take effect Thursday, but without the provisions that angered opponents — including sections that required officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.

The judge also put on hold parts of the law that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times, and made it illegal for undocumented workers to solicit employment in public places.

U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled that those sections should be put on hold until the courts resolve the issues. Other provisions of the law, many of them procedural and slight revisions to existing Arizona immigraiton statute, will go into effect at 12:01 a.m.

..."There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens under the new (law)," Bolton ruled. "By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."

Legal Insurrection has the decision.

Now She's Done It!

How dare someone defy the Obamessiah!!!

Justice Department Files Suit Against Arizona Immigration Law

Published July 06, 2010
FoxNews.com

Accusing Arizona of trying to "second guess" the federal government, the Justice Department on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging the state's immigration policy -- claiming the "invalid" law interferes with federal immigration responsibilities and "must be struck down."

In the suit, which names the state of Arizona as well as Gov. Jan Brewer as defendants, the Justice Department claims the federal government has "preeminent authority" on immigration enforcement and that the Arizona law "disrupts" that balance. It urges the U.S. District Court in Arizona to "preliminarily and permanently" prohibit the state from enforcing the law, which is scheduled to go into effect at the end of the month.

"The United States Constitution forbids Arizona from supplanting the federal government's immigration regime with its own state-specific immigration policy," the suit says. "A policy that, in purpose and effect, interferes with the numerous interests the federal government must balance." (Which interests are they? The need to appease the drug cartels or the unions' desire to grab every illegal that crosses the border, give them a job and turn them into a card-carrying Socialist??)

Click here to read the lawsuit.

Separated at Birth?

If you only listened to Calderon's Congressional rant,...



Yeah, it's a cheap shot, but that's what you get for coming to OUR country and chiding us for handling YOUR problems!

Wait,...It's YOUR Problem, But,..

You don't like OUR solution????

Calderon Criticism of Arizona Law Overlooks Mexico's Tough Immigration Policy

FOXNews.com

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has been ripping into Arizona's immigration law as he tours Washington -- while appearing to disregard the way his own country cracks down on immigrants along Mexico's southern border.

Mexico repeatedly has been cited by human rights groups for abusing or turning a blind eye to the abuse of migrants from Central America. Until recently, Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense -- anyone arrested for the violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. Mexican lawmakers changed that in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but their law still reads an awful lot like Arizona's.

Arizona's policy, which Calderon derided on Wednesday as "discriminatory," requires law enforcement to try to determine the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant -- provided they are already in contact with that person. They can't randomly stop people and demand papers and the law prohibits racial profiling.

Is The Pope Catholic?

And the spirit of Carrie Prejean lives on,....

Was Miss Oklahoma Sandbagged by Arizona Question?

FOXNews.com

Miss Oklahoma Morgan Elizabeth Woolard told Miss USA judge Oscar Nunez that she supported Arizona's right to pass a tough illegal immigration law -- and then finished second. Was Woolard set up?


And the winner?

The perfect liberal, apologist model: an Arab-American Catholic multiculter who gave the answers only a Socialist could love:

Fakih, a Lebanese immigrant, told pageant organizers her family celebrates both Muslim and Christian faiths. She moved to the United States as a baby and was raised in New York, where she attended a Catholic school. Her family moved to Michigan in 2003.

During the interview portion, Fakih was asked whether she thought birth control should be paid for by health insurance, and she said she believed it should because it's costly.

"I believe that birth control is just like every other medication even though it's a controlled substance," Fakih said.

First Victory in AZ!

AG Holder and your leash holder, the Mighty Obamessiah, should take note:

Ariz. Referendum Drives Targeting New Law Dropped
Associated Press

The two proposed referendum drives challenging Arizona's new sweeping law targeting illegal immigration are being abandoned, organizers said Monday.

Andrew Chavez, a professional petition circulator involved in one of the efforts, said its backers pulled the plug after concluding they might not be able to time their petition filings in such a way as to put the law on hold pending a 2012 public vote.

Jon Garrido, the chief organizer of the other drive, attributed its end to a belief that the law would have been subject to legal protections under Arizona's Constitution if approved by Arizona voters.

The law takes effect July 29 unless implementation is blocked by court injunctions requested under at least three of the four pending legal challenges already filed by an Hispanic clergy group, police officers and other individuals.

