Yes, last week the United States Supreme Court UPHELD an Arizona law aimed at illegal immigration, on the basis that sates are not prohibited from attemptng to deal with a problem that is mainly a Federal responsibility, so long as the state law is consistent with Federal law. Yes, this is the sameprinciple involved in the Obama Administration high profile lawsuit against Arizona, where Arizona has merely tried to help ENFORCE Federal law, ut it is not the same law or the same case. Rather, the law involved was a law imposing severe penalties on employers for hiring illegal immigraants without adequate inquiry into their status.
Notice that the Obama Administration has still not sued places like San Francisco, who openly OPPOSE Federal law on illegal immigration, and deliberately disobey it and/or obstruct it. Illegal immigration is one of the most blatant areas where leftists, and the mainstream media, expose themselves as the worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four. Nope. Leftists are NOT interested in "the law". They are merely interested in POWER--getting the Federal courts to imppose their views by dictatorial power. No, leftists do NOT believe in democracy, as this blog has shown you repeatedly. Leftists believe in neithr the "rule of law" or democracy. They believe in the rule of men (themselves), and in dictatorial imposition of their views on everybody--on the basis that their views SHOULD be in the Constitution, even if they are not.
"But Skip," you say, this lawsuit was brought by the CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. Are you saying that is a left wing organization."
In a way, I am saying that. Too many Chamber of Commerce Republicans are ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS, rather than conservatives. That means they are leftist style hypocrites, without real principles. They, too, FEAR democracy, and don't believe in it. They, too, are interested in POWER, rather than in principles of freedom and enforcing our laws. They, too, want to IMPOSE their views on us all by dictatorial means. Amazingly enough, the Chamber of Commerce is SOMETIMES not as bad as the economic fascists who now dominate Wall Street and BIG business, because small business has more influence there, but this case shows how establishment Repubicans think. the Chamber of Commerce regards itself as an INTEREST organization promoting what it perceives as the SELFISH intreests of business, and the country be hanged. We need to stop encouraging illegal immigrants from both entering this country illegally and STAYING in this country illegally? Well, the Chamber of Commerce does nto perceive this as a problem which should inconvenince business.
Yes, way too many establishment Repubilcans, AND establishment "conservatives", do NOT believe businesses should help enforce the law, or even be forced to obey the law. Say hello to sanctuary cities like San Francisco, Chemaber o f Commerce. You ae on the SAME PAGE on this one--the same indefensible page threatening to destroy our country. Too many business people, and Wall Street Journal type Republicans, who regard the main job of the Repubican Party as supporting business in every way, believe that businesses NEED illegal immigrants (9% unemployment be damned) in order to EXPLOIT AMERICAN WORKERS. No, they don't lput it that way, but that is what it comes down to. And it is shameful..
Yes, the OBAMA head of Homeland Security signed this Arizona law into law when she was governor of Arizona. That has not stopped the Obama Administration from FAILING to push for real penalties against businesses who fail to pursue DISCREPANCIES in names and Social Security numbers. Yesa, NO illegal immigrant should be able to get a real job in this country, because we ALREADY MATCH names and Social Security numbers--AND we notify employers of problems with the match (as Meg Whitman found out). However, guess what happened when the Bush Administration finally proposed sending a letter to employyers enforcing new regulations imposing sever SANCTIONS for failing to follow up and investigate discrepancies? Right. The ACLU and the AFL-CIO (Benedict Arnold had nothing on those people, who BETRAYED American labor) promptly sued to BLOCK the new regulations in Federal Court in SAN FRANCISCO (where else). So far as I know, the Ob ama Administration has made no attempt to pursue this easy way of holding employers accountable--by a new Arizona-type law, if necessary. You can see why setablishment Republicans have not really pursued this either. This UNHOLY alliance between business Repubicans, labor, and other leftists is enough to make one despair for this country.
Nope. As never before since World War II, we do NOT NEED "guest workers". Worse, "guest workers' will merely increase the problem of illegal immigration by providing another way for massive numbers of people to get into this country without even having to risk an illegal entyy.
Nope. I will debate ANY 'establishment Republican", or ANY so-callked conservaitve, in this blog or anywhere, as to the DECEPTION of the establishment Republican positioni on illegal immigration (the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty approach, however modified). It is indefensible.
Doubt me? DON'T. Consider what happens so long as present law (based on an extreme reading of the 14th Amendment) is not changed. Presently, as everyone knows but everyone refuses to defend or change, children whose parents are BOTH not permanent residents of this contry (as on "pregnancy tours", or pregnant mothers camped outside the country hospital in El Paso where my mother was once a nursing supervisor) are automaticallyl citizens of the Untied States. This means that children of any "guest workers" born in this country are automaticallly citizens of the Untied States. Absurd. I will NEVER support ANLY "guest worker" program until this is changed-by Constitutional Amendment, if necessary, which would not be an "attack" on the Constitution but the Constitutionial method to change a glitch or outmoded part of the Constitutioni.
Are "establishment" Republicans like this Chamber of Commerce unit "conservative"? This case is a Q.E.D. moment showing they are NOT. I did not really look at the makeup of the 5-4 Supreme Court decision (my problem with eyesight means it is hard for me to pick up these details quickly from written articles), but the cable coverage certainly seemed to assert that the CONSERVATIVE members of the Supreme Court formed the majority. That would be the logical result, as those are the justices who actually believe in a LIMITED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, with states exercising authority to the maximum extent possible. Establishment Republicans obviously do NOT believe in that principle. As I said, Q.E.D. It is demonstrated.
Do you understand what I am realy telling you with this article? Yes, I am telling you that I will NEVER support a Repubican politician who thinks this way again. I suported President Bush twice, before disowing him over any number of domestic things (including illegal immigration), and I refuse to vote for a Repubican who thinks the way these establishment Repubicans think. Does that mean I can't support any Repubican who favors a "guest worker" program? Not quite. Too many Republicans think they HAVE to cater to business that way. They think they are opposig unions. Hogwash. But that one item is not make or break. However, any candidate who shows that he or she is PANDERING to the Bush-McCain view on illegal immigration will NEVER get my vote--against Barack Obama or anyone else. I did not vote for McCain, and I will never vote for a similar establishment--leftist--Repubican again in my lifetime. Yes, it does give me qualms on Chris Christie, and it is why I wuoould not automatically suport him if he were to run (despite his great qualities).
P.S. Nope. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment