immigration

Janet Napolitano’s been busy lately – very busy – conducting personal interviews with every Mexicans citizen. And when she was done, she proudly announced that 84,000,000 of them are trustworthy enough to be given special “trusted traveler” status, allowing them to breeze through American airports with virtually no security checks.

What the Secretary of Homeland Security didn’t mention was that the total population of Mexico is 112,468,855 which means that she considers 28,468,855 Mexican citizens untrustworthy. That’s 28.3% of the nation’s population.

Be very careful here, Ms.Napolitano. You’re treading dangerously close to profiling.

mexican-trusted-traveler

Junk? We don't need to feel your stinkin' junk.

JudicialWatch.org has the derogatory details:

As violent drug cartels take over Mexico and expand their criminal enterprises north, the United States has signed a “trusted traveler” agreement that allows pre-screened Mexican airline passengers to bypass lengthy airport security checkpoints.

The foreigners will get “trusted traveler cards” with fingerprints and other biometric data and they must answer customs declarations questions on touch-screen kiosks before leaving airport inspection areas. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano claims it’s a way to enhance information sharing and mutual security in the face of “ever-evolving, multinational threats.”

About 84 million Mexicans are expected to qualify for the trusted traveler program, according to Mexico’s Interior Ministry Secretary, who signed the agreement on behalf of his country this week. Celebrating the festive occasion, the Mexican government official assured that the new accord will facilitate the U.S. entry of business travelers and tourists who are key factors in economic development, growth of trade and cultural exchange.

Mexicans will get the perk through the U.S. government’s Global Entry Program, which allows participants to obtain security clearance by presenting a “machine-readable” passport or resident card at airport “Global Entry kiosks.”

The machines issue the foreign travelers a transaction receipt and directions to baggage claim and the exit into the United States. Applying is easy. Candidates fill out an online application, provide valid identification and answer a few questions from a Customs and Border Protection officer.

We have one simple question about this new policy:

Why are 75% of all Mexicans considered trustworthy enough to breeze through customs and security, but 99.99% of all Americans are considered so untrustworthy that they have to get their junk touched just to get on an airplane?

Source: JudicialWatch.org

- by editor | 4 comments | Share Link


“Illegal aliens are de facto citizens.” In case your high school Latin is a little rusty, that means “Illegal aliens are, in fact, citizens.”

We’d never heard of Colorado Congressman Jared Polis until we heard this statement. But we knew immediately that he was a Democrat.

- by editor | 15 comments | Share Link


Uh-oh. Florida’s a vital swing state and President Obama will desperately need its electoral votes in 2012. Unfortunately for the President, a proposed Arizona-style illegal alien law is popular with Florida voters.

Now the White House is scrambling, trying to figure out how they can sue Arizona to overturn its illegal alien law without suing Florida for the same thing.

florida illegal alien protest

Uh-oh. Floridians are just as pissed as Arizonans.

The Miami Herald has the anti-illegal info:

The first crack at an Arizona-style immigration overhaul has been filed in the Florida Senate, with a proposal that would let law enforcement officers ask suspected illegal aliens to prove their immigration status and could penalize some legal immigrants who aren’t carrying proper documentation.

The bill, sponsored by Senate President Pro Tempore Mike Bennett, R-Bradenton, is the first volley in a likely long and heated debate over the future of immigration policy in the state. Since the passage of the Arizona law last spring, many Florida Republicans – including Gov.-elect Rick Scott – have argued that Florida needs a similar law and campaigned on the issue throughout the summer and into the fall…

Bennett’s measure would allow law enforcement officers during a lawful detention or arrest to ask for the detainee’s immigration documents if the officer suspects they may be in the country illegally. The bill, however, prohibits law enforcement from using race as a reason for checking the person’s documentation. The bill also penalizes legal aliens who refuse to carry their documentation, with a possible fine of up to $100 and a 20-day jail sentence.

Damn those Floridians. First they elect a Hispanic senator who can speak eloquently without a Teleprompter and now this.

Source: Miami Herald

- by editor | 11 comments | Share Link


This is one of those “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore” moments. Except it’s in German.

Ewald Stadler, a member of the Austrian Parliament, clearly sees what political correctness and insurgent Muslim immigrants have done to his country and its culture. Let’s just say he doesn’t like it.

In this video clip, Stadler goes off on the Turkish ambassador, who made the mistake of complaining that Turkish Muslims are now allowed to integrate into Austrian society.

We could use a few more Ewald Stadler’s in the world. Correction: We need a lot more Ewald Stadler’s in the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRmgI_WXff0

H/T: Moonbattery.com

- by editor | 30 comments | Share Link


The Swiss have always been known for watches, chocolates and secret bank accounts. To that list, you can now add rational laws.

black-sheep-swiss-poster

"Get rid of the black sheep" seems like a simple message unless you're a liberal who sees racism in everything

Reuters reports the results of the Swiss referendum:

Most Swiss voting in a referendum have approved the easier expulsion of foreigners convicted of serious crimes such as murder, according to preliminary computer projections released on Sunday by national television.

In the latest sign of growing hostility to immigration in the Alpine state, 53 percent of voters accepted a proposal to deport automatically foreigners convicted of crimes including rape or trafficking in drugs or people.

Of course, Reuters reports that those supporting the ballot measure are “right wing.” But the political affiliation of those opposed to the law is left mysteriously unmentioned.

… The initiative was put forward by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which has played on rising fear about immigration in recent years to become the country’s biggest political movement.

Posters for the SVP’s proposal show a group of white sheep kicking a black sheep off the Swiss flag. They first ran when the SVP was collecting signatures for the referendum.

Last year the Swiss passed another “right wing” law that outlawed the construction of new minarets. That law was not popular with guys named Mohammed.

“First the Muslims and minarets, now criminals,” said Mohammed, a native of Lebanon who recently received his Swiss passport. “We’re not all criminals.”

Why, if we were you, Mo, we’d say, “Screw Switzerland,” give up our pretty new Swiss passport and return to the paradise otherwise known as Lebanon where rapists, drug dealers and slave traders are apparently treated like kings.

Source: Reuters

- by editor | 8 comments | Share Link


As if he hasn’t violated enough laws, President Obama is now violating Newton’s Third Law of Motion. That’s the one that says “to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.”

In February of this year the President announced that he was sending troops to the Mexican border.

mexican-border

"Do you see any troops, Estacio? I don't see any troops."

That action was accompanied by lots of hoopla in the media, but in a completely unequal reaction, the withdrawal of those troops has now been quietly announced in a letter to a Texas congressman.

The Washington Examiner has the details:

The Obama Administration plans to withdraw National Guard troops from the Texas, New Mexico and California borders by the end February under a new Southwest security plan, even as turmoil in Mexican border cities grows, according to documents obtained by The Washington Examiner.

A letter sent to various members of the Texas Congressional delegation from Texas’ Gov. Rick Perry’s office says, “In February, 2011, the Texas, New Mexico, and California National Guard forces that were deployed to the border in September, 2010, under President’s Obama’s Southwest Border Augmentation Plan, will have 30 days to complete a total draw down of forces.”

The roughly 550 troops will have the month of February to redeploy back to their units, Texas Congressman Ted Poe told The Examiner. Troops would not be pulled off the Arizona border under the plan, and about 100 of the troops would re-deploy there from other states, officials said.

Poe received the letter today. His office confirmed with Department of Homeland Security officials that the plan came from the administration.

“I’m surprised the president would so quickly remove troops from Texas. They’re not supposed to leave until July,” said Poe.

Fact is, Obama withdrew those troops faster than the French front lines fleeing a battle.

Congressman Poe shouldn’t have been surprised. It doesn’t matter where the President sends troops – the Mexican border or Iraq or Afghanistan – he seems to be incapable of doing it without simultaneously announcing a date that they will be pulled out.

He just wishes he could surrender in Afghanistan as quickly as he surrendered on the Mexican border.

Source: Washington Examiner

- by editor | 11 comments | Share Link


In a move designed to (a) reduce the number of Islamic terrorists entering the country, (b) increase the number of other tourists entering the country, or (c) both, a Danish politician has come up with a novel idea:

naked-breasts

Leave it to the Danes to develop the world's most sophisticated terrorist detection system

Show all incoming immigrants images of naked breasts.

Al-Arabiya has the naked truth:

Want to immigrate to Denmark? Then you need to be able to handle to look at a pair of naked women’s breasts, at least if Peter Skaarup, foreign policy spokesman of the far-right Danish People’s party has his way.

According to Skaarup, a documentary film about Denmark that will be shown as part of an upcoming immigration test for foreigners needs to have a pair of breasts in it, to intimidate any extremists from attempting to enter the tiny Scandinavian country.

Because a topless woman on a beach would be a good example of the Danish open-mindedness, Skaarup points out.

This, he said, is mainly relevant for immigrants coming from fundamentalist societies where women are oppressed and are not allowed to display their sexuality or even their hair. On the other hand Danish women are allowed to wear –-or not wear— what they please, underlining that he is not trying to provoke anyone with his statements.

… Integration spokesman for the Conservative Party, one of two government parties, Naser Khader says “a pair of naked breasts is no protection against extremism.”

“It’s quite the opposite, fundamentalists are so obsessed with sex that they will be pouring in over the borders. Maybe we should try with naked pigs,” Khader writes on his page on social networking site Facebook.

He’s kidding. At least we think he’s kidding. But we also think that’s not the worst idea we’ve ever heard.

If either concept is instituted, it will no longer be the terrorists’ dynamite vests that explode, it’ll be their heads. And that’s a much better outcome.

H/T: WeaselZippers.us

- by editor | 29 comments | Share Link


This is not a good week to be a Democrat. Nothing seems to be going their way. Not even their outrageous lawsuit against Arizona’s illegal alien law.

john-noonan

Here come da judge, there goes the Feds' argument

The Washington Post has the details:

Judge John T. Noonan Jr. grilled administration lawyers at a hearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. He took aim at the core of the Justice Department’s argument: that the Arizona statute is “preempted” by federal law and is especially troublesome because it requires mandatory immigration status checks in certain circumstances.

“I’ve read your brief, I’ve read the District Court opinion, I’ve heard your interchange with my two colleagues, and I don’t understand your argument,” Noonan told deputy solicitor general Edwin S. Kneedler. “We are dependent as a court on counsel being responsive … You keep saying the problem is that a state officer is told to do something. That’s not a matter of preemption…. I would think the proper thing to do is to concede that this is a point where you don’t have an argument.”

Ouch. The Feds don’t have an argument now. They didn’t have an argument then. They won’t have one in the future.

Other than that, this lawsuit was a really good idea.

Source: Washington Post

- by editor | 31 comments | Share Link


This is the last thing the Democrats wanted to hear. One of their most reliable voting blocks is abandoning them on one of their most reliable wedge issues.

The San Bernardino Sun has the details of Democrat discord:

illegal-aliens

The illegal alien P.R. committee makes a statement for the press

A new study shows Latinos have soured considerably on illegal immigration in the last three years.

In 2007, 50 percent of Latinos surveyed told the Pew Hispanic Center that the growing number of illegal immigrants was a positive force for the existing Latino population. In a Pew survey released Thursday, that number had plummeted to 29 percent.

Thirty-one percent said illegal immigration had a negative effect, and 20 percent said it had no effect.

While the wording of the question changed slightly in 2010 – striking the phrase “growing number” to reflect studies that show illegal immigration declining – several local advocates on different sides of the issue called the change in perception unsurprising.

Those Inland Empire voices diverged significantly, however, when it came to explaining the shift and what it means for immigration policy.

Raymond Herrera, president and founder of a Claremont-based group called We the People, California’s Crusader, said political will has been shifting since 2004.

Herrera said that’s when activists like him began loudly calling for reform, slowly building what he said is a national consensus that illegal immigrants should be deported.

“The Minutemen stood up six years ago and brought the awareness level to the American people,” he said. “It is now at an apex where … enough people have had their American dream stolen (by illegal immigrants).”

