OK when LIBERALS do it…


You know you are a soulless whore utterly without principles when you have to make stuff up about Tea Party people but liberals clearly, blatantly, brazenly, shamelessly hold signs like this and nobody reports it. They’ll offer as an excuse that all are at the Correspondents’ Dinner but you know that wouldn’t make a speck of difference….God I hate these (media) people. I can’t even hide my contempt for them anymore….Thank you to Gateway Pundit for posting them. Unexpurgated column below:

Posted by Jim Hoft on Saturday, May 1, 2010, 10:17 PM
There was a pro-illegal immigrant protest in New York City today at Union Square.Andrew Berman was there and posted several photos from the anti-American rally.

This violent sign – “Death to US Imperial-Fascists” – probably won’t make the news tonight.
Suddenly, it’s fashionable to carry swastikas again.
Of course, the state-run media won’t say boo about these Nazi signs. After all, there’s a conservative pictured on the sign.

Location of the original post at Gateway Pundit here

Health Care for ILLEGALS next / by Ralph Peters

Ralph Peters is the author of the new book Endless War: Middle-Eastern Islam vs. Western Civilization.
~President Barack Obama’s greatest crime against our flag and the republic for which it stands isn’t his administration’s health-care theft bill. That’s mere shoplifting compared to what’s coming next.

Obama and the leftwing of the Democratic Party intend to turn ten to eleven million illegal immigrants into voters as expeditiously as possible, giving them a permanent national electoral majority based upon a beholden Lumpenproletariat. If they succeed, our country will face mob rule.

No individual who broke the law to enter this country should ever be allowed to decide who becomes our president, governor, senator—or town council member. If there is one message patriotic Americans must act upon during the remainder of Obama’s reign, it’s this: No voting rights for illegals.

No other issue of our time matters remotely as much—not our lukewarm struggle with Islamist terror or even our metastasizing deficits. This isn’t about tax increases or where to hold terror trials. It’s about preserving our democratic institutions for law-abiding citizens.

Inevitably, objections to handing immigration criminals the vote will be denounced as racist, anti-immigrant, inhumane and so on. Unable to argue on logical grounds, the left will resort to savage name-calling. And, of course, illegal immigrants will be compared to the legal immigrants of yesteryear, as if our laws are just burdensome annoyances that insist on silly distinctions.

As for the left’s all-purpose charge of racism, any illegal immigrant—Irish, Guatemalan or Nigerian—must never be granted the right to vote in a US election. “Illegal” means “not legal.” It means “criminal.” This is not a matter of nuance, and it isn’t color-coded.

(The single exception I would make would be to grant full citizenship to illegal immigrants who serve honorably in our military for a minimum of five years—but the left would hate that, too.)

As for being anti-immigrant, that’s nonsense, too. Legal immigration remains a great strength of our country (I’ve argued for years for more visas and a path to citizenship for hi-tech wonks and other highly skilled workers). Any immigrant who plays by the rules to enter this country, adjusts to our public values and obeys our laws should be allowed to earn the full rights of citizenship on schedule. But no phony waiting periods, or token fines, or pay-your-back-taxes scams can be allowed to buy voting rights for those who broke our laws to steal into our homeland.

And the “inhumane” charge is sheer hypocrisy. If the Democratic leadership and its organized protest mobs (such as the hate-group La Raza) genuinely cared about the plight of illegal immigrants, they’d argue only for a form of residency. Illegals themselves aren’t the ones demanding the vote. They’d be delighted just to be able to stay here. It’s political activists who claim to speak for them who make voting rights “a test of our nation’s sense of justice.” Playing the pity card, they pretend that legalization is all about keeping families together. It’s not. It’s about eleven million bought-and-paid-for votes. Anyway, millions of illegal immigrants weren’t worried about the unity of their families when they abandoned their homes for the USA.

But reason won’t matter. Anyone who challenges the free gift of voting rights to illegal immigrants is going to be charged as a bigot by the left. It’s an accusation that those who love our country will just have to shrug off.

Conservatives and independents are going to have to decide with precision what they’re going to fight for in this struggle. That means starting out by recognizing that we’re not going to line up eleven million illegals in a column of fours and march them back across the border. They’re here. Most are going to stay.

The crucial fight ahead is over those voting rights. Every other question arising from this issue is trivial in comparison. Those who love this country must focus on that single mantra, repeating it until the votes-for-illegals snake is dead: No voting rights for illegals, no voting rights for illegals, no voting rights for illegals.

The importance of this iron focus can’t be over-stressed, because left-wing activists in the administration and in Congress will try to lure our elected representatives into arguments over secondary issues, pretending to compromise on minor matters. There’ll be discussions over the deportation of criminal aliens, back taxes, waiting periods, health-care liability, fines and fees, and any other distractions that can be tossed into the mix. We must not let ourselves be drawn into debating such details as if the overall legalization process is a forgone conclusion.

What’s the right answer to the illegal-immigration crisis our government’s neglect has allowed to grow to such destructive proportions? Congress needs to create a new class of US residency for those illegals with no further criminal records and who can document a history of employment. That residency would provide basic social and economic rights. It would not give illegal immigrants the vote.

There is no reason, constitutional or moral, why Congress can’t do this. There are already multiple classes of non-citizen residents, from temporary workers to refugees. Of course, the Democratic leadership will howl and claim that anything short of full citizenship is an unacceptable injustice. But what would be unjust about allowing eleven million criminals (and yes, they are criminals, every one, by virtue of breaking the law to enter our home) to remain on our soil, with all of the daily privileges and protections accorded full citizens–except the right to choose those who govern the rest of us? Families (except of those who broke additional laws) would remain united. Workers could work openly (and pay taxes honestly). Children could go to school and apply for scholarships. They just couldn’t force their political prejudices on us—although their American-born children would acquire full voting rights, when of age.

This is a practical, ethical, patriotic and sensible approach. It will be attacked savagely by those who care more about blocks of votes than about the quality of human lives.

Born in 1952, I’ve lived through many national crises—more than a few of them exaggerated in their proclaimed importance at the time. But I view the question of voting rights for illegal immigrants as the most critical issue of my lifetime, as regards the protection of our republic. We had the American Revolution, not the French Revolution. We never have been, and never should be, ruled by mobs. But mob rule is the goal of today’s corrupt Democratic Party leadership. They view power as an end in itself. And they will do virtually anything to sustain, deepen and guarantee that power.

After a recent interview on security issues with talk-show host Laura Ingraham, we discussed this issue off-mike. When I said, “No votes for illegal immigrants,” Laura gave me that piercing look of hers and completed the line for me: “No votes for illegal immigrants—ever.”

This is the crucial battle of the Obama era. Independents, Republicans and Democrats of conscience must set aside all personal
hobby horses and secondary issues, and avoid seductive compromises. To preserve the United States we love and revere, we must concentrate ferociously on one clear goal as the left attempts to subvert our future elections through the gift of votes to eleven million illegal immigrants: No vote for illegals—ever!



Original post here.

Amnesty, AGAIN? NOW??

Do the words glutton for punishment apply here or what??????

It’s not enough that he’s hacked off his loony lefty fringe.

It’s not enough that’s he’s hacked off the independents.

It’s not enough that he’s hacked off vast swaths of people who actually bought his pile of bile and now have buyer’s remorse.

It’s not enough that he hacked off conservatives… well… since he entered politics.

It’s not enough that we have spent the last 13 months in some kind of clinical obsessive compulsive mania over health care when the entire country is screaming JOBS.

Now we have to scratch off the scab of amnesty??????

Are you stinkin’ kidding me?


latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-immigration5-2010mar05,0,1123497.story

latimes.com

Obama looking to give new life to immigration reform

In an effort to advance a bill through Congress before midterm elections, the president meets with two senators who have spent months trying to craft legislation.

By Peter Nicholas
6:18 PM PST, March 4, 2010
Reporting from Washington

Despite steep odds, the White House has discussed prospects for reviving a major overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws, a commitment that President Obama has postponed once already.

Obama took up the issue privately with his staff Monday in a bid to advance a bill through Congress before lawmakers become too distracted by approaching midterm elections.

In the session, Obama and members of his Domestic Policy Council outlined ways to resuscitate the effort in a White House meeting with two senators — Democrat Charles E. Schumer of New York and Republican Lindsey Graham of South Carolina — who have spent months trying to craft a bill.

According to a person familiar with the meeting, the White House may ask Schumer and Graham to at least produce a blueprint that could be turned into legislative language.

The basis of a bill would include a path toward citizenship for the 10.8 million people living in the U.S. illegally. Citizenship would not be granted lightly, the White House said. Undocumented workers would need to register, pay taxes and pay a penalty for violating the law. Failure to comply might result in deportation.

Nick Shapiro, a White House spokesman, said the president’s support for an immigration bill, which would also include improved border security, was “unwavering.”

Participants in the White House gathering also pointed to an immigration rally set for March 21 in Washington as a way to spotlight the issue and build needed momentum.

Though proponents of an immigration overhaul were pleased that the White House wasn’t abandoning the effort, they also wanted Obama to take on a more assertive role, rather than leave it to Congress to work out a compromise.

Immigration is a delicate issue for the White House. After promising to revamp in his first year of office what many see as a fractured system, Obama risks angering a growing, politically potent Latino constituency if he defers the goal until 2011.

But with the healthcare debate still unresolved, Democrats are wary of plunging into another polarizing issue.

“Right now we have a little problem with the ‘Chicken Little’ mentality: The sky is falling and consequently we can’t do anything,” Rep. Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said in an interview.

Republicans are unlikely to cooperate. On Capitol Hill, Republicans said that partisan tensions had only gotten worse since Obama signaled this week that he would push forward with a healthcare bill, whether he could get GOP votes or not.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) said in an interview, “The things you hear from the administration won’t be well received.”

Schumer, speaking as he walked quickly through the Capitol, said he was having trouble rounding up Republican supporters apart from Graham. “It’s tough finding someone, but we’re trying,” Schumer said.

On Thursday, Schumer met with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, who oversees the government’s immigration efforts, to strategize over potential Republican co-sponsors.

“We’re very hopeful we can get a bill done. We have all the pieces in place. We just need a second Republican,” Schumer said in a statement.

Among proponents, there is a consensus that a proposal must move by April or early May to have a realistic chance of passing this year. If that deadline slips, Congress’ focus is likely to shift to the November elections, making it impossible to take up major legislation.

“There’s no question that this is a heavy lift and the window is narrowing,” said Janet Murguia, president and chief executive of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino advocacy group.

When it comes to immigration, Obama’s strategy echoes that of healthcare. He has deferred heavily to Congress, leaving it up to Schumer and Graham to reach a breakthrough with the idea that he would put his weight behind the resulting compromise.

peter.nicholas@

latimes.com