Monday, June 11, 2007

More Carolyn Lockhead Propaganda - With Response From 9-11 Families For A Secure America

As anyone who reads this knows, I have long been a critic of the SF Chronicle's Carolyn Lockhead - a pro-amnesty propagandist - who regularly weighs in with heavily slanted 'news analysis' on immigration. This time I'm not alone in calling her on it... the 9-11 Families For A Secure America issued a press release picking apart her latest pro-amnesty 'news' piece.

First, here's the offending 'news' - with my usual comments in LOUD SCREAMING CAPS....

(06-09) 04:00 PDT Washington -- The collapse of the giant immigration overhaul in the Senate might demonstrate that the dreaded status quo -- 12 million people living in the country illegally and more arriving each day -- is not really so dreadful after all.

The multitude of interests involved in the immigration debate -- business groups, ethnic lobbies, politicians in both parties and the American public -- in the end proved unwilling to yield enough to support the bipartisan compromise.

As California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat who helped negotiate the failed deal, said, the current immigrant situation in the United States is a de facto amnesty. Even the most ardent advocates of a border crackdown concede that it will be impossible to apprehend and deport 12 million people living here illegally (LOCKHEAD ONCE AGAIN BRINGS UP THE FALSE CHOICE OF MASS DEPORTATION VERSUS MASS AMNESTY).

But as much as everyone complains about the situation, the enormous black market in labor operating openly in the United States serves the interests of many involved, however imperfectly. It is an amnesty without amnesty (LIAR! IT IS AN ILLEGAL, BLACK MARKET UNDERGROUND WHICH WOULD NOT BE SO INSIDIOUS IF WE JUST STARTED ENFORCING OUR LAWS! TAKE A LOOK IN ANY SENATORS' MAIL ROOM AND SEE IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE 'HAPPY' WITH THE STATUS QUO!)

"Inaction, the status quo, is particularly helpful to employers (EXPLOITERS) of unskilled, undocumented workers, because they obviously aren't going to face the potential teeth of tougher employer sanctions (OR ANY OTHER LAWS THAT AREN'T BEING ENFORCED)," said Daniel Tichenor, a research professor at the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University and author of "Dividing Lines: the Politics of Immigration Control in America."

Low-wage industries such as landscaping and nursing homes could fare better in the current freely operating (THANKS TO NO ENFORCEMENT) black market than under a heavily regulated temporary worker program that would require migrant workers to leave the country after two years.

A technology company lobbyist complained at one point that Silicon Valley is the only business group that really couldn't live with the status quo, because tech companies rely on legal immigrants.

Peter Duignan, a fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University who has written extensively about Latino immigration, observed that as angry as the public gets about illegal immigration, when it comes to deporting their nannies or housekeepers, people change their views. Economists frequently point out that the middle class benefits enormously from the wide availability of low-cost immigrant labor in restaurants, hotels, retailing, construction and many other service industries.

Unions complain of worker exploitation but are divided over whether the influx is a threat to wages or a large new recruiting pool.

Although everyone claims to want tougher enforcement, recent raids on employers have generated an enormous outcry, not just from immigrants' rights groups but from the same Republican senators who have been demanding a crackdown.

Five Republican senators, including Charles Grassley of Iowa, Wayne Allard of Colorado and John Cornyn of Texas -- all of whom helped block the Senate immigration reform bill -- called Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to Capitol Hill to complain after federal agents arrested 1,282 illegal immigrants at Swift and Co. meatpacking plants last year.

For Democrats, the failure of the Senate bill allows them to keep the immigration issue alive for the 2008 election, when they will be courting Latino voters. Among the urgent business items next week that Senate Majority Leader (AND TRAITOR) Harry Reid, D-Nev., said needed to take precedence over the immigration debate is a "no confidence" vote on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

Asian and Latino immigrants' (CAROLYN TRIES TO SHIFT FOCUS AWAY FROM LATINOS HERE - I'LL SAY THIS, THE WOMAN IS A PROPAGANDIST EXTRAORDINAIRE) rights groups wanted legalization for the 12 million undocumented immigrants but seemed unwilling to accept a major change in the immigration system that would have curtailed the migration of extended families in the future.

Republicans insist on shifting the current immigration system, which relies on family ties, to a merit-based point system that emphasizes job skills and education.

Ironically, the family migration system was designed in the 1920s as a means of keeping out "undesirable" immigrants from southern and eastern Europe, because newer migrants did not have relatives in the United States, Peter Salins, a political scientist at Stonybrook University, noted in a recent article.

The family migration system continues to heavily favor groups with established kinship ties in the United States, which today are Latinos and Asians.

Cecelia Munoz, a top Washington advocate for the National Council of La Raza, argued vehemently against opening immigration "to anybody in the world." Experts believe a point system could open new channels to African immigration, which historically has been heavily under-represented in the United States since the end of American slavery (WAIT A MINUTE! JUST WHAT IS SHE SAYING EXACTLY? THAT IMMIGRATION IS THE PARLAY OF LATINOS AND NO BLACKS ALLOWED???).

The day before the bill failed, supporters had narrowly beaten back Democratic efforts to add 833,000 green cards for extended family migrants -- a defeat that made the bill far less palatable to many pro-immigrant groups.

Those who are most hostile to more immigration, led by Sens. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., have railed endlessly about toughening the border (TYPICAL LOCKHEAD SMEARJOB - NOTE THE LANGUAGE USED). But in helping to kill the legislation, they also killed tougher enforcement and identification systems they say would help stop terrorists (BULLSHIT! THE LAWS ARE NOT BEING ENFORCED NOW, AND THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER TO BELIEVE THAT ANY NEW LAWS MADE BY THIS PIECE OF SHIT LEGISLATION WILL CHANGE THAT. DEMINT AND SESSIONS SAW THROUGH THIS AND RIGHTFULLY FOUGHT AGAINST IT!)

"They're not getting employer sanctions with teeth," Tichenor said, referring to lawmakers who brought down the bill. "They are not getting plans for border reinforcement. They're not getting the more uniform tamper-proof ID system that was to be put into effect with this (THEY WOULDN'T HAVE GOTTEN ANY OF IT ANYWAY - WHICH IS WHY THEY OPPOSED IT)."

Tichenor said that historically, the odds of enacting any comprehensive immigration reform are never more than 40 percent because a compromise on immigration always involves painful trade-offs among groups with very different vested interests.

"There are so many odd bedfellows, there are so many intra-party battles that end up forming around this issue, that it's always a long shot," he said. "The compromises require uneasy and fleeting alliances and often involve folks swallowing a bitter pill to get some of the reforms they want."

The Senate might yet resurrect the bill (YOU SURE HOPE SO, DON'T YOU?). Feinstein and other supporters vowed Friday to press forward. President Bush is scheduled to meet Tuesday with Republican senators at the Capitol.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., threatened to attach the immigration overhaul to bills naming a post office if it comes to that. "We are not giving up; we are not giving in," said Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, the top Democratic (TRAITOR) sponsor.

Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a San Jose Democrat and former immigration attorney who chairs the House immigration subcommittee, outlined the many problems that both parties had with the Senate's compromise.

"The conservatives in the House feel that the way they dealt with the undocumented was amnesty (AND IT WAS)," Lofgren said. "Nobody in the business community thinks this point system the way they've created it will work for the American economy. The family system they set up is really quite unworkable. The temporary program doesn't work. I mean, there's a lot not to like about this bill. Having said that, there are remedies for these things. ... I think they should pass something and allow the House to work its will."

But Lofgren said House leaders see no point in passing their own bill if the Senate fails to act.

"In the how-our-laws-are-made booklet," she said, "it says both the House and the Senate have to pass a bill for it to become law."


ANTI-AMNESTY SOURCES CITED: 2 (and only in dismissive, insulting language)

And here's 9-11 FFASA's response (with my emphasis in bold)...

9-11FSA Families and Friends: Below is a hyper-link to an article which was written on-line in under the heading “NEWS ANALYSIS” entitled Immigration bill’s demise suggests many are OK with status quo by Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau Saturday June 9, 2007.

Please when reading this article consider the following; the first two paragraphs are false because including the American public in them makes the whole premise of the proceeding article incorrect. “Status quo for the Citizens of this nation is not DREADFUL after all.” To this reporter it is not dreadful and she is editorializing and expressing her own opinion that 12 million illegal aliens (a low estimation) and more arriving each day is ok with the American public. Most polls illustrate the vast majority of the public do not want illegal immigration because it has more negative consequences for the nation than positive. The reporter in this article mentions many of the open borders supporters and the fact that they all are feeding at the public trough and this is the reason that the American public is in this very negative position, facing 20 million or more illegal aliens. All are individuals who are unknown, creating many serious problems which the open borders supports are causing for profit and power to the peril of our national security, economic security, and the very existence of our sovereignty as a nation.

The Senate bill has not yet passed not because the status quo is ok with the American citizens. It did not yet pass not because the parasites of the open borders lobby groups could not agree. The real reason it did not yet pass is because the American citizens have come to realize that their very existence depends that it not pass. American citizens in unprecedented numbers have faxed, called, mailed and spoken to their elected officials telling them their political futures are at stake and we must continue to do so. If we let up now or ever the parasites always waiting in the wings will seize that opportunity and legislation like the Terrorist assistance and facilitation act of 2007(S1348) will be passed.

Please contact your senators and tell them you do not want S1348 to pass. All you demand for now is that they fund enforcement of existing immigration laws and border barriers.

Until we can secure the borders and enforce interior immigration laws our national security is at risk.

Thanks. Bruce.

9-11 FFASA website

No comments: