Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION THE FIGHT TO KEEP OUR DEMOCRACY -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (1485)	3/12/2007 7:40:49 PM
From: Ben Wa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3197

Immigration Anarchy Monday, March 12, 2007 7:34 PM SANTA BARBARA, Calif., March 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Following is an opinion editorial by Rick Oltman, director of Public Relations for Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS): The recent arrests of illegal alien "absconders" by federal immigration officers have sparked a backlash of protests around the nation against the so-called "raids." Immigrant protestors have taken to the streets waving their fists to denounce these legitimate arrests and their slogans include; "climate of fear," "devastating to families," "terrorized by the government." Terrorized by the government? Yes, even that. These protestors support the status quo which for the last fifteen years has meant virtually zero interior enforcement of our immigration laws. They are immigration anarchists. "Operation Return to Sender" is targeting those who have been ordered deported but failed to appear for deportation. Consider this. Our government can't muster the will to the defend the borders effectively against even the worst drug traffickers, so to order anyone deported suggests that these arrests are of the worst of the illegal alien population. Currently over 400,000 "absconders" live somewhere in our country, nobody knows where. Some are violent felons, some are sexual predators and some are from countries that are sympathetic to Al Qaeda. To answer those who say that these people are only working here, let's at least be honest. They have broken several laws by the time they get a job in our country. They have sneaked into our country illegally and they are working here illegally as well; not felonies until the second illegal entry, but law breaking all the same. But they do commit a felony when they forge documents to get a job. And, whether they are using a stolen social security number or have simply made one up, that is also a felony. Not to mention that employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens are also breaking the law. And illegal aliens' presence in large numbers creates sanctuaries for criminals in cities that politicians are loath to police. So the folks picked up in these raids were not just working here innocently. The most sympathetic and true victims of this enforcement are, of course, the children. Thus it is with all law enforcement. When parents are punished for committing crimes, there is always an impact on the children, including citizen children. Children suffer whenever their parents are punished and that includes crimes that are not immigration-related. It is these illegal alien parents themselves who are subjecting their children to trauma because they have violated the law. But should every lawbreaker escape punishment because they have children? No, the effect of violations on innocent children is more of a reason to vigorously enforce a deterrent against law-breaking parents and the victims they create. Fifteen years ago California immigration activists were calling on the government to enforce immigration laws and warning the country not to let illegal immigration get a toe hold in their communities. California's schools were bulging with illegal aliens as were our jails and prisons. Some healthcare facilities were beginning to collapse under the strain. Taxes were going up to pay for it all. The political elites told us, "It's not that big a problem, so we don't need to do anything about it." In 1994 Californians voted to cut off tax dollars to illegal aliens and in 1996 Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. Again the political elites declared, "It's not that big a problem, so we don't need to do anything about it." Now eleven years later these same elites are saying, "It's such a big problem; we can't do anything about it!" That is unacceptable. The enablers that created the massive problem we have today by ignoring it are certainly to blame for the current situation, not those of us who were warning a decade ago that the problem was escalating. We still are calling on the government to enforce the law, because we can predict what our country will look like in another fifteen years. For example, pay attention to L.A.'s escalating gang problem for a glimpse of the future in your community. All levels of government should work together to enforce the law and deter future mass immigration, because otherwise the future is bleak. If we don't enforce our laws we will see on our streets and in the news the terrible, self-inflicted wounds we will suffer, from today's ongoing immigration anarchy. Rick Oltman is the Director of Public Relations for Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS) and can be reached at RickOltman@capweb.org or RickOltman@comcast.net. SOURCE Californians for Population Stabilization (CAPS)

To: KLP who wrote (1485)	3/20/2007 10:10:29 AM
From: Ann Corrigan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3197

Iowa Voters Express Outrage at Illegal Immigration By ADAM NAGOURNEY Published: March 20, 2007 DES MOINES(AP), March 17 — Immigration, an issue that has divided Republicans in Washington, is reverberating across the party’s presidential campaign field, causing particular complications for Senator John McCain of Arizona. The topic came up repeatedly in recent campaign swings through Iowa by Mr. McCain and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, another Republican who, like Mr. McCain, supports giving some illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, a position that puts them at odds with many other conservatives. Both candidates faced intensive questioning from voters on the issue, which has become more prominent in the state as immigrants are playing a larger and increasingly visible role in the economy and society. “Immigration is probably a more powerful issue here than almost anyplace that I’ve been,” Mr. McCain said after a stop in Cedar Falls. As he left Iowa, Mr. McCain said he was reconsidering his views on how the immigration law might be changed. He said he was open to legislation that would require people who came to the United States illegally to return home before applying for citizenship, a measure proposed by Representative Mike Pence, Republican of Indiana. Mr. McCain has previously favored legislation that would allow most illegal immigrants to become citizens without leaving the country. Beyond whatever influence it has as the state whose caucuses kick off the presidential nominating contest, Iowa has become something of a laboratory for the politics of immigration. Not only is it a place where industries like meatpacking rely heavily on immigrant workers and where a once relatively homogenous population is confronting an influx of Hispanic residents, but the presidential candidates who are criss-crossing the state are also providing forums for Iowans to express their views and influence national policy. On Saturday morning in Des Moines, Mr. Brownback stood for 30 minutes at a breakfast with Republicans as question after question — without exception — was directed at an immigration system that Iowans denounced as failing. “These people are stealing from us,” said Larry Smith, a factory owner from Truro and a member of the central committee of the state Republican Party. Finally, Mr. Brownback, with a slight smile, inquired, “Any other topics that people want to talk about?” “What are you going to do with illegal immigrants who come here and become criminals?” demanded Jodi Wohlenhaus, a Republican homemaker who lives outside Des Moines. The debate on the campaign trail is both reflecting and feeding the politics of the issue in Washington. President Bush and the two parties in Congress have been engaged in a three-way negotiation that has pitted demands from many conservatives to concentrate first on improving border security against Mr. Bush’s call, backed by many Democrats, for a guest worker program that could include a right for some illegal workers to eventually get legal status. The issue has become much more complicated as the presidential campaign has gotten under way, exposing the Republicans in particular to voters who are angry about what they see as porous borders, growing demands from immigrants on the social welfare and education systems and job losses that they link at least in part to a low-wage labor force coming over the border. Mr. McCain, for example, appeared to distance himself from Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Democrat with whom he formed an alliance last year on an immigration bill that stalled in Congress. “What I’ve tried to point out is we couldn’t pass the legislation,” Mr. McCain said. “So we have to change the legislation so it can pass. And I’ve been working with Senator Kennedy, but we’ve also been working with additional senators, additional House members.” Mr. McCain focused instead on the proposal by Mr. Pence, a conservative. “Pence has this touchback proposal,” Mr. McCain said at a news conference. “I said hey, let’s consider that if that’s a way we can get some stuff.” Mr. McCain’s aides said his identification with Mr. Kennedy accounted for much of his political problem on the issue with conservatives. One of his rivals for the nomination, former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, has taken to attacking what he calls the McCain-Kennedy bill. Mr. McCain has found himself particularly identified with this battle in no small part because he is from a border state that is deeply divided over immigration. The issue is not likely to recede, regardless of the outcome of the debate in Washington: The Republican field of presidential candidates includes Representative Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican who has based his campaign on an anti-immigration message and who will almost certainly participate in Republican presidential debates starting this spring. In a speech to conservatives in Washington two weeks ago, Mr. Romney said: “The current system is a virtual concrete wall against those who have skill and education, but it’s a wide open walk across the border for those that have neither. And McCain-Kennedy isn’t the answer.”