Somehow, we think this is going to play havoc with the Democrats’ claim that anyone who’s against illegal aliens is racist.

Source: San Bernardino Sun

- by editor | 8 comments | Share Link


Why do we need to go to Canada to find a media outlet that reports this story?

The Canada Free Press has the story:

President Barack Hussein Obama, in a determination letter to Congress, has announced that he will allow an additional 80,000 immigrants – – mostly from Islamic countries – – to resettle in the United States during fiscal year 2011.

Mr. Obama says that the increase in Muslim immigrants “is justified by humanitarian concerns or is otherwise in the national interest.”

Humani-friggin-tarian concerns?

Isn’t that the same reason Auntie Zeituni was allowed to stay in the country?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Auwe-aGF4Lo

H/T: TheBigFeed

- by editor | 15 comments | Share Link


Every other blog that’s run this video clip has focused on the first part, where former and future California Governor Moonbeam pledges to sign a bill entitling every illegal alien in the tarnished Golden State to attend college.

Far as we’re concerned, though, it’s the following line that reveals just how out of touch with reality Brown really is.

“Of course,” Brown says, “I’m not going to sign any bills until we get the budget solved and that may take me a couple of months.”

Governor Moonbeam, indeed. It’s taken the state decades to get $30 billion in debt. It’s reduced two consecutive governors to blithering idiots. The state is controlled by the public employee unions to whom Brown is beholden. The legislature is controlled by lunatic leftists who refuse to cut a penny in spending. And this lying sack of excrement says it may take “a couple of months” to solve the problem. Note that it may take him a couple of months. Why this guy’s such an economic wizard that he may just get the whole thing wrapped up in a couple weeks. With a little luck, maybe just a day or two.

California is about to get what it deserves. Unfortunately, the state’s few remaining conservatives will be taken down along with the liberals who not only caused the problem, but continue to exacerbate it by electing leftist wackos like Brown.

H/T: Breitbart.tv

- by editor | 17 comments | Share Link


If Congressman Ted Poe has his way, President Obama will be putting troops on the Mexican border. Lots of troops.

CNSnews.com has the details:

ted poe

Congressman Ted Poe wants 10,000 troops stationed on our southern border. We, on the other hand, would like to be stationed on Bo Derek's southern border.

Texas Republican Rep. Ted Poe has introduced legislation that would force President Obama to put 10,000 troops on the Mexican border.

Rep. Ted Poe (R.-Texas), who served for 30 years as a Texas prosecutor and judge before being elected to Congress, introduced legislation last week designed to force President Barack Obama to deploy a minimum of 10,000 National Guard troops at the U.S. Mexico border for the specific purpose of patrolling the border and intercepting aliens and smugglers attempting to cross illegally into the United States.

The legislation would allow the president to deploy more than 10,000 National Guardsmen, but not fewer.

“The president could put more than that, but he must put 10,000,” Poe told CNSNews.com. “The uniqueness of this is they would be paid by the federal government, because everybody says it is the responsibility of the federal government to protect the border. So the federal government will use the resources it already has to pay for those 10,000 National Guard troops, but they will be supervised by the governors of the four states on the border.”

We love this idea, so don’t get us wrong. But we think the only way this bill will ever get passed is if the vote is held while Democrats are all struck dumb by the concept of actually defending our borders.

Source: CNSnews.com

- by editor | 7 comments | Share Link


This is one of those stories that you read, pause, and then read again because you think you must have read it incorrectly the first time.

A coalition of Mexican mayors has asked the United States to stop deporting illegal immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes in the U.S. to Mexican border cities, saying the deportations are contributing to Mexican border violence.

deported mexican criminal

Mexico for Mexicans, but the United States for Mexican criminals

The request was made at a recent San Diego conference in which the mayors of four Mexican border cities and one U.S. mayor, San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders, gathered to discuss cross-border issues.

Ciudad Juarez Mayor Jose Reyes blamed U.S. deportation policy for contributing to his city’s violence, saying that of the 80,000 people deported to Juarez in the past three years, 28,000 had U.S. criminal records — including 7,000 convicted rapists and 2,000 convicted murderers.

