Virginia’s Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli issued a legal opinion last Friday granting the authority to Virginia police  state law enforcement officers allowing them to check the immigration status of anyone “stopped or arrested” in response to an inquiry over whether his state could mirror the policies passed into law in Arizona.

Per AG Cuccinelli:

It is my opinion that Virginia law enforcement officers, including conservation officers may, like Arizona police officers, inquire into the immigration status of persons stopped or arrested. 

This decision follows the actions of a Clinton-appointed Federal Judge who blocked Arizona from implementing the same provision in their new anti-illegal immigration law.

The difference in this ruling is that Cuccinelli reiterated in the opinion a prior finding that while state officers have the authority to arrest suspects on criminal immigration violations, they are advised against arresting over civil immigration violations. Overstaying a visa would fall under the latter category. 

Meanwhile, back in Arizona, Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu has had enough of Obama and his administration.

Babeu says that instead of helping law enforcement in Arizona stop the hundreds of thousands of people who come into the United States illegally, the federal government is targeting the state and its law enforcement personnel:

What’s very troubling is the fact that at a time when we in law enforcement and our state need help from the federal government, instead of sending help they put up billboard-size signs warning our citizens to stay out of the desert in my county because of dangerous drug and human smuggling and weapons and bandits and all these other things and then, behind that, they drag us into court with the ACLU.

The sheriff was referring to the law suits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Department of Justice challenging the state’s new immigration law.

Sheriff Babeu asked:

So who has partnered with the ACLU.  It’s the president and (Attorney General) Eric Holder himself.   And that’s simply outrageous.

Our own government has become our enemy and is taking us to court at a time when we need help.

The May 17 ACLU class-action lawsuit charges the law uses racial profiling and named the county attorneys and sheriffs in all 15 Arizona counties as defendants.  The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit on July 6, charging the Arizona law preempted the federal government’s sole right to enforce immigration law.

If the president would do his job and secure the border; send 3,000 armed soldiers to the Arizona border and stop the illegal immigration and the drug smuggling and the violence, we wouldn’t even be in this position and where we’re forced to take matters into our own hands.

Per U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), about 250,000 people were detained in Arizona in the last 12 months for being in the country illegally. Babeu reminds us that number only reflects the number of people detained and that thousands more enter the country illegally each year.

Another little fact that the Main Stream Media ignores is, that, according to the CBP, 17 percent of those detained already have a criminal record in the United States.

And if Obama’s war against the states he’s supposed to be working for isn’t enough to get you mad, how about this?

On the day parts of Arizona’s immigration law, SB 1070, went into effect, Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio was in the news for a related reason: there’s a price on his head, offered by a Mexican drug cartel.

The audio and text message in Spanish offered $1 million for Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s head and $10,000 for anyone who wants to join the Mexican cartel.

An anonymous man says his wife received the text message Tuesday evening.  It also included an international phone number and instructions to pass the message along.

The man said:

She showed it to me..I was kind of disgusted..I reported it to the Sheriff’s department yesterday..they said they were going to direct the threat squad on it.

Lisa Allen of Sheriff Joe’s office says they believe the message originated in Mexico.

Even though the Sheriff has received numerous empty death threats in the past, they believe this threat has some merit to it because of its timing.

Allen says:

Arpaio gets threats pretty routinely, but obviously with this heightened awareness of his role in the immigration issue we’ve got to take this one a little bit more seriously with a million dollar contract out on him.

But what really has investigators paying attention is how quickly the message may have been spread:

It’s going so many different places that our folks are looking at it and thinking well at any given point in time it could land in front of some crazy person who thinks I can do that.

How is Sheriff Joe responding to the threat?  Allen says:

It’s a little bit like water off a duck’s back for him, but you never know if it’s that sense of false bravado with him..you just can’t read it, I’m sure he’s concerned, I’m sure he’s concerned for his family more than anything else.

The text message came from an international number, which will make it very difficult for investigators to trace.

So, while Obama and his minions attack in our own courts the very citizens that they are supposed to be serving and protecting, a Mexican drug cartel places a bounty on the head of the most well-known sheriff in America.  And Scooter wonders why his poll numbers are sinking faster than the Titanic.

Before I leave, here’s a video that will probably complete your meltdown that I have started with this blog.  Vaya con Dios, mis amigos.

Sources:  foxnews.com, cnsnews.com, my foxphoenix.com

President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) makes his first Atlanta appearance since his inauguration today.

If you think every Democrat in Georgia that’s running for office this November will want to have a photo op today with Scooter, you’re wrong. 

Former Georgia Governor Roy Barnes has said he’s not available to be there.  The Democratic gubernatorial candidate will be somewhere else in Georgia, about 100 miles away from Obama.

Campaign manager Chris Carpenter released the following statement:

Roy has a busy campaign schedule in Middle and South Georgia on Monday where he’ll be talking to farmers and local law enforcement. Roy’s priority is to continue traveling across the state, talking to voters about jobs, education, and transportation- his plan to make Georgia work.  Uh Huh.

In July, a poll by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research Inc. showed that Obama has a meager 37 percent approval rating in the state of Georgia. The president’s popularity with Independents, in particular, has also decreased significantly since his election in 2008.

Governor Sonny Perdue will be available to greet the President planeside when Scooter lands in Georgia.   Mr. Perdue’s spokesperson Bert Brantley said that the governor had to juggle his schedule to be able to greet the president.

This is nothing new in Georgia politics.

In 1996 Democrat Michael Coles was running against Republican Newt Gingrich for the 6th congressional district seat.   Mr. Coles shunned President Clinton at rallies in Atlanta and Macon.

Mr. Coles is a legendary Atlanta entrepeneur who entertained political aspirations a decade ago.  He now lives in Montana.  He shared these thoughts:

In 96, I stepped out of the private arena and ran against Newt Gingrich for the house. I ran as a Democrat. I think the difficult thing for anyone in Georgia – if you run as a Democrat- is to separate yourself from not being a national Democrat, because Georgia Democrats like Zell Miller and Sam Nunn are cut out of a different cloth and that’s how I wanted to be seen. I wanted to be sure, if I was going to lose that race- -I wasn’t going to be indentified as a national Democrat.

One Democratic operative relayed to Hullinger that Governor Zell Miller wanted to be with President Clinton during an Atlanta campaign rally.  Sadly for the Governor, Mr. Clinton was unpopular in Georgia at the time.

Instead of Governor Miller appearing on stage with Bubba, Zell Miller hid out in the crowd. 

The Governor did, technically, make it to the rally, that sly old fox.

Not only are Democrats trying to avoid being seen with Obama, they’re trying to avoid each other.

With Mid-term Elections coming up quickly, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi did the Washington two-step around questions on ABC’s “This Week” about the ethics charges facing two Democratic members of the House. The Democratic game plan for the Mid-terms seems to be “every man for himself.”

Pelosi told ABC This Week’s new Liberal anchor Christiane Amanpour:

I’m totally out of the loop.  It is independent. It is confidential, classified, secret, whatever. We don’t know what it is.

And just as San Fran Nan is desperately trying to distance herself from the graft and corruption of her fellow House Dems, so have numerous democratic congressional hopefuls chosen to distance themselves from the current unpopularity of their Party’s leadership.  I’m shocked.

According to Madame Speaker:

Our members are the best salespersons for their own districts.   They’ve been elected there. They know the constituents. 

And their constituents know them…and that’s the Democrats’ biggest problem.

With voters already outraged about the economy, the graft and corruption of New York’s Charlie Rangel and California’s Maxine Waters have the Democrats scrambling in a last-ditch effort to maintain their Congressional majority.   The fact that two Democrats are headed to rare trials in the full House seems to be handing the Republican Party much need ammunition for the upcoming battle.

 Jonathan Allen, congressional correspondent for Politico opined:

I think historically one of the best ways to win control of Congress is to say the other guys are corrupt. 

Especially when there’s proof, Jonathan.

So, if they can get their act together, the Republicans are being served up this election on a silver platter.   And the Democrats? Well, their hopes for keeping control of the House may rest on three things:  money, distance, and promises.

The Democrats have raised the most campaign money.  Of course, a bunch came from Soros, and a bunch probably came from overseas like Obama’s campaign donations.

Pelosi confirmed the monetary advantage on ABC’s This Week:

We have a two-to-one advantage money-wise.  So, we feel very confident about where we are.

Second, the Democrats are painfully aware that keeping their distance from each other may be essential to ensure the preservation of their congressional majority.  Additionally, Obama has assured Democratic members of Congress that he will do anything he can to help them survive their fall elections, even if that means staying away.

And all the Democrats breathed a sigh of relief when he announced that.

The third thing is, despite charges from Republican spokesmen such as Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner that Speaker Pelosi has not kept her 2007 promise to “drain the swamp that is Washington, D.C.,” the current action by the Ethics Committee, however harmful to the Party’s prospects, may actually be the greatest proof that she has.

The problem with Pelosi using Rangels’ and Waters’ punishments as proof that she’s cracking down on corruption, is that fact that, right now, it looks like both will just get slapped on the wrist.

It has taken Obama less than two years to alienate his own political party.  How awful a President do you have to be to accomplish this in such a short time?  Bush was a second term lame duck president with poll numbers in the 30 percentile before he got the brush-off from Republican candidates.  Scooter hasn’t even finished half of his first term yet.

Unprecedented.

Sources:  11alive.com, abcnews.go.com

As America’s Mid-term Elections draw closer, the tone-deaf members of the Democratic Party are poised for the biggest political defeat in our nation’s history.   They are saddled with an un-American President who is more intent on accomplishing the tenets of his Far Left, Marxist Ideology than he is in dealing with the economic crisis and enemies, foreign and domestic, that besiege us.  Their members are besotted by greed, power, and an overblown sense of self-entitlement, blindly following the wishes of their president and his Far Left base, instead of following the wishes of the majority of Americans.  Let’s take a look at 3 problems that are presently roadblocks to the Democrats’ Mid-term hopes:

1)  Fox News told us Friday that charming Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.)will go through an ethics trial akin to the one likely on the docket for Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY).

People familiar with the investigation, who choose to remain anonymous, predict the charges will be announced next week. The House ethics committee declined Friday to make any public statement on the matter.

Waters, 71, is accused of using her position to help arrange for federal bailout funds for a bank associated with her family.   They have already investigated her for communicating with an executive at a bank in which her husband owned stock. That same bank was applying for a federal bailout. She serves on the House Financial Services Committee.

Waters responded:

I am confident that as the investigation moves forward the panel will discover that there are no facts to support allegations that I have acted improperly.

Waters came under scrutiny after former Treasury Department officials said she tried to arrange a meeting between regulators and executives at Boston-based OneUnited Bank without mentioning her husband’s financial ties to the institution.

Her husband, Sidney Williams, held at least $250,000 in the bank’s stock and previously had served on its board. A spokesman for Waters claims that Williams was no longer on the board when the meeting was arranged.

Sources indicate that the House Ethics Committee is close to issuing a report in Waters case and will announce her punishment soon.

2)  Meanwhile, calls for Rep. Charlie Rangel, Democrat from  New York, to resign amid reports that all the House was going to do to him for his 13 ethics violation was reprimand him.  Way to take a stand, Dems!

A reprimand is the most lenient of the three formal modes of discipline in the House. The other two are censure and expulsion.

A Congressional Research Service report tells us that “reprimand expressly involves a lesser level of disapproval of a Member than that of Censure, and is thus a less severe rebuke by the institution.”

If Charlie is reprimanded, he must stand in the well of the House and be reprimanded by the speaker. The full House would likely have to vote to reprimand Rangel.

Rangel racked up 13 allegations of violations relating to his tax filings for properties he owns in the Dominican Republic and the use of four lucrative rent-controlled apartments in pricey New York City.

If an agreement with Rangel is not reached, the case goes to another ethics committee panel that will likely hold a public “trial” in September against the 20-term lawmaker. The four-member panel that recommended a reprimand is composed of Reps. Green, Jo Ann Bonner, R-Ky., Doc Hastings, R-Wash., and Bobby Scott, D-Va., who joined the investigative subcommittee in August 2008.

Already a handful of Democrats has called for Rangel to resign, most recently Rep. John Yarmuth, D-Ky. The others include Rep. Walter Minnick of Idaho, Betty Sutton of Ohio, Zack Space of Ohio, Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona and Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio.

Kirkpatrick said in a statement:

Too many politicians, both Democrats and Republicans, have fallen victim to the idea that they are ‘different’ than regular folks and nothing could be further from the truth.

It is our job as members of Congress to hold each other accountable to a higher standard regardless of party.  If the serious charges against (Rangel) are accurate, he needs to resign.

And it appears that  President Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm) is throwing Good Time Charlie under the bus in an interview with CBS News:

I think Charlie Rangel served a very long time and served his constituents very well, but these allegations are very troubling.  And he’s somebody who is at the end of his career, 80 years old. I’m sure that what he wants is to be able to end his career with dignity, and my hope is that it happens.

Rangel denies the charges and says the indictment released Thursday contains factual errors.

3)  Finally, there’s the matter of Illegal Immigration, the 600 pound gorilla sitting on the sofa.  The fight over Arizona’s immigration law showed no signs of letting up Friday as the federal judge who blunted its force faced threats and the Republican governor who signed it considered changes to address any legal problems.

Since Clinton appointee, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton,  put on hold the strongest parts of the law, hundreds of e-mails and phone calls — including some threats — have poured into the courthouse.

Seventy people were arrested in demonstrations.

And a fund set up to help defend the new law added $75,000 Wednesday alone, leaving the state with more than $1.6 million to get Bolton’s ruling overturned.

Gov. Jan Brewer has vowed not to back down, saying she’ll challenge Bolton’s decision all the way to the Supreme Court.

But Brewer said Friday she may “tweak” the law to respond to the parts Bolton faulted.

Brewer told The Associated Press:

Basically we believe (the law) is constitutional but she obviously pointed out faults that can possibly be fixed, and that’s what we would do. 

She said she’s talking to legislative leaders about the possibility of a special session, but said no specific changes had been identified.

Bolton delayed the most Liberally-opposed provisions of the law in her temporary injunction, including a section that required officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.   Bolton believes that the federal government’s case has a good chance at succeeding in its argument that federal immigration law trumps state law.

On the other hand, she allowed police to enforce the law’s bans on blocking vehicle traffic when seeking or offering day-labor services and a revision to the smuggling ban that lets officers stop drivers if they suspect motorists have broken traffic laws.

Bolton also let officers enforce a new prohibition on driving or harboring illegal immigrants in furtherance of their illegal presence.

Democrats did not believe that Brewer was being honest in her stated desire to change the law, with a key state House of Representatives minority leader calling it laughable:

Rep. Kyrsten Sinema of Phoenix asked:

Why would we help her?  This bill is so flawed and clearly a federal judge agrees.  Besides that, we got to get these new Hispanic voters on board in time for the Mid-terms.

House Speaker Kirk Adams said there would not be much support among fellow Republicans to weaken the law.

Attorneys have begun reviewing the law to identify possible changes, he said.

The law’s chief sponsor, state Sen. Russell Pearce, said he would only back changes to make it stronger.

Even though the ruling clearly pandered to them, immigrant rights supporters still held passionate demonstrations near the federal courthouse in downtown Phoenix after the parts of the law that weren’t blocked took effect Thursday.

Federal officials in charge of court security wouldn’t say whether anyone made a death threat against Bolton and wouldn’t provide specifics of the threats they were examining, but said a majority of the e-mails and phone calls to the judge’s chambers and the court clerk’s office are from people who are upset about her ruling, officials said.

While the Arizona lawsuit waits in front of the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals, the most brilliant president ever and his minions are trying to figure out how they can just bypass Congress and grant amnesty to illegal immigrants.

These three situations clearly provide evidence to back the prognostication that the Democrats are going to face their own Little Big Horn in November.  Pseudo-intellectualism, Beltway Elitism, an absence of ethical behavior, and a ‘we-know-better-than-you-do” attitude toward the American public, is all adding up to indicate the coming of an electoral tsunami of Biblical proportions.  Nancy and Harry had better start building an ark. 

Sources:  drudgereport, foxnews.com, washingtontimes.com

 A federal judge on Wednesday blocked most of Arizona’s anti-immigration law just hours before it was to take effect, spitting in the face of the majority of the American people.
U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton in Phoenix issued a temporary injunction against the parts of the law that would require police to determine the status of people they lawfully stopped and suspected were in the country illegally.

Bolton also ruled that Arizona can not make it a state crime to not carry immigration documents, and struck down two other provisions as an unconstitutional attempt by Arizona to undermine the federal government’s efforts to enforce immigration policy.  What efforts?

Bolton (a Clinton appointee) declared in a 36-page decision that the provisions would have inevitably “swept up” legal immigrants and were “preempted” by the federal government’s immigration authority.

 She also wrote:

The court by no means disregards Arizona’s interests in controlling illegal immigration and addressing the concurrent problems with crime. 

 But, she added:

It is not in the public interest for Arizona to enforce preempted laws.

It most certainly is, your honor, since the Obama Adminstration refuses to.
By the way, does this mean that Americans don’t have to carry their driver’s license and proof of insurance in their cars anymore?

Gov. Jan Brewer said that there would be a swift appeal to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:

We would have liked to have seen it all upheld, but a temporary injunction is not the end of it.   I look at this as a little bump in the road.

Immigrant rights advocates, some of whom had been bussed in for protests after the law takes effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday, were simply joyous.

Lydia Guzman, president of Somos America, or We Are America proclaimed:

It’s a victory for the community.  It means justice will truly prevail.

Not for Arizona Rancher Robert Krentz, God rest his soul.

Half of all people stopped for entering the country illegally are detained on Arizona’s southern border.

Civil rights groups and then the Obama administration sued, after Gov. Brewer signed the law, protesting that the measure would lead to racial profiling and interfere with the federal government’s ability to regulate immigration. 

Obama’s administration does a poor job of regulating immigration now.  And this is not going to help the situation any. 

The Justice Department said in a statement:

While we understand the frustration of Arizonans with the broken immigration system, a patchwork of state and local policies would seriously disrupt federal immigration enforcement and would ultimately be counterproductive .   States can and do play a role in cooperating with the federal government in its enforcement of the immigration laws, but they must do so within our constitutional framework.

Bolton allowed some technical parts of the law to go into effect.  She preserved a clause that forbids any local entity from creating a policy of less than full enforcement of federal immigration laws, as well as a provision that makes it a misdemeanor to block traffic to solicit work or hire a worker, an effort aimed at getting rid of day laborers.

In Arizona, where American citizens cannot even go into some parts of our own National Parks because the Mexican Drug Lords have taken them over, the discussion was less about legal details and more about how illegal immigration has changed the state.

Faye Yanez, 65, a school teacher said:

The state should have a right to take care of the state because the federal government isn’t doing anything.

Preach, sister, preach.

Susie Baker, 53, who remodels homes in Tucson, felt differently:

I am thrilled.  I think Jan Brewer is out of her mind. She is bringing harm to Arizona.

Baker said she often hires Latinos on home projects, and doesn’t ask them their immigration status:

To me, it doesn’t matter.  They are willing to do the work.

Plus, she doesn’t have to pay them as much as American citizens.

Politicians’ reactions were heavily split down party lines (I’m shocked!) on whether they supported the bill.  It received votes from all Republicans in the state Legislature and no Democrats.

The state’s two Republican U.S. senators, John Kyl and John McCain said in a statement that they were disappointed by the ruling:

Instead of wasting tax payer resources filing a lawsuit against Arizona and complaining that the law would be burdensome, the Obama administration should have focused its efforts on working with Congress to provide the necessary resources to support the state in its efforts to act where the federal government has failed to take responsibility.

Outside the federal courthouse in Phoenix, Vice Mayor Michael Nowakowski, a Democrat and strong foe of the law, said debate over SB 1070 had been a political sideshow that didn’t make the state safer. He completely negated the polls showing a majority of voters in Arizona and in the U.S. back the measure.

“Polls are for politicians before elections; they’re not for civil rights,” said Nowakowski, contending that many civil rights laws would have polled poorly in the 1950s and ’60s.

Hey, Mikey!  Let’s look at some of those polls, shall we?  Per rasmussenreports.com:

Fifty-four percent (54%) of U.S. voters say the Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants.

Regarding the administration challenging the Arizona law in court, a recent Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 56% of U.S. voters oppose such a challenge.

Just 26% believe the Justice Department should challenge the legality of Arizona’s law in court. Eighteen percent (18%) are undecided in the survey conducted May 26 and 27.

Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters, in fact, favor passage of a law like Arizona’s in their own state.

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters believe a police officer should be required to check the immigration status of anyone stopped for a traffic violation or violation of some other law if he suspects the person might be an illegal immigrant.

Arizona voters support the state’s new immigration law overwhelmingly, with 71% in favor of it.

Sixty-four percent (64%) of voters believe the federal government by failing to enforce immigration law is more to blame for the current controversy over Arizona’s new statute than state officials are for passing it.

The law’s author, state Sen. Russell Pearce, has predicted in a television interview that the measure will be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 vote. 

The Supreme Court is already scheduled to consider another Arizona law this fall. That law dissolves any business that repeatedly and knowingly hires illegal immigrants. How they rule in this decision may give us a clue as to its view of SB 1070.

First, Gov. Brewer and the citizens of Arizona will have to take their fight to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals,  the most liberal Circuit Court of Appeals in the land.  If they rule against her and her state there, then it’s on to the Supreme Court.  The administration, in its arrogance, seemingly has not cared about the damage that a long, drawn out legal fight could do to the Democrats’ chances in the Mid-term Elections.  Just as it did with Obamacare, this administration is trying to force their view of illegal immigration as a civil rights issue down the throats of the American public.  It is very evident that, in the eyes of this administration, the safety of American citizens comes in a distant second to securing new Hispanic Democrat voters in their brazen effort to keep themselves in power.

Sources:  drudgereport.com, latimes.com

A Mexican man is beaten up and his backpack stolen walking home from a soccer game and the Mexican Government promises:

We will act decisively in order to protect our citizens and will actively promote that those guilty of these vicious attacks are brought to justice expeditiously. We are working hand-in-hand with local authorities on all levels.

Big deal.  Just another day in the chaotic, violent country below our southern border.  Right?

Wrong.  This incident happened in Staten Island , New York, in the good ol’ U.S.A.

Police are investigating the assault in Staten Island as a possible hate crime, and the Mexican government is now getting involved as well.

Five men mugged the 40-year-old Mexican man Friday night as he was walking home after a soccer game at Faber Park, a police spokesperson said. The story is that they beat him while shouting anti-Mexican epithets. The man suffered head trauma, a fractured jaw and needed ten stitches above his eye, officials said.

The men made off with his backpack.

At least the sixth violent, ethnically-charged incident that has taken place in the neighborhood since April has community leaders urging residents to stay alert.

Consul General of Mexico in New York, Ruben Beltran, made the promise to “protect our citizens“ that I alluded to earlier  in an e-mail to the Staten Island Advance.

The muggee is a construction worker who has made the United States  his home (illegally) for the last five years, said Beltran. Police are looking for five suspects in this latest case, which is being investigated as a hate crime.

Beltran has asked the NYPD to “conduct a thorough investigation” of the alleged hate-crime cases. Beltran has offered “extensive cooperation and all the necessary support to ensure that justice is served.”  After all, the victim is a citizen of Mexico.

According to the Advance, this latest incident has promoted the Mexican Consulate to post personnel in Staten Island until further notice. This move is an effort to safeguard the rights of individuals and effectively assist and provide information to the Mexican residents of this area.

The Guardian Angels, lead by Curtis Sliwa, have also promised to patrol the area.  Make the Road New York, a local community group that serves the communities of Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island is organizing a march that will take place on Wednesday.

Mexican officials have also created an information line that for (illegal) immigrants to contact if they are afraid to contact authorities directly, the number is 1-800-724-7264.

Meanwhile, an anti-immigration group want the Obama administration to ensure a safe exodus for illegal immigrants who are fleeing the U.S. due to the weak economy and Arizona’s strict new immigration law.

Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) wants Americans to put pressure on the White House and the Homeland Security Department to create “safe departure” border checkpoints along the U.S. border for illegal immigrants so they can flee the country without the threat of being detained or prosecuted for immigration crimes.

 The president of the group, William Gheen, said in a written statement:

The peaceful and gradual exodus of illegals from Arizona shows there is no need for comprehensive immigration reform amnesty.  Comprehensive immigration enforcement works and has the desired effect without mass deportations.

According to Gheen, the safe passage would allow illegals to:

…leave in an orderly fashion, instead of trying risky desert crossings, paying money to the cartels for passage south, or fleeing to other states.

This is about the only situation we would ever advocate that our immigration laws be waived. We want to encourage the illegals to leave America on their own and thus we ask Obama to provide them safe passage out of America.

So far, the White House and Homeland Security have not responded.

All this is going on while the Obama administration is waiting on the judge’s ruling in federal court on their injunction to block Arizona’s immigration law, set to take effect on Thursday.  The now-famous law would make illegal immigration a state crime and require police to check the residency status of anyone they suspect of being an illegal immigrant. A ruling on the case is expected by this morning.

It is estimated that 100,000 illegal immigrants have left Arizona in the past two years as it cracked down on illegal immigration and its economy was rocked by the recession.  A Department of Homeland Security report on illegal immigrants estimates Arizona’s illegal immigrant population peaked in 2008 at 560,000, and a year later dipped to 460,000.

No one knows how many illegals have left since the new law passed in April. Some are fleeing the U.S. and others are heading to neighboring states.

A pro-immigrant group called the safe passage proposal “a little suspicious.”

Sarahi Uribe, a regional organizer for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network said:

I think it’s clearly part of the attrition strategy. Make things so horrible for immigrants that they will self deport.  But while it’s true some people are leaving Arizona, a great deal of people are staying.  Spin, Senora, spin.

Uribe dismissed Gheen’s idea as a “thinly disguised” strategy to “drive people out of the state of Arizona.”

It’s kind of sick they would paint this as humanitarian relief when Arizona’s immigration law has created a humanitarian crisis.

Gheen told FoxNews.com that he would not want safe passage for illegal immigrants accused of serious criminal offenses, such as murder or rape.

“The main thing is, we just want them to leave,” Gheen said, adding that if all immigration laws were enforced, the number of illegals would be reduced to less than 1 million in 10 years.

Now let me get this straight.  A Mexican consul is demanding protection for a Mexican citizen who has claimed squatter’s rights for 5 years in a country that he entered illegally.  Meanwhile, he has been enjoying our freedoms with none of our responsibilities.  I’m very sorry he and others have been attacked.  That’s wrong and those attacks are isolated incidents.  However, just as breaking and entering a home or business is a crime, so is sneaking into a country.  As more states pass similar laws to that Arizona, illegals will be looking to either move to another state or go home to Mexico.  The idea of safe passage is fine, if it will work.  The proposed pathway to citizenship idea, while a noble idea, unfortunately,  has a lot of political issues attached to it. 

So, let’s take this one step at a time.  Secure our borders.  Enforce the anti-illegal immigration laws.  And if the Federal Government won’t, the states, like Arizona, will have to pass their own laws.  America became a great nation because it is a melting pot of American-born and legally-immigrated citizens with a shared allegiance, not a multi-cultural United Nations with everyone loyal to their home country.

Sources:  nbcnewyork.com, foxnews.com

We live in perilous times.

North Korea has announced it would counter U.S. and South Korean joint naval exercises with “nuclear deterrence” after the Obama administration feebly warned the government in Pyongyang shouldn’t take any provocative steps.

According to the Korean Central News Agency, their National Defense Commission said North Korea will:

…legitimately counter with their powerful nuclear deterrence the largest-ever nuclear war exercises to be staged by the U.S. and the South Korean puppet forces.

The maneuvers, will involve 20 vessels and 200 aircraft from the U.S. and South Korea   They pose a threat to the country’s sovereignty and security, Ri Tong Il, an official with North Korea’s delegation to the Asean Security Forum, claimed to reporters in Hanoi on Saturday.

Ri’s comments followed North Korean Foreign Minister Pak Ui Chun sitting in the same room with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Hanoi for a security meeting of Asia’s largest powers. Clinton blasted North Korea for being “on a campaign of provocative, dangerous behavior,” urging Kim Jong Il’s regime to change.

Still, the “door remains open for North Korea,” Clinton later told reporters:

We are willing to meet with them, willing to negotiate, to move toward normal relations.

… if North Korea commits itself to giving up its nuclear weapons program, she said.  I’m sure they will comply, Hillary.

U.S. State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said in Washington on Saturday that North Korea:

would be better served by reflecting on the current situation, not taking any further aggressive actions or provocative steps.

Meanwhile, in Washington, a former CIA director says military action against Iran now seems more likely because no matter what the U.S. does diplomatically, Tehran keeps building nuclear weapons.

Michael Hayden, a CIA chief under President George W. Bush, says that while he was serving, a strike was “way down the list” of options. But he tells CNN’s “State of the Union” that such action now “seems inexorable.”

Hayden says Iran will build its program to the point where it’s just below having an actual weapon. He believes that would be as destabilizing to the region as the real thing.

U.S. officials say that military action remains an option if sanctions fail to deter Iran.

Iran deflects criticism by claiming its nuclear work is for peaceful purposes such as power generation.

As if these to situations weren’t being mishandled enough by Obama and his minions, our government secretly advised Scottish ministers it would be “far preferable” to free the Lockerbie bomber than jail him in Libya.

Correspondence obtained by The Sunday Edition of The London Times shows that the Obama administration considered compassionate release more palatable than locking up Abdel Baset al-Megrahi in a Libyan prison.

The outrageous intervention, which brought the wrath of the US relatives of those who died in the attack, was agreed upon by Richard LeBaron, deputy head of the US embassy in London, a week before Megrahi was freed in August last year on grounds that he had terminal cancer.

Acquired by a well-placed US source, the document illuminates a tremendous prevarication in Obama’s claim last week that all Americans were “surprised, disappointed and angry” to learn of Megrahi’s release.

Scottish ministers mistakenly viewed the level of US resistance to compassionate release as “half-hearted” and a sign it would be accepted.

The Obama administration has tried to keep the letter secret.  They refused to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the flimsy excuse that releasing it would prevent future “frank and open communications” with other governments.

In a letter sent on August 12 last year to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and justice officials,  Mr LeBaron wrote that the US wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned because of the nature of the crime.

The note added:

Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose.

Mr LeBaron also claimed that freeing the bomber and exiling him to Scotland:

…would mitigate a number of the strong concerns we have expressed with regard to Megrahi’s release.

Obama’s administration lobbied the Scottish government more strongly against sending Megrahi home, under a prisoner transfer agreement signed by the British and Libyan governments, in a deal now known to have been linked to a pound stg. 550 million oil contract for BP.

Megrahi was released by Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill on the grounds that he had three months to live, making his sentence effectively spent.

A probe was launched by the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee after The Sunday Times revealed this month that Megrahi’s doctors thought he could live for another decade.  It’s a miracle!  Did this guy meet up with Benny Hinn?

According to a source close to the Senate inquiry:

The (LeBaron) letter is embarrassing for the US (adminstration) because it shows they were much less opposed to compassionate release than prisoner transfer.

Last week, a succession of British politicians, including former justice secretary Jack Straw, delivered a diplomatic snub to the committee by refusing to fly across the Atlantic to answer questions at the Senate’s hearing on Thursday (US time) about their role in Megrahi’s release.

Then, right in the middle of the controversy over the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and Megrahi’s release, news broke over the weekend that BP is planning deep-water drilling off Libya.

And BP boss Tony Hayward is rumored to be resigning this week when the company announces its half-year results, London’s Sunday Telegraph reported.

What a coincidence.

In an article posted on April 10, 2009, columnist Gerald Warner of telegraph.co.uk coined the title President Pantywaist for Barack Hussein Obama (mm mmm mmmm).  He gave him this nickname after Obama:

…recently completed the most successful foreign policy tour since Napoleon’s retreat from Moscow. You name it, he blew it. What was his big deal economic programme that he was determined to drive through the G20 summit? Another massive stimulus package, globally funded and co-ordinated. Did he achieve it? Not so as you’d notice. 

Given the way America’s enemies are laughing at America and spitting in our face, the way that Obama has arrogantly alienated our foreign allies, and the President’s Steve Urkel-esque naiveté as exhibited by his Smart Power Foreign Policy, I would say Mr. Warner hit the nail on the head.

Sources:  Bloomberg.com, yahoo.com,theaustralian.com.au

Please listen to this audio from the Mike Gallagher show.  Mike and Sarah Palin hit the nail on the head.

September 11, the year of Our Lord 2001

8:43 A.M. – The FAA notifies NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector of the suspected hijacking of United Airlines Flight 175.

8:45 A.M. – American Airlines Flight 11 crashes into the north World Trade Center tower (1 Tower).

8:46 A.M. – Jet fighters are scrambled from Otis Air National Guard Base in Fallmouth, Massachusetts.

9:03 A.M. – United Airlines Flight 175 crashes into the south World Trade Center tower (2 Tower).

9:08 A.M. – The FAA bans all takeoffs of flights going to or through New York airspace.

9:17 A.M. – The FAA shuts down all New York City-area airports.

9:21 A.M. – All bridges and tunnels into Manhattan are closed.

9:24 A.M. – The FAA notifies NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector of the suspected hijacking of American Airlines Flight 77.

9:25 A.M. – The FAA orders shutdown of all airports nationwide, banning takeoffs of all civilian aircraft.

9:31 A.M. – President George W. Bush makes a statement from Emma Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Florida calling the crashes an “apparent terrorist attack.”

Almost 3,000 innocent victims lost their lives in the cowardly attack.

What motivated these Muslims to commit this heinous act?

Mohamed Atta was a planner of the Sept. 11 attacks as well as an instrument of al Qaeda’s will. Having discovered a cause for which they were ready — indeed, often eager — to sacrifice their own lives, the 19 young jihadists followed orders as precisely and dutifully as a Nazi Storm Trooper.

Not one of them seems to have come from a military background, and there was little in their youth to suggest that they would become terrorists. The pilot of the first plane to hit the World Trade Center, Atta, came from “an ambitious, not overtly religious middle-class household in Egypt” and had led “a sheltered life” until he arrived in Hamburg, Germany, in 1992 to do graduate study in architecture.

The pilot of the second plane, Marwan al-Shehhi, was an amiable, “laid-back” fellow from the United Arab Emirates who had joined the UAE army, “not the world’s most effective fighting force but one of its most generous, paying [its scholarship] students monthly stipends of about $2,000,” which was probably his primary reason for enlisting.  This enabled him to go to Hamburg, though there is little evidence that he “had any serious scholarly ambitions.”

They both joined many other young Muslims in Hamburg, Germany for prayer and discussion, sometimes at a mosque called al Quds (the Arabic name for Jerusalem), sometimes in one of the various group houses where the men lived austerely and piously.  Per Terry McDermott in his book “Perfect Solders”:

That young men from good backgrounds would leave homes and families without fanfare or discouragement was evidence of the broad support within Saudi Arabia for jihad.  The men were trained in hand-to-hand combat in the Al Qaeda camps [in Afghanistan], taught the physical skills they would need for the sole task given them — to physically overpower flight crews. The pilots were the leaders. The new men would be the muscle.

To a considerable extent, America did not recognize the advent of a new age but whether anyone knew it or not, an era of religious terror had arrived. Intermingling religious and political goals had been the norm for most of human history. Islam itself came into the world with secular as well as sacred aims. What had changed in this latest incarnation had more to do with the world it was in than Islam itself. By the latter half of the twentieth century, the movement toward secular government had triumphed almost everywhere except in the Islamic world. The advocates of political Islam became aberrant simply by outlasting the political ambitions and empires of other religions. They might have been mere curious anachronisms had not the modern world provided them the means to wed their old beliefs to new, readily accessible technologies. The outcome of that union is terror on a scale not previously known.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was asked the other day what his position was concerning Rick Lazio’s call for an investigation into the Cordoba Initiative, the Islamic group constructing this mega mosque near Ground Zero. The mayor protested that any investigation into the mosque would be “out of character for what this nation stands for and the way we conduct ourselves.”

Bloomberg added:

I don’t think we’re going to go and start investigating funding sources for religious organizations or vetting people who preach or pray in religious organizations.

Like the Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew Cuomo, the mayor is hiding behind a false proclamation of religious freedom to try to avoid having to investigate the obviously shady Imam Rauf and his organization that is behind the Cordoba Institute.

The Cordoba Institute paid in cash nearly five-million dollars for the property at Ground.   Where they got the money from is not entirely known. 
However, we do know that Imam Rauf of the Cordoba Initiative longs for the introduction of Sharia law in the U.S:

Throughout my discussions with contemporary Muslim theologians, it is clear an Islamic state can be established in more than just a single form or mold. It can be established through a kingdom or a democracy. The important issue is to establish the general fundamentals of Sharia that are required to govern. It is known that there are sets of standards that are accepted by [Muslim] scholars to organize the relationships between government and the governed. [emphasis added]

Current governments are unjust and do not follow Islamic laws.

New laws were permitted after the death of Muhammad, so long of course that these laws do not contradict the Quran or the Deeds of Muhammad … so they create institutions that assure no conflicts with Sharia. [emphasis in translation]

If Sharia law comes to our shores, it will usurp the Constitution and inhibit religious freedom, free speech and women’s rights.  And that’s mild stuff compared to other facets of Sharia Law.

The questions on everyone’s lips are:  Why are NYC politicians behind this desecration of hallowed ground?  Why are they bending over backwards to allow the Muslims a symbolic propaganda triumph that will be heard around the world?  And if it isn’t a symbolic “holy” mission of Islamic extremist propaganda, why are they building a mosque on Ground Zero, the site of the worst Terrorist attack ever on American soil?  And why are they insisting on having their Grand Dedication of the 10th anniversary of that heinous, cowardly attack?

Wise up, Mayor Bloomberg and the rest of you useful idiots.  You’re being used.

Sources:  youtube.com, patriotresource.com, washingtonpost.com, examiner.com