Calling illegal aliens “immigrants” is an insult to those who come here legally

By Dave Gibson Immigration Examiner

The issue of “immigration” played a prominent role during the presidential debate. However, it was not “immigration” that was being discussed, but rather “illegal immigration.”
While most people now refer to illegal aliens as “immigrants” and often use the blanket term of “immigration,” even when referring to those who enter this country illegally en masse, it is doubtful they realize the effort that has been gone into convincing them to ignore the definite distinctions between the terms.
Referring to illegal aliens as “immigrants” is not only dishonest, it is incredibly insulting to the millions of folks who have come to this country legally, and belittles their contributions.
During a July 2010 webcam interview with NBCLA, Arianna Afsar, a UCLA sophomore, and recently crowned Miss California came out strongly against amnesty, saying: “I think that people who want to be a United States citizen need to come over here legally in order to get the privileges that every American receives.”
Afsar’s father is an immigrant, from Bangladesh. He also helped three family members come here. All arrived through legal means.
Afsar told the reporter: “It ended up taking him 10 years, but he did it legally. I don't think that if you are close to the border that you have the right to be given the rights of a United States citizen.”
Not surprisingly, on their website (nbclosangelescom), NBC described Afsar’s belief that the rule of law should apply to everyone as “controversial.”
Unfortunately, just as they have with so many issues, the left has co-opted the language in this case. For instance, the act of aborting a baby is no longer “abortion,” but has transformed into “a woman’s right to choose.”
Politicians and advocacy groups who continue to push for a so-called “path to citizenship” for illegal aliens conveniently ignore the fact that such a “path” already exists and it has been successfully taken by millions of people. Of course, it is not quick, and it does not reward criminals. Changing the language to soften or gain acceptance for an unpopular, or even immoral or illegal activity is simply a propaganda tactic.
We are constantly subjected to such propaganda from the likes of President Obama and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich when they speak about the difficulties one faces as an immigrant to this country. Of course, they are not referring to legitimate immigrants, but to the millions of illegal aliens, now placing a huge burden upon this nation.
While our success may be as a “nation of immigrants,” we are also a nation of laws and turning our backs on either will undoubtedly spell our demise.

EITC - Another Illegal Alien Benefit!

STOP Senate Democrats From Allowing Illegal Aliens to Steal Billions from Taxpayers

Conservative Daily September 5, 2012

In yet another act of blatant partisan cowardice aimed at pandering to Hispanic voters in the United States, Congressional Democrats have balked at closing a tax loophole that allows illegal aliens to raid the United States treasury and rob citizens and legal aliens of their hard earned tax dollars.  It is despicable and must be stopped immediately.

It has recently come to light that illegal aliens are allowed to claim tax credit refunds on children that may or may not live in this country, or exist at all!  So while hard working American citizens and legal aliens toil to make ends meet in this failing economy, illegal aliens are walking away with billions upon billions of dollars EVERY SINGLE YEAR.

Apparently, the tax-and-spend Democrats STILL doesn’t understand the economic cataclysm that has befallen our country.  As Gov. Chris Christie said in his keynote address at the 2012 Republican National Convention “Their plan: whistle a happy tune while driving us off the fiscal cliff, as long as they are behind the wheel of power.”  That’s EXACTLY what they are doing.  They see the writing on the wall and know that their time is almost at an end.  So they are desperately clinging to power by giving away American dollars to those who have not earned them.

America’s National Debt currently sits at over $16 TRILLION; $5 trillion of which has been added in the last three and a half years!!  President Obama’s Administration has added more to the National Debt than all other Presidents, COMBINED.  Yet, these weak-minded liberals still think that giving away billions of dollars every year to those who are here illegally and file fraudulent tax returns is good use of YOUR money.  This must end NOW!!

So here is how the scam works: the Internal Revenue Service requires EVERYONE residing in this country to pay taxes on money earned.  It doesn’t matter if you were born here, immigrated here legally, or came into this country by illegal means; all must pay taxes.  Sounds fair, right?  But that’s just the beginning.

If you are here illegally then you will not have the required Social Security number to file taxes.  Therefore, the IRS will issue you what is called an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN).  This number allows a person to file taxes and get refund checks.

The trouble begins with the Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC).  The ACTC allows a taxpayer to deduct a refundable $1,000 for every child they claim as a dependent.  A refundable deduction is one where even if an individual doesn’t owe a dime in taxes, the Federal government will send them a check for the amount of the refundable deduction. 

Therefore, if an illegal alien’s tax return states that they do not owe any taxes for that year, they will still get a check in the mail based on the number of dependent children claimed on the tax return.  An illegal alien claiming $0 tax liability with four children is entitled to $4,000 nontaxable, free money.   Unbelievable!

You probably think that the IRS has created oversight to determine who is filing for the ACTC and attempts authenticate the claims of dependent children.  They don’t.  They never have.  In 2011 alone, over $4 BILLION went to pay ACTC refunds to illegal aliens who offered absolutely no proof to the validity of their claims.  Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), who co-sponsored a Senate bill to close the tax loophole, predicts that illegal aliens will receive over $7 billion in ACTC refunds this year 2012.  Why are we giving away $7 BILLION to folks who came here illegally when our economy is in such turmoil!

As mentioned in the foregoing paragraph, Senator Sessions has co-sponsored S. 577, the “Child Tax Credit Integrity Preservation Act”, originally sponsored by Sen. David Vitter (R-LA); the bill is also co-sponsored by Senator John Boozman (R-AR).  This bill is an attempt to close the loophole that allows illegal aliens to steal billions of dollars from the US Treasury each year by mandating that anyone applying for the ACTC have a Social Security number.  But guess what?  In a despicable display of partisan politics, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) BLOCKED the legislation from reaching a Senate vote!

You read that correctly, Senator Reid BLOCKED this common sense legislation that stops illegal aliens from robbing the US Treasury at the expense of hard working citizens and legal aliens in a desperate attempt to stay in power by attempting to pay off the Hispanic vote.  It is disrespectful to the Hispanic community and to taxpayers at large.  We MUST demand that Dirty Harry allow a floor vote on S. 577.  What is he scared of; fiscal sanity and common sense?

After Senator Reid blocked S. 577, Senator Sessions had this to say about the bill: “I’m disappointed that the Majority Leader objected to our effort today to prevent billions in tax credits from being wrongly sent to illegal immigrants claiming they have dependents, many of whom do not live in the US. This should not be a partisan issue: it is wrong for the government to use Americans’ tax dollars to directly subsidize illegality, especially at a time when our nation is spending so much money we don’t have.” Senator Sessions’ remarks are spot on and we must continue to support S. 577 until Senator Reid is forced to allow the legislation to come up for a vote.

Here is what the Inspector General of the Tax Administration wrote on the subject of ACTC: “The payment of federal funds through this tax benefit appears to provide an additional incentive for aliens to enter, reside, and work in the United States without authorization, which contradicts federal law and policy to remove such incentives”.  So not only are we paying illegal aliens to break the law and lie to the IRS, we are also incentivizing their illegal presence within the borders of the United States!  This is unconscionable and Senator Reid should be EMBARRASSED by his actions.

Our economy is 1n shambles and, as Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan remarked in his speech at the 2012 Republican National Convention, “We don’t have much time.  But if we are serious, and smart, and we lead, we can do this.”  It is time we take a stand to protect our economy and the rule of law.  It is up to us to provide a better nation for our children and grandchildren.  We must stop Congressional Democrats from using the tax code and entitlements to pay off certain portions of society in a transparent and disrespectful attempt to gain votes and cling to power.  It is up to US to bring fiscal sanity back to our government.  The first step is closing the ACTC tax loophole.  Stand with us today and DEMAND that Congress pass into law S.577!

The Hypocrisy of Amnesty Advocates

by Phyllis Schlafly Eagle Forum February 20, 2013

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results. The Ronald Reagan amnesty of 1986 was a conspicuous failure, and a virtually identical plan failed in 2007 when it was pushed by John McCain, Ted Kennedy and George W. Bush.

Now the establishment has lined up eight Senators plus a media chorus to resurrect the Reagan amnesty. That may make sense if you are seeking leftwing Democratic votes, but it is insanity for conservatives and Republicans.

The Reagan amnesty admitted twice as many illegal aliens as expected and was riddled with fraud and cheating. It started a gigantic stream of illegal aliens to walk, swim, or bribe their way across the border into the U.S. that has continued to this day.

The amnesty pushers are counting on Americans not to remember the Reagan failure, and counting on the American people’s ignorance of arithmetic and politics. They are also hoping to make Republicans believe amnesty is the key to getting the Hispanic vote plus the key to conning religious citizens into believing amnesty is the way to practice Christian compassion.

The amnesty proposal cooked up by six Senators who claim to be bipartisan is essentially the same plan that aroused the fury of the grassroots in 2007 and covered Congressmen with a tsunami of messages. But there is one big difference today; this time we know the cost, and that’s truly scary.

Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation estimates that this amnesty plan will cost the U.S. taxpayers “$2.5 Trillion above any taxes paid in” because the majority of illegal aliens who would eventually be legalized by the proposal are uneducated and poor. At least 60 percent are high school dropouts so they live below the poverty level and will be eligible to receive many of our 79 varieties of welfare handouts.

The entire plan should be illegal because it violates an explicit tenet of federal law that anyone granted entry into the U.S. must be financially self-supporting and not likely to become a public charge. Of course President Obama is not shy about issuing illegal executive orders.

Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) pointed out that “We know already that the Administration refuses to enforce existing law restricting immigrant welfare use, and in fact promotes expanded welfare use to immigrants, including food stamps, public housing, and Medicaid. . . . What good are promises of future enforcement when the Administration covertly undermines those laws now in place?”

There is no way that supporting amnesty will give Republicans the Hispanic vote, and amnesty advocates are plainly dishonest when they assert the contrary. In the election following the Reagan amnesty, George H.W. Bush got only 30 percent of the Hispanic vote in 1988, and only 25 percent when he ran for reelection in 1992.

We’ve been told that George W. Bush was well-liked by the Hispanics, but he got only 35 percent of the vote when he was elected in 2000. There is no evidence that any plan can give Republicans 50 percent of the Hispanic vote.

When Hispanics are asked what issues they care most about, immigration usually ranks only fifth. Hispanics who come from countries where big government is a permanent fact of life and where the economic systems are based on bribery are unlikely prospects for the Republican message of limited government and restraints on government spending.

Any amnesty plan, no matter how it is dressed up, is a formula for more Democratic votes and the big-government, big-spending policies advocated by the Democrats.

A couple of coalitions have formed to try to convince religious groups that amnesty is a manifestation of Christian compassion. In fact, it is gross hypocrisy because it betrays the millions of immigrants who came here legally and obeyed our laws.

This was well understood by the famous advocate for the rights of Hispanic immigrants, Cesar Chavez. Long deceased, he is still such an Hispanic icon that the National Education Association (NEA), year after year, passes a resolution calling for a national holiday to honor Cesar Chavez, and it’s already a state holiday in California.

Chavez was vehemently opposed to illegal aliens coming across the Mexican border because they took jobs from legal immigrants. He ordered union members to call the Immigration and Naturalization Service and report illegal aliens working in the fields so our government could deport them.

Chavez got his supporters to picket INS offices to demand a crackdown on illegal aliens, and he offered staff to the INS to serve as volunteer border guards to keep Mexicans from sneaking into the U.S.

Occasionally, Chavez’ people even physically attacked illegal aliens to scare them away.

Why the Tea Party Movement Must Oppose Illegal Immigration and Amnesty

By Ronald W. Mortensen, (Part II of II)

Ronald W. Mortensen, PhD, is a retired career U.S. Foreign Service Officer and former Society for Human Resource Management senior executive.

The fact that American citizens suffer very real and very serious consequences including having their credit ruined, having arrest records wrongfully attached to their names, being saddled with income tax liabilities for income earned by illegal aliens under their Social Security numbers, being denied government benefits, and having their medical records compromised with potentially life-threatening consequences is unfortunate but unavoidable.

It should not come as a surprise that those on the left show unwavering support for millions of illegal aliens who have no allegiance to the United States. After all, illegal aliens are malleable and highly vulnerable. The left can, therefore, readily gain their loyalty by telling them that they are victims of racism, of racial profiling, of American imperialism, and of an unfair capitalistic system.

The progressives, liberals, social justice advocates, and even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce support people unlawfully in the United States. They provide them with taxpayer-funded benefits and they promise illegal aliens a path to citizenship.

For those who are working to fundamentally change America's free market system and restrict individual liberty, illegal aliens provide another means of increasing the culture of dependency that allows the left to expand its power.

Legalizing millions of illegal aliens and allowing them to bring in as many as 103 million family members over 20 years would fundamentally transform the United States socially, economically, and politically, according to Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation, and greatly expand entitlement spending.

Perhaps most importantly for the left, illegal aliens and their family members have no allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and little understanding of the importance of limited government. Legalizing millions of illegal aliens is likely to provide added support for the concept of a "living Constitution" and for a greatly expanded role for government.

Taken together, all of these things make it possible for the progressives, liberals, and social justice advocates to achieve their overriding goals of radically changing the Constitution, creating a culture of dependency, vastly expanding federal power, further weakening the rule of law, diminishing individual freedom, and destroying the free market economy.

The left and the other advocates for illegal aliens try to hide what they are doing by labeling the Tea Parties and others who disagree with them as racists, nativists, restrictionists, xenophobes, and as hate groups.

Those on the left talk about compassion and yet they show no compassion for the millions of people who obey our laws and wait years to legally enter the United States or who die while waiting for their turn.

They talk about justice yet they deny justice to millions of Americans who are the victims of illegal-alien job-related identity theft by ignoring these crimes and extending amnesty to those committing job-related felonies as long as they are in the United States illegally.

They talk about racism while supporting an effectively racist illegal immigrant policy that favors one ethnic group over all other races, religions, and ethnicities.

They talk about helping the poor, while turning their backs on the poorest and most desperate people in the world.

And then they put forth a "comprehensive immigration reform" plan that rewards illegal aliens with a path to citizenship. Under the left's plan, anyone illegally in the United States would pay an insignificant $500 fine, pay a year or two of back taxes, be required to learn English, and be given total amnesty from job-related identity theft.

The left portrays their amnesty plan as compassionate and just; however, it is neither.

It would leave the millions of American citizens who are victims of illegal-alien identity theft to recover their good names and their lives without any help from the government that is supposed to protect and defend them.

Why the Tea Party Movement Must Oppose Illegal Immigration and Amnesty

By Ronald W. Mortensen, (Part I of II)

Ronald W. Mortensen, PhD, is a retired career U.S. Foreign Service Officer and former Society for Human Resource Management senior executive.

While I was working on legislation designed to address the problems associated with illegal alien driven, child identity theft in Utah, a supporter of the "Tea Party" movement asked me why I was so concerned about illegal immigration. "After all, aren't illegal immigrants just good, hard working people who are trying to make a better life for themselves and their families," he asked.

I responded that illegal immigration is a direct threat to constitutionally limited government, the rule of law, free markets, private property, individual freedom, and fiscal responsibility.

It is important to understand that illegal aliens are primarily social and economic migrants who leave their countries in order to improve their social and economic status rather than in the search of individual freedom and liberty. As such, their allegiance remains with their countries of origin.

For the most part, illegal aliens come from cultures where power rests with the government rather than with the people, where citizens look to government for a wide range of services rather than being self reliant and where the rule-of-law is weak and corruption is a way of life.

I pointed out that the average illegal alien quickly learns that the rule-of-law doesn't apply to him in the United States. After all, the first act that he takes when coming to the United States is either to sneak across the border or to get a visa by lying to a United States consular officer about his intention to return to his home country.

Then after violating American immigration law, the illegal alien immediately graduates to felony document fraud, felony perjury on I-9 forms, and felony identity theft in order to get jobs with "reputable" employers. This is justifiable in his eyes because that is the way things are done in his country.

Once in the United States, the illegal alien demands special privileges. He speaks his language and expects America to adapt to him. He retains his culture and flag. He expects Americans to give documents issued by his government, such as consular identification cards, the same status as documents issued by the United States. He sends much of his earnings back to his home country. He demands the right to drive without a license and he takes advantage of a wide range of taxpayer provided benefits for both himself and his family.

The illegal alien is often poorly educated. He works at low-paying jobs, lives with other illegal aliens in overcrowded apartments and houses. He frequently participates in gang activities when not at work. He knows little about American culture, traditions, or the Constitution.

The illegal alien distrusts the police and finds nothing shocking about the federal government owning automobile companies, bailing out banks, or providing health care. After all, that is the way things are in his home country.
True individual freedom and personal responsibility may be alien concepts to him and he likely does not understand that individual rights come from God and not from government.

The illegal alien is welcomed and supported by progressives, liberals, and social justice advocates. They teach him that he is a victim and that he has rights; however, they do not teach him constitutional principles or to cherish individual freedom, the rule of law, and personal responsibility.

The left encourages him to take advantage of a wide range of government "entitlements" for both himself and his children and joins in an unholy alliance with businesses to encourage him to commit multiple, job-related felonies while justifying his actions on the grounds of compassion and the unfairness of American immigration laws.

The supporters of illegal immigration justify the fact that illegal aliens routinely use the identities of American children to get jobs because it is being done for the greater good or because they need the workers. They ignore the estimated 1.1. million Arizona kids who have their Social Security numbers stolen and used by illegal aliens and they turn a blind eye to the fact that 75 percent of all illegal aliens have fraudulent Social Security numbers.

Illegal aliens, progressives, liberals, social justice organizations, and Chambers of Commerce write off the damage done to millions of American men, women, and children as unavoidable collateral damage that is necessary for underprivileged illegal aliens to achieve the American dream and for businesses to have a source of low-cost labor.

A Thoughtful Interesting Deviation from Illegal Immigration

Why Do Societies Give Up?

By Victor Davis Hanson 2/14/2013

Hundreds of reasons have been adduced for the fall of Rome and the end of the Old Regime in 18th-century France. Reasons run from inflation and excessive spending to resource depletion and enemy invasion, as historians attempt to understand the sudden collapse of the Mycenaeans, the Aztecs and, apparently, the modern Greeks. In literature from Catullus to Edward Gibbon, wealth and leisure -- and who gets the most of both -- more often than poverty and exhaustion implode civilization.

One recurring theme seems consistent in Athenian literature on the eve of the city's takeover by Macedon: social squabbling over slicing up a shrinking pie. Athenian speeches from that era make frequent reference to lawsuits over property and inheritance, evading taxes, and fudging eligibility for the dole. After the end of the Roman Republic, reactionary Latin literature -- from the likes of Juvenal, Petronius, Suetonius, Tacitus -- pointed to "bread and circuses," as well as excessive wealth, corruption and top-heavy government.

For Gibbon and later French scholars, "Byzantine" became a pejorative description of a top-heavy Greek bureaucracy that could not tax enough vanishing producers to sustain a growing number of bureaucrats. In antiquity, inflating the currency by turning out cheap bronze coins was often the favored way to pay off public debts, while the law became fluid to address popular demands rather than to protect time-honored justice.

After the end of World War II, most of today's powerhouses were either in ruins or still preindustrial -- China, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, Russia and Taiwan. Only the United States and Great Britain had sophisticated economies that survived the destruction of the war. Both were poised to resupply a devastated world with new ships, cars, machinery and communications.

In comparison to Frankfurt, the factories of 1945 Liverpool had survived mostly intact. Yet Britain missed out on the postwar German economic miracles, in part because after the deprivations of the war, the war-weary British turned to class warfare and nationalized their main industries, which soon became uncompetitive.

The gradual decline of a society is often a self-induced process of trying to meet ever-expanding appetites, rather than a physical inability to produce past levels of food and fuel, or to maintain adequate defense. Americans have never had safer workplaces or more sophisticated medical care -- and never have so many been on disability.

King Xerxes' huge Persian force of 250,000 sailors and soldiers could not defeat a rather poor Greece in 480-479 B.C. Yet a century and a half later, a much smaller invading force from the north under Philip II of Macedon overwhelmed the far more prosperous Greek descendants of the victors of Salamis.

For hundreds of years, the outmanned legions of the tiny and poor Roman Republic survived foreign invasions. Yet centuries later, tribal Goths, Visigoths, Vandals and Huns overran the huge Mediterranean-wide Roman Empire.

Given our unsustainable national debt -- nearly $17 trillion and climbing -- America is said to be in decline, although we face no devastating plague, nuclear holocaust, or shortage of oil or food.

Americans have never led such affluent material lives -- at least as measured by access to cell phones, big-screen TVs, cheap jet travel and fast food. Obesity rather than malnutrition is the greater threat to national health. Flash mobs go after electronics stores, not food markets. Americans spend more money on Botox, face lifts and tummy tucks than on the age-old scourges of polio, small pox and malaria.

If Martians looked at the small box houses, one-car families and primitive consumer goods of the 1950s, they would have thought the postwar United States, despite a balanced budget in 1956, was impoverished. In comparison, an indebted contemporary America would seem to aliens flush with cash, as consumers jostle for each new update to their iPhones.

By any historical marker, the future of Americans has never been brighter. The United States has it all: undreamed new finds of natural gas and oil, the world's pre-eminent food production, continual technological wizardly, strong demographic growth, a superb military and constitutional stability.

Yet we don't talk confidently about capitalizing and expanding on our natural and inherited wealth. Instead, Americans bicker over entitlement spoils as the nation continues to pile up trillion-dollar-plus deficits.

Enforced equality rather than liberty is the new national creed. The medicine of cutting back on government goodies seems far worse than the disease of borrowing trillions from the unborn to pay for them.

In August 1945, Hiroshima was in shambles, while Detroit was among the most innovative and wealthiest cities in the world. Contemporary Hiroshima now resembles a prosperous Detroit of 1945; parts of Detroit look like they were bombed decades ago.

History has shown that a government's redistribution of shrinking wealth, in preference to a private sector's creation of new sources of it, can prove more destructive than even the most deadly enemy.

The GOP's Amnesty Caucus Raises the White Flag

By Pat Buchanan 2/1/2013

On Monday, Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Jeff Flake and Marco Rubio emerged with an offer of a Republican surrender to Barack Obama.

We will accept amnesty for 11 million illegal aliens, said the four, but you must get serious about securing the border against yet another invasion. Only after an independent commission agrees the border has been secured will the 11 million be given green cards and put on a path to citizenship.  The next day in Las Vegas, Obama, reveling in victory, instructed the four waving their white flags that the defeated do not dictate terms.

Get cracking on comprehensive reform now, Obama instructed Marco and John, or I send my own bill to the Hill, granting amnesty to every illegal alien, with no preconditions. Putting the 11 million illegal aliens on a path to U.S. citizenship should begin not after the border is better secured, but the day the bill is signed.  In a pointed lecture to Rubio, the Great Hispanic Hope of the GOP, Obama said, "We have done more on border security in the last four years than we have done in the previous 20."

A graduate of the Saul Alinsky school, Obama can smell the defeatism in the Republican Party. And he knows how to treat supplicants begging for a fig leaf to cover the nakedness of their capitulation.  But why are the Republicans surrendering their "no amnesty" stand, which has been party policy since America rallied to the GOP's opposition to amnesty in 2007, when a national grass-roots uprising routed McCain, Teddy Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush himself?

McCain fears the future. We got 27 percent of the Hispanic vote in 2012, and the reason is our position on illegal aliens, he argues. Until we get this behind us, we will never again get the 40 percent of the vote Bush got. Either we capitulate to Obama and La Raza, or we are doomed.

Why is McCain wrong? He is wrong on principle. Should a majority of women tell pollsters they are against overturning Roe v. Wade, does the party abandon its pro-life stand and cease calling for Supreme Court justices who might overturn Roe? What kind of party is that? What kind of people do that? Who thought in 2007 we could rout the establishment of both parties?

Washington is not invincible. But you cannot rally the people if you are not prepared to lead and fight.

Republican capitulation on amnesty is not going to win Hispanic votes, but it will demoralize the party base. McCain, the amnesty champion today and in 2007, got 31 percent of the Hispanic vote against Obama. Why is he an expert on what the party should do?

When those 11 million illegals have completed their path to citizenship and become voters, why should they, or the millions more family members they will have brought in by then, vote for the GOP? Hispanics are not small-government people. They believe in and benefit disproportionately from Big Government.  Some 53 percent of Hispanic children are born out of wedlock, and 52 percent of Hispanic families are headed by single women.

Big Government provides their kids with Head Start before school, free K-through-12 schooling, Pell Grants and student loans for college, and two or three free meals a day at school for the kids. Big Government provides food stamps, welfare for mom and earned income tax credit checks should she work. Big Government subsidizes her housing and provides free health care for the family through Medicaid.

A Pew Hispanic poll found that by 3-to-1, Hispanics would favor a big government with more services to a small government with fewer services.  Why would these folks vote for a Republican Party that promises to downsize the Big Government upon which they depend for sustenance, security and survival? Why would they vote for a party that is going to cut capital gains, income and inheritance taxes they don't pay?

The 11 million illegal aliens, who came with nothing, are poorer than the Hispanics who are already citizens. When we make citizens of them and the family members they bring in, our welfare state will explode and the social safety net will sag under the weight of millions of new beneficiaries.

Republicans win between 27 and 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. Add 10 million new Hispanic voters, and Democrats will realize a net gain of 2 to 4 million new voters. There goes the Southwest, and there goes the presidency, forever.

Amnesty would be the greatest victory for mass lawbreaking in U.S. history. It would reward those who broke our laws and make fools of those who waited in line back home to come to America.

And this is about more than economics. It is about our sovereignty, our security, our national culture and our national identity.

This fight is not yet lost, and even should we lose, is it not better to go down fighting than to ask for terms from Barack Obama?

'Fast and Furious' Whitewash by Justice Department

By Chuck Norris  - Townhall.com

Sometimes, as the saying goes, the truth really is stranger than fiction. There may have been some wild plotlines on "Walker, Texas Ranger," but there was nothing that compares to the scandal surrounding "Fast and Furious" -- the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives operation that resulted in the loss of a distinguished Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry.

The congressional investigation into "Fast and Furious" has been going on for more than a year, but it was stonewalled by Attorney General Eric Holder, who instead opened an internal investigation by the Department of Justice's inspector general. Tens of thousands of internal Justice Department documents supplied to the inspector general were withheld from Congress, despite having been requested in a lawful subpoena issued by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

This act of stubborn defiance resulted in Holder's becoming the first attorney general to be voted in contempt of Congress. Now Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report finally has been released, but it leaves some critical questions unanswered. Before delving into specifics, let me thank Townhall's Katie Pavlich for her help deciphering the report, as well as her groundbreaking reporting on this issue from day one.

Media accounts surrounding the release of the report had a routine flavor, which was otherworldly in light of the report's contents. The Associated Press reported that "the Justice Department's internal watchdog ... faulted the agency for misguided strategies, errors in judgment and management failures during a bungled gun-trafficking probe in Arizona that resulted in hundreds of weapons turning up at crime scenes in the U.S. and Mexico." Oh, is that all?

"Fast and Furious" involved the "walking" of guns into Mexico -- an artful term for gun smuggling that was clearly illegal but nonetheless encouraged. Most of these guns turned up in the hands of drug dealers and known criminals. The ostensible goal of the ATF was to catch these cartel members red-handed with the smuggled guns during crimes in Mexico. Two of the guns that were "walked" into Mexico were found at the crime scene of the killing of Agent Terry, who died in a firefight with drug cartel henchmen.

Thousands of guns walked into Mexico are still on the loose. Where are they, and how many are out there? Does the U.S. government have a plan to recapture them, or will we simply spend years wondering how many more victims they are being used to kill? And who will make sure that Congress and the public are made aware if and when these guns surface at more crime scenes here in the U.S.?

The report outlines the basics of "who knew what when" and recommends potential sanctions for no fewer than 14 government employees. Note that 14 is also the precise number of criminals who have pleaded guilty under this operation, according to the AP. But the report doesn't delve into potential motivations. There may be deeper motives for allowing these guns to walk into Mexico that remain unaccounted for. Is it possible that allowing an infusion of firearms to go into Mexico was intended to provoke an explosion of gun violence, thus prompting domestic politicians to call for sweeping new restrictions on our rights? The report is silent on this count.

Terry is the most prominent victim of this horribly botched operation, and his family members are the unsung heroes here. They have been waiting patiently for answers for almost two years now. Brian Terry only wanted to do his job and get home for the holidays. Dubbed "Superman" by colleagues and friends, he is the face of "Fast and Furious." Justice must be properly served, or else his valiant service and ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty will be dishonored.

Even with its omissions, the inspector general's report is a chilling indictment of a collapse in leadership at the highest levels of federal law enforcement. There may be 14 staffers who take the fall, but it's clear that their politically appointed superiors were either asleep at the switch or willing to jeopardize public safety to push an agenda that remains undisclosed. Can anyone possibly need any more reasons to register to vote?

The bottom line is that the American people deserve answers that go well beyond the inspector general's report. Congress needs to proceed with a comprehensive investigation, and it must have the unfettered cooperation and access that the Department of Justice thus far has withheld. And Justice is clearly in need of new leadership. Let's give it to them.

Immigration and the Welfare State

By Former Representative Ron Paul, Texas

More and more of my constituents are asking me when Congress will address the problem of illegal immigration. The public correctly perceives that neither political party has the courage to do what is necessary to prevent further erosion of both our border security and our national identity. As a result, immigration may be the sleeper issue that decides the 2008 presidential election.

The problem of illegal immigration will not be solved easily, but we can start by recognizing that the overwhelming majority of Americans — including immigrants — want immigration reduced, not expanded.

Amnesty for illegal immigrants is not the answer. Millions of people who broke the law by entering, staying, and working in our country illegally should not be rewarded with a visa. Why should lawbreakers obtain a free pass, while those seeking to immigrate legally face years of paperwork and long waits for a visa?

We must end welfare state subsidies for illegal aliens. Some illegal aliens — certainly not all — receive housing subsidies, food stamps, free medical care, and other forms of welfare. This alienates taxpayers and breeds suspicion of immigrants, even though the majority of them work very hard. Without a welfare state, we would know that everyone coming to America wanted to work hard and support himself.

Our current welfare system also encourages illegal immigration by discouraging American citizens from taking low-wage jobs. This creates greater demand for illegal foreign labor. Welfare programs and minimum wage laws create an artificial market for labor to do the jobs Americans supposedly won't do.

Illegal aliens also place a tremendous strain on social entitlement programs. Under a proposed totalization agreement with Mexico, millions of illegal aliens will qualify for Social Security and other programs — programs that already threaten financial ruin for America in the coming decades. Adding millions of foreign citizens to the Social Security, Medicare, and disability rolls will only hasten the inevitable day of reckoning.

Economic considerations aside, we must address the cultural aspects of immigration. The vast majority of Americans welcome immigrants who want to come here, work hard, and build a better life. But we rightfully expect immigrants to show a sincere desire to become American citizens, speak English, and assimilate themselves culturally. All federal government business should be conducted in English. More importantly, we should expect immigrants to learn about and respect our political and legal traditions, which are rooted in liberty and constitutionally limited government.

Our most important task is to focus on effectively patrolling our borders. With our virtually unguarded borders, almost any determined individual — including a potential terrorist — can enter the United States. Unfortunately, the federal government seems more intent upon guarding the borders of other nations than our own. We are still patrolling Korea's border after some 50 years, yet ours are more porous than ever. It is ironic that we criticize Syria for failing to secure its border with Iraq while our own borders, particularly to the south, are no better secured than those of Syria.