Its provisions include requiring that police enforcing another law must question a person about his or her immigration status if there is "reasonable suspicion" that the person is in the United States illegally. It also makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.

Another Reason to Stand By Arizona,....

Don't Play Ball With State of Arizona
4/26/2010 7:49 PM ET By Kevin Blackistone

About 10 years ago, the NCAA made one of its most bold and upright decisions: it refused to allow any more of its postseason tournaments, like March Madness, to be held in South Carolina until the state stopped flying the banner of the long defeated racist Confederacy in the face of 21st century societal progress.

NCAA spokesman Bob Williams explained at the time that the organization wanted to "ensure that our championships are free from any type of symbolism that might make someone uncomfortable based on their race." (And yet the NCAA has no problem with a school's nickname like "The Running Rebels;" clearly recalling the same Confederates who approved of slavery?)

As such, it is time for the governors of college athletics -- and the officials who control the BCS -- to expand their postseason ban. Arizona should be next, immediately. (That would be the same sham "championship" where revenue trumps talent, right?)

The University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Ariz., should lose the BCS National Championship Game scheduled to be played there next January unless Arizona legislators rescind soon and for good an anti-immigration law they just passed that gives police the right to stop and search for documents anyone police suspect of being in the country illegally.

After all, that law means racially profiling people who appear to be Hispanic, no matter what Arizona lawmakers claim. That means making an entire group of people, as the NCAA spokesman said, uncomfortable in Arizona because of their heritage. That's unquestionably wrong.

We all should be uncomfortable with that, however. As Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles wrote earlier this month, comparing the law to Nazi Germany: "The Arizona legislature just passed the country's most retrogressive, mean-spirited, and useless anti-immigrant law. The tragedy of the law is its totally flawed reasoning: that immigrants come to our country to rob, plunder, and consume public resources." (No disrespect, Cardinal, but that's EXACTLY what ILLEGAL immigrants do, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not!)

The NFL should toss out a bid it received recently from Arizona to host the Super Bowl in 2015. The PGA Tour, which held two events in Arizona in February, should scratch any Arizona stops from its 2011 calendar to prove it is more inclusive than it appears.

And Major League Baseball -- out of respect to the 29 percent of its players, four managers, one general manager and one owner who are Hispanic or from Latin America -- should certainly heed the call of an embryonic protest movement in Arizona and pull its 2011 All-Star Game from the Diamondbacks' stadium in Phoenix. (And guess what: none of them came to the US through illegal means!)

I'm Shocked,....Aren't You?

San Francisco Leads Charge to Boycott Arizona, But Calls Could Spark Backlash

FOXNews.com

Sanctuary city San Francisco is leading the charge of municipalities and groups considering a boycott of Arizona over its law to allow police to ask people their immigration status.

Mayor Gavin Newsom this week suspended all non-essential travel for city employees going to Arizona, meaning no conference in Scottsdale next weekend for members of the city's housing authorities. The city's Board of Supervisors also has taken the first step toward an economic boycott, a move that could result in the suspension of existing contracts with Arizona-based companies and a ban on new ones.

But Newsom also has formed an "Arizona Boycott Workgroup” to analyze if and how an economic boycott could backfire on San Francisco businesses. For instance, the city does business with a company that accepts and processes payments in Arizona. There's concern if the boycott is made uniform, 2,500 San Franciscans could lose their jobs.

Groups like the San Francisco Convention Bureau and the city's restaurant lobby also worry about a reciprocal backlash.

So,..It WAS Bush's Fault,....

George Will, on Arizona's decision to actually DEFEND our country's border:

Finally, if we just built the damn wall like Bush tried to do, we wouldn’t be in this stupid mess to begin with. And the people who screamed about that wall have no right to complain with Arizona’s new policy now. They BEGGED for the tough new Arizona law.

The shrill cry of the leftwing was that a border wall was identical to the Iron Curtain. The only thing wrong with that is that it is beyond ignorant; the Iron Curtain was created to keep citizens from escaping to freedom; a border wall would protect out citizens by keeping illegal immigrants who have no right to be here out.

Liberals also cite the Posse Comitatus Act as preventing the powers of the federal government from using the military for law enforcement. But that begs the question: just how is protecting our borders from foreign invasion “law enforcement”? This is a clear situation in which our national security is at issue. The soldiers on the border would not be arresting American citizens; they would be detaining foreign invaders.

The Chinese built the Great Wall of China to keep the Mongols out; and it worked. And I’m just guessing that a people who put a man on the moon can build a damn wall that does the job.

Bottom line, I think the Arizona law probably ultimately goes too far. But like I said, pro-illegal immigration forces DEMANDED a law that went too far by steadfastly refusing any form of reasonable policy.

There is no reason whatsoever that citizenship should not be checked along with identity and residence, under the same conditions and situations in which it is reasonable to ascertain identity and residence. And if you are here illegally, your ass should be on the next bus out of the country – after serving jail time for violating our borders and breaking our laws. And the wall that we build should make sure you don’t come back.

Hmmm,.....Liberals and Posse Comitatus? Seems to me, back in 1993 a certain liberal administartion didn't think twice about Posse Comitatus when the sic'ed the US Army on the Branch Davidians, huh?

Make the ACLU Go Away!

Maybe we should just ignore the ACLU?

ACLU Signs Add to Washington State's Immigration Storm

Wednesday, February 25, 2009
By Jana Winter

An immigration showdown is brewing on Washington's Olympic Peninsula, where simmering tensions and borderline hostility have fueled a turf war between the local community and the Border Patrol agents assigned to protect it.

Now the American Civil Liberties Union has jumped into the ring and upped the ante, rolling out a campaign that will install signs inside buses informing riders of their rights — to ignore Border Patrol agents.

The signs, entitled, "YOUR RIGHTS with border patrol agents on this bus," makes three points:

• If you're a U.S. citizen, you don't have to prove it.
• If you're not a U.S. citizen and are 18 or older, you must show your immigration papers to federal agents.
• Everyone has the right to remain silent.

The campaign, which could start as early as next week, is the latest in a series of expanding grassroots efforts aimed at curbing the expansion of Border Patrol forces and the powers of its agents.

Click here to see ACLU flyer.

Last summer the Border Patrol beefed up its presence in the region, and in October it began conducting random roadside stops at checkpoints located at and within the international border to combat, what it says, is a real threat to national security.

This move has put them at odds with human rights groups and even local law enforcement — some who have rejected federal immigration money to protest the Border Patrol's tactics.

The ACLU has joined forces with left-leaning groups around the state — lavender farmers, retirees, activists, grandparents, Socialists, Green Party members, politicians, Unitarians, Christians, vineyard owners, hippies and other assorted protesters — who say these measures have infringed on people's civil liberties.

What's Good for the Goose,...

Obama's aunt has immigration hearing in April
By TED BRIDIS and EILEEN SULLIVAN – 22 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Bush administration quietly withdrew in the weeks after Barack Obama's election a new rule requiring high-level approval before federal agents nationwide could arrest fugitive immigrants. The future for Obama's aunt, who had been living in the country illegally, will be determined at an immigration court hearing in April.

The Homeland Security Department had originally imposed the unusual directive days before Obama's election, an order that would have affected Zeituni Onyango, the half-sister of Obama's late father. She had been instructed to leave the country four years ago by an immigration judge who rejected her request for asylum from her native Kenya.

The directive from Immigration and Customs Enforcement expressed concerns about "negative media or congressional interest," according to a newly disclosed federal document obtained by The Associated Press. The department lifted the immigration order weeks later, on Nov. 26.

The directive made clear that U.S. officials worried about possible election implications of arresting Onyango, who at the time was living in public housing in Boston. She is now believed to be living in Cleveland.

An immigration judge stayed her deportation order on Dec. 17. The judge reopened her case requesting asylum on Dec. 30, and she has a hearing on April 1 in a Boston immigration court, Elaine Komis, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Executive Office of Immigration Review, said Monday.

Onyango traveled to Washington last week for her nephew's inauguration. News organizations observed her attending an inaugural ball with her immigration lawyer, Margaret Wong.

Several years ago, Obama's aunt has sought asylum from Kenya. The East African nation has been fractured by violence in recent years, including a period of two months of bloodshed after December 2007 that killed 1,500 people.

Obama has said he didn't know his aunt was living in the United States illegally and believed that laws covering the situation should be followed.

The chronology of events means there was a brief window — between Nov. 26 and Dec. 17 — when immigration agents could have arrested and deported Onyango without obtaining the high-level approval required in the government's Oct. 31 directive.

A copy of that directive, "Fugitive Case File Vetting Prior to Arrest," was released to the AP just over two months after it was requested under the Freedom of Information Act. It does not mention President Obama or any members of his extended family.

The immigration directive was lifted weeks after the election, according to an internal e-mail provided Monday by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. ICE spokeswoman Kelly Nantel previously had told the AP the directive was still in place, and the White House told the AP late Sunday that Obama would consider whether to overturn it.

Without Joey Vento - This Could be Us Soon!

Forget the persecution Joey Vento is getting from the City of Philadelphia,...if we don't stop catering to any immigrant group (legal or otherwise) that refuses to assimilate, this is what we have to look forward to:

Miss Belgium Booed for Not Speaking Dutch

Monday, December 17, 2007

Newly crowned Miss Belgium speaks several languages — including French, English and Czech — but it seems that doesn't count for much when she doesn't speak Dutch.

After she failed to answer a question in elementary Dutch and switched to French during Saturday night's competition, 20-year-old Alizee Poulicek was booed by some of the 3,400 fans in Antwerp, the heart of Dutch-speaking Flanders.

In a country that has been without a government for nearly 200 days because of continued strife between Dutch- and French-speaking parties, the beauty queen's linguistic abilities has taken on larger significance.

"Miss Belgium does not speak Dutch," read a headline in the Dutch-speaking Het Laatste Nieuws newspaper Monday.

"Miss Belgium is not 'tweetalig,' " wrote the Francophone paper La Libre, using the Dutch word for "bilingual," to highlight ever-increasing Flemish demands that all Belgians in the public eye should also speak the majority language.

Dutch-speaking Flemings make up 6 million of the 10.5 million Belgians; most of the rest are Francophones, although there is also a small German-speaking community in the east of the country.

After Belgium gained independence from the Netherlands in 1830, French dominated political and economic life. It is only since World War II that Dutch speakers from the north have started turning their demographic dominance into effective power. For the past three decades, all prime ministers have been Flemish, though all also spoke French.

Northern Flanders and southern Wallonia have gained greater autonomy, but many in Flanders still pounce on every perceived linguistic slight.

Poulicek now knows that. The daughter of a Czech father and a Belgian mother, she lives in the French-speaking city of Huy. She spent half her life in the Czech Republic, returning to Belgium just six years ago. Living in the south, she has had little need to speak Dutch.

"I have to try, learn more," she told VRT television in halting Dutch. She continued in French: "I spoke almost no Dutch when I started this adventure."

For Darlene Devos, organizer of the Miss Belgium contest, it could have been a lot worse.

"I don't worry about this too much. It is the least painful thing," she said. "I would consider it different if they had said 'Miss Belgium is an ugly girl."'

Reality Trumps Absurdity

HT to MaddMedic for this gem:


STATE OF AFFAIRS

A conversation between a Customer and Bank of America

Bank: This is the Bank of America, can I help you?

Customer: Yes, I want to cancel my account. I don't want to do business with you any longer.

Bank: Why?

Customer: You're giving credit to illegal immigrants and I don't think it's right. I'm taking my business elsewhere.

Bank: Well, Mr. Customer, we don't want to see you do that, but we can't stop you. I'll help you close the account.

What is your account number?

Customer: (gives account number)

Bank: For security purposes and for your protection, can you please give me the last four digits of your social security number?

Customer: No.

Bank: Mr. Customer, I need to verify your information, but in order to help you, I'll need verification of who you are.

Customer: Why should I give you my social security number? The reason I'm closing my account is that your bank is issuing credit cards to illegal immigrants who don't have social security numbers.

You are targeting that audience and want their business.

Let's say I'm an illegal immigrant and you've given me a credit card. I have a question about it and call for assistance.

You wouldn't be asking me for a Social Security number, would you?

Bank: No sir, I wouldn't.

Customer: Why not?

Bank: Because you would have pressed '2' to speak in Spanish. We don't ask for that information when calling in on the Spanish line.

CHECK THIS OUT ON SNOPES! IT'S TRUE!