Thread: The Proof is in! Majority of Americans oppose Comprehensive

A couple of points-
The term 'Comprehensive Immigration Reform' is an Orwellian term for amnesty for illegals. In recent years there are more and more examples of how our language has been twisted and distorted by elected officials in DC. We need to point this out to average Americans.
( examples: 'Pension Protection Act' means allowing companies to steal earned pension benefits, 'Social Security Equalization act' means giving social security benefits to illegal immigrants after they return to Mexico, and so forth).
Given that most illegals are from Mexico, I suggest asking them if they want a 'path to citizenship' as an American. When they stop laughing, they will be wiring money back to Mexico and waving the Mexican flag. Most of them have absolutley no interest in becoming American citizens.
In fact, they want the American Southwest back as a part of Mexico.
And when Calderon and his slimy predessor, Vincente Fox lecture the US on Mexico's exportation of poverty, they should be reminded that they are the priviledged 'white' Spanish ruling class that has betrayed their poor citizens and caused the mass migration of poor uneducated Mexican people.
Dave Lovelace
San Jose

A transcription of Doug McIntyre's on illegals and Jamiel's law on Friday 4/5/08 on Los Angeles KABC radio.

We have been covering Jamiel’s Law in the aftermath of the atrocity that was the murder of Jamiel Shaw, II. allegedly by Pedro Espinosa, an illegal immigrant, gang banger.

Here’s another one out of Marshall Town, Iowa. By the way, these stories go coast to coast all the time. Today in L.A. Times they have an article out of Marshall Town, Iowa that one Monica Del Carmen Lopez drove an SUV into the side of a mini-van in October and she killed a 90-year-old grandmother and injured three of her relatives. They discovered this 23 year old gang banger was already arrested countless of times, mostly for minor infractions. However, she had also been arrested for assault, child endangerment for exposing a child to methamphetamines, because she hung out with meth heads and meth dealers. And by the way, she was in the country illegally. “Every day I struggle not to be angry,â€

Welcome to Alipac jpm. Glad to have you with us. If you use Alipac's News and Stories archives you will see death after death, injury aft injury and crime after crime. What we need is a whole section here just for the crimes that are placed in the news. We need a whole section just for victims that are reported. Years ago we wouldn't have seen any, but they have been reporting it more and more. Some still won't so you know how much more is out there.

Good analysis W. Let's send this around.

Here's some recent, related & relevant info as a further reminder:

---

Rasumssen Reports, May 23, 2007:

"The enforcement side of the debate is clearly where the public passion lies on the issue. Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters say it is Very Important for “the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.â€

An email from Walter Moore, a candidate for Mayor of L.A.

Jamiel's Law: Villaraigosa And City Council Unamimously Favor Illegal Aliens Over American Crime Victims
By Walter Moore, Candidate For Mayor of Los Angeles, WalterMooreForMayor.com

On March 2, 2004, the Los Angeles City Council -- including Villaraigosa, Zine, and Smith -- voted 15 to 0 to pass an ordinance (No. 175853) requiring all City agencies to accept Mexico's "Matricula Consular" cards as valid identification.

Repeat: the vote was 15 to ZERO.

The only people who benefit from that ordinance, of course, are illegal aliens. After all, anyone in the country legally would have valid identification. The ordinance is part of the City's "sanctuary city" policy: aiding and abetting illegal immigration by changing our rules to accommodate illegal aliens.

Fast forward to today, May 8, 2008.

It has been a month since the Shaw family came to City Council and urged them to pass Jamiel's Law, to spare another family the heartbreaking burden of a preventable murder.

What action has City Council taken? None. No vote. No ordinance. Nothing but talk and Zine's watered-down counterfeit motion, which would merely "request" that Chief Bratton modify Special Order 40 somewhat. Incredibly, City Council hasn't even had the guts to put that tepid, toothless motion to a vote. And Bratton has arrogantly declared that he won't change one word of Special Order 40 in any event.

Nor, of course, has Villaraigosa himself taken any action. His silence on Jamiel's Law is deafening. He came to Jamiel's funeral for a "photo op," but he won't come to the aid of Jamiel's family now that they're trying to spare other families the terrible loss they themselves have suffered. Villaraigosa could deny "sanctuary city" protection to gang members with the stroke of a pen. Special Order 40 is a memo, not a law. The Mayor has to power to amend it or even abolish it by issuing a simple Executive Directive. He refuses to use that power. He insists on making our city a sanctuary for gangs.

So we're done with the Mayor and the City Council. Last night, the Shaws and I signed a formal request for the City Clerk to put Jamiel's Law on the March 2009 ballot. Today I will FedEx the request to City Hall. Within a month, we should have petitions ready for L.A.'s voters to sign.

Then you, I and our fellow voters will have 120 days to gather at least 74,000 L.A. voters' signatures. We will do that, and we will put Jamiel's Law on the March 3, 2009 ballot.

And on March 3, 2009, we will make L.A. a sanctuary not for gangs, but for law-abiding American citizens and legal aliens.

welcome jpm!!!!!!

On March 2, 2004, the Los Angeles City Council -- including Villaraigosa, Zine, and Smith -- voted 15 to 0 to pass an ordinance (No. 175853) requiring all City agencies to accept Mexico's "Matricula Consular" cards as valid identification.

Repeat: the vote was 15 to ZERO[quote]

This type of assinine menatily should have already been stopped ! This must be a NAU order . Therefore is it not in direct violation of Federal and state laws ? Oath of office ? Where are the stop guards on these types of issues? Federal Marshalls etc .

[quote="Populist"]Good analysis W. Let's send this around.

Here's some recent, related & relevant info as a further reminder:

---

Rasumssen Reports, May 23, 2007:

"The enforcement side of the debate is clearly where the public passion lies on the issue. Seventy-two percent (72%) of voters say it is Very Important for “the government to improve its enforcement of the borders and reduce illegal immigration.â€

Sent to everyone on my email list!

The article brings up a great point about distortion.

...The reason this unpopular legislation failed last year and the reason Congress is reluctant to take the issue up during an election year is they know the truth is a majority of American reject changing the current laws to allow illegal aliens to stay in the US.

If the propaganda coming out of the mouths of open borders fanatics like Rep. Joe Baca, (D-CA) or Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL) were true, then members of Congress would be rushing to bring the legislation to the floor and eager to campaign on it in the 2008 elections. The fact that members of Congress do not want to address the legislation or campaign on it is proof that a majority of Americans reject the legislation.
...

This says it all in the current US political climate and speaks volumes of their character. I would like to see this question asked to McCain and B. Hussein Obama directly.