We need to allocate far more of our resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase.

If we took some of the steps I have outlined here — eliminating the welfare state and securing our borders — we could effectively address the problem of illegal immigration in a manner that would not undermine the freedom of American citizens. Sadly, it appears we are moving toward policies like a national ID that diminish our liberties. Like gun control, these approaches only punish the innocent, as criminals will always find a way around the law.

Beware: Amnesty Won’t Elect Republicans

Eagle Forum December 22, 2012

The Republican strategists who confidently predicted that their candidate, Mitt Romney, would win the 2012 election are already pontificating about what Republicans must do to win in 2016. After their disastrous defeat, strategy and policy mistakes, and expensive super PAC advertising that failed to win votes, why should anybody take their advice again?

The elitists now tell us that amnesty for illegal aliens, a.k.a. “immigration reform,” is the key to future Republican nirvana. That’s wrong-headed advice.

Barack Obama sealed his victory in the battleground states: Ohio, Wisconsin, Virginia, and New Hampshire, but those states have very few Hispanics, and illegal immigration was not a significant issue. Obama won narrowly in Florida, another battleground state, but the Hispanic vote there is Cuban and Puerto Rican and they don’t care about immigration laws.

Most polls show that Romney’s pro-enforcement policies were more popular than Obama’s pro-amnesty views. Let’s look at some numbers.

In regard to the entry of illegal aliens, a CBS poll in August found that 63% of voters believed that Arizona’s immigration enforcement laws are either “about right” or “didn’t go far enough.” This was confirmed by a Breitbart News election-night poll reporting that 61% of voters favored Arizona-style immigration laws, including 63% of independents, 53% of blacks, and even 40% of Democrats.

The notion that the main reason Hispanics vote Democratic is their support of amnesty for illegal aliens and their resentment against Republicans who oppose it is a big political lie. The reason Hispanics vote Democratic is that two-thirds of Mexican immigrant families, although they are hard workers, are in or near poverty and 57% use at least one welfare program, which is twice the rate of native-born non-Hispanic households.

That’s not a constituency for whom promises of amnesty for more poor immigrants would persuade them to vote for the Party that is branded as supporting tax cuts for the rich, limited government, and spending reductions. Nor does it mean that Hispanics are a voting bloc eager to vote for a white Cuban, Marco Rubio, instead of the Party that is offering them cash, health care, and other benefits.

The elitists are trying to wrap their fallacious argument in Ronald Reagan, but that won’t wash. Reagan was persuaded to sign a major amnesty bill for the then-illegal aliens, but it’s well known that the resultant amnesty was rife with fraud and did not produce Republican votes.

In Reagan’s 1980 victory, he received 35% of the Latino vote, and in his landslide of 1984 he received 37%. After Reagan’s generous 1986 amnesty, George H.W. Bush’s 1988 victory produced only 30% of the Latino vote.

Another myth about Hispanic voters is the notion that social issues will get them to vote Republican because they are Christian and pro-family. The Hispanic illegitimacy birth rate is 53%, about twice that of whites, and a Pew Research Center poll now reports that the majority of Hispanics support gay marriage.

An American National Elections Study asked a question about free market vs. government solutions. Only 17.9% of Hispanics responded “the less government the better,” and 83.3% said a strong government involvement is required to handle economic problems.

The pro-amnesty crowd waged an expensive campaign this year to defeat the famous Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio, but he nevertheless won his reelection. He said he wants to talk “man to man” with Obama and explain that granting amnesty to illegal aliens is unfair to legal immigrants.

Policymakers should read the studies by Cuban exile scholar Jose Azel that probe into Hispanic attitudes and history. He concludes that the sociopolitical heritage from Spain and the post-colonial experience of Latin America have led Latinos to view government very differently from the principles of limited government enunciated and adopted by our Founding Fathers.

There isn’t any real evidence of Mexican assimilation to parallel the Irish and Italian assimilation in the 20th century. Irish and Italian assimilation absolutely depended on stopping the entry of more new foreigners, as the United States did in the 1920s.

The voting bloc that Mitt Romney ignored, but which Republicans must recapture if they ever want to win again, is the blue-collar men without a college degree who had well-paid manufacturing jobs until the free traders shipped those jobs overseas. They used to be called Reagan Democrats and they were an essential part of the big victories won by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Republicans need a new strategy to recapture those good middle-class jobs. We don’t need them merely for Republican votes; we need them also to restore our manufacturing capacity for economic, national security, and family-support reasons.