Those criminal deportees, he said, have contributed to the violence in Juarez, which has reported more than 2,200 murders this year. Reyes and the other Mexican mayors said that when the U.S. deports criminals back to Mexico, it should fly them to their hometowns, not just bus them to the border.

Got that? They’d have less crime in Mexico if we would just keep Mexican criminals here in the United States where they belong.

We’d say it’s crazy, but some liberal would accuse us of being unfair to lunatics and Mexicans.

Source: Fox News

- by editor | 11 comments | Share Link


Loretta Sanchez, one of the House’s sinister Sanchez sisters, made the news last week with a racist rant – in Spanish – against Vietnamese-Americans and Republicans.

loretta sanchez

Loretta Sanchez' motto: Open mouth, insert foot

This week she’s hopped into a new vat of hot water with this gem:

“The problem is this, and I am going to lay it in front of the Latino community: If we do not win, in November, there will be no vote for a reform until another 10 or 20 years. If we win, we will have a voting in November or December. I do not know if we’ll pass the law but we will take a vote. But if we do not win, we are going to have to wait another 10 to 20 years because what is happening in this country is very anti-immigration.”

Two words: Incapacitado pato (If our schoolyard Spanish hasn’t failed us, that means “lame duck” in Spanish. But the odds are 50-50 that is means “Your mother is a whore.”)

H/T: PoliPundit.com

- by editor | 14 comments | Share Link


The reviews are in: Colbert bombs on Capitol Hill

by editor on September 25, 2010

We haven’t seen a review in Variety, but the political reviews have been brutal. Steven Colbert bombed in the House. If Colbert’s “testimony” had been a Broadway play, it would have closed on opening night.

Politico collected this batch of bad reviews from various reporters’ Twitter accounts.

“REALLY not sure this is funny,” wrote ABC News’ Rick Klein.

“Colbert is making a mockery of this hearing,” said Mother Jones’ David Corn.

“Colbert’s testimony made a mockery of Congress,” said the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake.

The Hill’s Mike O’Brien said, “This might be the most amazing public stunt before Congress.”

National Review’s Kathryn Lopez wrote that “a congressional chairman made a joke of her committee today.”

And it doesn’t look like Megyn Kelly nor Iowa Congressman Steve King cared for Colbert’s performance, either.

H/T: Politico.com

- by editor | 17 comments | Share Link


Mexico has had it up to here with illegal aliens. So they’ve begun building a fence along the border. Not along its northern border with the United States, but along its southern border with Guatemala.

In case you don’t know how to say “hypocrisy” in Spanish, please allow us to help.

TheBlaze.com reports the hipocresía:

border fence mexico guatemala

Human rights violation! Human rights violation! Human rights violation!

According to the head of customs for Mexico’s tax administration, Raul Diaz, the Mexican border state of Chiapas is constructing a wall along the country’s southern border with Guatemala, along the river Suchiate which divides the countries. Diaz says the purpose of the wall is to prevent the passage of contraband, but admits, “It could also prevent the free passage of illegal immigrants.”

According to Mexico’s National Commission on Human Rights (CNDH), 500,000 people from Central America cross into Mexico illegally every year — the vast majority of them attempting to reach the United States. In addition, smugglers reportedly use the Suchiate River to move goods across the international border without paying duty taxes.

Screw them and the burro they rode in on. The Mexican government, that is.

Source: TheBlaze.com

- by editor | 14 comments | Share Link


Talk about Must See TV, this video clip should be required viewing for anyone on either side of the immigration debate.

It features Roy Beck cleverly demonstrating the catastrophe that’s about to be caused by mass immigration into the United States.

Gumballs, anyone?

- by editor | 7 comments | Share Link


We exaggerate, but not by much. John Kerry is out there burnishing his liberal credentials by demanding that immigration agents be more “humane” while risking their lives arresting drug dealers and human traffickers.

Politico.com has the details:

john kerry

John Kerry wants to make sure immigration agents don't operate in a fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan

As Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano led a naturalization ceremony for more than 5,000 new Americans at Fenway Park, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) on Tuesday pitched a bill requiring federal authorities to take a more “humane” approach when enforcing immigration laws.

The “Families First Immigration Enforcement Act of 2010” calls for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to give state agencies advanced notice before an immigration raid so they can provide translators for the detainees.

The Kerry bill would also require ICE to check detainees to see if any should be released on the grounds that they are too sick, too old, pregnant or nursing, or fall under other vulnerable groups.

You know that the liberals will stretch the definition of “sick” until it includes the common cold. “Oops. Can’t arrest Jose. He says he feels a scratchy throat coming on.”

Source: Politico.com

- by editor | 47 comments | Share Link


A few weeks ago we reported that it may be months before the new troops Obama promised to station on the Mexican border actually show up. One Arizona sheriff is now steaming mad because the government is delivering signs almost as fast as it’s delivering troops.

arizona border sign

CNS News reports the details of the deficiency:

Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu said requests by Arizona law enforcement personnel and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) for 3,000 National Guard troops along the state’s border with Mexico have been answered so far with 1 percent of that number deployed there this week.

“We have a whopping 30 [National Guard troops] this week that are showing up,” Babeu told CNSNews.com. “It’s less than a half-hearted measure designed to fail.”

But the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has placed 15 signs along a 60-mile stretch of Interstate 8 that links San Diego with Phoenix and Tucson warning travelers of drug cartels and human trafficking operations.

We fully expect the Obama administration to announce that these signs cost $1,000,000 each and created or saved 53,000 jobs.

H/T: Bluegrass Pundit

- by editor | 16 comments | Share Link


china human rights

Chinese official having a spirited civil rights debate with Chinese citizen

The temptation to openly laugh at the United States must be getting stronger and stronger.

The Obama administration submitted a report to the United Nations Human Rights Council last week and among the many American sins for which it apologized was Arizona’s anti-illegal alien law.

Keep in mind that the beacons of brotherhood who sit on the UN Human Rights Council include Angola, Egypt, South Africa, Bangladesh, China, Jordan, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and believe it or not, Cuba.

Let’s just say that Arizona Governor Jan Brewer is less than pleased. She wrote an angry letter to the President condemning the report, demanding its withdrawl and calling it “downright offensive”.

The Associated Press has the details:

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer demanded Friday that a reference to the state’s controversial immigration law be removed from a State Department report to the United Nations’ human rights commissioner.

The U.S. included its legal challenge to the law on a list of ways the federal government is protecting human rights.

In a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Brewer says it is “downright offensive” that a state law would be included in the report, which was drafted as part of a UN review of human rights in all member nations every four years.

“The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional,” Brewer wrote.

Of course, the members of the Human Rights Commission listed above are confused by the concept of building a wall to keep people out. Their human rights records are all they need to do the job.

Source: Associated Press

- by editor | 17 comments | Share Link


Sheriffs in Arizona seem to grow cojones the size of Yuma watermelons. Paul Babeu, the Sheriff of Pinal County, Arizona, has a message for President Obama:

“If the president gave me a half hour,” Babeu said, “I am confident that I could convince him and to show him the way that he can personally secure the border, and he would be the hero of everybody that truly transcends bipartisan politics and secures that border. I believe that if a leader truly wanted to do that we have the means and the resources necessary to secure our border and to protect America once and for all, and then we can get to the point in the future, only after the border is secure, that there is some type of discussion about what do we do with the approximate 13 million people who are here illegally.” 


Pinal County, located in Southern Arizona is a major route for smugglers bringing narcotics and illegal aliens across the Mexican border.

C’mon, President Obama, you visited Afghanistan in an effort to pretend you care about that war. Don’t you owe it to the people of Arizona to at least fake it for them, too?

H/T: NewsBusters.org

- by editor | 6 comments | Share Link


If you’re the Obama administration and you look at the polls and see that a huge majority of Americans support Arizona’s anti-illegal alien law and would support similar laws for their own states, what do you do?

You’d double down and sue the popular sheriff in Arizona’s biggest county, that’s what you do.

The Washington Post has the details of the latest federal foul-up:

arpaio joe Arpaio

Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has some pink underwear that will fit Eric Holder perfectly

A federal investigation of a controversial Arizona sheriff known for tough immigration enforcement has intensified in recent days, escalating the conflict between the Obama administration and officials in the border state.

Justice Department officials in Washington have issued a rare threat to sue Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio if he does not cooperate with their investigation of whether he discriminates against Hispanics. The civil rights inquiry is one of two that target the man who calls himself “America’s toughest sheriff.” A federal grand jury in Phoenix is examining whether Arpaio has used his power to investigate and intimidate political opponents and whether his office misappropriated government money, sources said.

The standoff comes just weeks after the Justice Department sued Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer (R) because of the state’s new immigration law, heightening tensions over the issue ahead of November’s midterm elections. The renewed debate has focused attention on Arpaio, a former D.C. police officer who runs a 3,800-employee department, and a state at the epicenter of the controversy over the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

Maybe when we get these guys out of office, Sheriff Joe can put them in pink underwear and feed them peanut butter sandwiches every day while they serve out their sentences in his outdoor jail.

Source: Washington Post

- by editor | 17 comments | Share Link


There’s a rebellion brewing in state houses across the country. To paraphrase Network, people are mad as hell about illegal aliens and they aren’t going to take it anymore.

Now Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum, who’s running for governor, has proposed an anti-illegal alien law that’s even tougher than Arizona’s.

Reuters reports the anti-illegal immigration information:

bill mccollum florida illegal alien

Wimpy-looking guy introduces tough bill

“Florida will not be a sanctuary state for illegal aliens,” McCollum, who was accompanied by state Representative Will Synder, said in a statement that also gave details of the proposed law.

The legislation would require law enforcement officials to check a suspected illegal immigrant’s status in the course of a stop, or a violation of another law.

This goes beyond the existing situation in the state where officers are allowed to check for immigration status, but not required to.

Florida, especially its southern portion, is a major U.S. migration destination for nationals from the Caribbean and Latin America, making it a cultural and racial melting-pot.

McCollum’s office said the proposed Florida immigration legislation goes “one step further” than a similar law recently introduced in Arizona, which has triggered protests and a constitutional challenge from President Barack Obama’s administration.

The Major League Baseball Players union has protested the Arizona law and some players say they may boycott next Sumer’s all-star game in Phoenix. They may want to rethink this, because at the rate states are proposing Arizona-like laws, they may run out of places to play.

Source: Reuters

- by editor | 3 comments | Share Link


In what may be the least surprising announcement made in months, Janet Napolitano revealed Thursday that the troops she promised Arizona and other border states won’t be in place for weeks. Maybe months.

Arizona lawmakers asked for National Guard troops on the border and Napolitano promised to have them in place by August 1, but it looks like Tucson’s just going to have to wait a little longer. Or a lot longer.

“The first began arriving, or the command and control elements began arriving, on the 1st of august. They should all be there within, I would say, 30 to 60 days,” said Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano.

Napolitano went on to say, “Or 90 days. Or maybe 120 days. Or maybe not at all. You know what I love about my job? The more you lie, the easier it gets.”

Source: Fox 11

- by editor | 18 comments | Share Link


Pete Stark has been in Congress for decades, which gives rise to the obvious question, what kind of lunatics vote for this kind of lunatic?

Michelle Malkin comments on the extreeeeeeme leftist’s latest lunacy:

It is painfully clear from this latest clip of California Democrat Rep. Pete Stark at last weekend’s town hall that he has no idea what the hell E-Verify — the federal employer citizenship verification program — is. Nor does he seem to care what it is, as he smirks at his informed constituents and asserts that denying jobs to illegal aliens could be “unconstitutional.”

Just in case you aren’t familiar with E-verify, it’s one of the few things the government does right. It’s an easy, effective, electronic way for a business to check the immigration status of anyone who applies for a job. 



Congressman Stark, however, compared E-Verify to the Arizona’s anti-illegal alien law, saying it might be unconstitutional because “it might unfairly stop someone from getting a job”.

Pete, buddy, that’s what it’s supposed to do.

H/T: Michelle Malkin

- by editor | 10 comments | Share Link