Jun 09 2007
Why The Far Right Is Out Of The Immigration Debate
The far fight, the immigration hypochondriacs as I like to call them, are working themselves to the margins. Especially when they complain about name calling, at which point I cannot help but think of these people – who call their conservative opposition ‘traitors’ and claim they the only “Real American” position – the whiny immigration hypochondriacs. Politics ain’t for those easily hurt. And hypocrites are just too much to stand after a while. But don’t take my word for it, take the word of Senator Kyl, who like me and many others want tough laws and a strong border, but will not go beyond fines and back taxes for those who have been here illegally for a long period of time:
Chief among the complaints has been the charge that the immigration compromise would offer “amnesty” to 12 million illegal immigrants. Law-and-order conservatives say these people are lawbreakers and shouldn’t be rewarded for cheating. That’s a position Mr. Kyl himself took in his last election. What does he say now about amnesty?
“Everyone has their own definition, I have found,” he says, “I think it is a dead-end debate. We have tried to do as many things as we can to ensure that for those that get to stay, they pay a price, and I don’t think it’s amnesty. For those who say, ‘This bill is amnesty, we shouldn’t pass it,’ one of my responses is, ‘OK, so do you like what we have?'”He means the current system, in which millions of immigrants are here illegally, and Washington does nothing about it. “This is de facto amnesty,” he says.
In addition to this nonsense from those who have no ideas but endless complaints is the issue of using violent crimes as a reasonable excuse to end our hospitality. The new bill makes it possible to deport people who commit or have committed violent crimes. Not for being here illegally, which is a process crime where fines and reparations (back taxes) are the norm. This is NOT amnesty by a long shot. But this ability to boot the real criminals is being held up by people who want to punish the process crimes more. So what is their lame answer? They say we will keep the hardened criminals until we get enough blood from the process crimes.
The immigration hypochondriacs are as incoherent as they are shrill. We have gang members and murderers and rapists here who we cannot deport under current law because of their violent crimes, but who we could deport tomorrow if this bill passes. No bill is perfect. No law enforcement is perfect. The hypochondriacs complain it will not be 100% effective. Nothing is. But even if it was 50% effective (my guess is it will be more like 85%), that means half the violent criminals who are uninvited guests can be given the boot. I will take that over more marginal hoops for the non-violent illegal aliens any day. But then I am not an immigration hypochondriac.
I would never leave something like 1-2 million criminals on our streets to stiffen penalties on 10+ million people doing nothing more than making a living. Making a living illegally, but still their crime is making a living here without our invitation or permission. But the far right is cheering how they are so much more American than the rest because they found some marginal warts on a bill and left 1-2 million violent illegal aliens on our streets. Imagine the twisted logic that has Malkin and Levin and others crowing about how they left us 1-2 million criminals to go after our children and neighbors. Incoherent? Absolutely. It borders on insanity. More from Kyl on what is going to happen now – and why the far right is properly going to be excluded from the equation:
This reality principle is a point he returns to frequently in our conversation. “There are a lot of things in the bill I’m still not happy with . . . It’s impossible to make the existing system work so we have to change the law, and changing the law requires Democratic votes, so you have to make concessions to Democrats.”
I agree. The far right has left this mess so as to make sure we, the un-American traitors, get a taste of these criminals in a hope we will become as obsessed and inflexible as them. The far right wanted us to “learn a lesson”, and a clear and obvious element of that lesson was to leave the violent criminals here as they diverted talk about lack of enforcement of our current laws. Our current laws don’t work, and they do not allow us to boot people for criminal acts here and prior to coming here. The far right knows this. And they are proud they have left 1-2 million of these criminals here to remind us why they are so pro-enforcement.
Hypocrisy is ripe on the far right. They call conservative opposition traitors as they tear asunder the governing coalition. They call Bush un-American because he stood by his positions he held for almost a decade now. And now they have with malice of forethought, left 1-2 million violent criminals on our streets because they don’t like the fines and back taxes on the non-violent criminals. No wonder we need to move these people out of the picture. Their next move to teach us a lesson could be even worse. They could propose we stop the airport security we put in place after 9-11, to teach us another lesson. This kind of twisted logic makes alliances with these people too high a price. The next citizen to die at the hands of a repeat offender illegal immigrant will have the far right to thank for their lesson. Because clearly it is more important to hammer the non-violent criminals than to get the violent ones out of here. It is so obvious why this is Pro-America, what is best for America, saving America. Can’t all you losers in the center who support the immigration bill see that?
Yeah – we see your logic. Explain it again when another child is attacked. Explain to the parent’s why it was so important to leave the predator we could have gotten off the street right here, to prey again.
Addendum: The supporters of the insanity are all upset I pointed out the fruits of their efforts! Welcome to tough love. Let me be clear, I am simply giving the far right all the credit they are due for stopping everything in this bill. They deserve to be recognized for their achievements. Too harsh? Damn, too bad. The one element of this bill, which made it worthwhile, was the ability to get the hardened criminals who are not citizens of this country out of here. The so-called “law and order” crowd left us with anarchy and criminals. Also known as the ‘status quo’. I will repeat the cold hard facts of life for all those out there upset I find their actions hypocritical and dangerous.
Let’s assume 1 million of the 12+ million here illegally are proven criminals a simple background check from US law enforcement would find immediately. This is actually a LOW estimate if (a) you believe the crime rate in the immigration is higher than the US population and (b) there are many more than 12 million illegal aliens in our country. But let’s just be conservative – in the true sense of the word. 1 million criminal aliens means that is one dangerous person for every 300 people in the US. If your school has 300 kids that means they have their own deadly alien nearby, ready to take one out. If you have 2,000 kids in your high school, you have over 6 of these animals to prey on your school. Cold hard numbers, not gibberish about how many miles of fence are being built.
If the new laws in the bill the far right so proudly derailed could take 85% of these people off the streets and ship them out of this country then that means 850,000 criminals off our streets. But that was ‘imperfection’ to the far right. Forget about their obsession about fines and taxes for the rest of the illegal aliens here, they said there was not enough law enforcement! Instead of leaving us 15 out of hundred, the left us 100 out 100! Their obsessive tunnel vision made it seem rational to them to leave 850,000 criminals on the street because we could not get 1 million? They did not give us anything that would take 1 million off the street; they just said it was better to keep 1 million foreign criminals in this country instead of what might come. Well, what might have come, what was likely to come, was the removal of all but 150,000 of those criminals.
This is the text book example of perfect being the evil of good. The so called American heroes who tout law enforcement over everything else left us with no new laws, no new legal resources and all the criminals we could have booted out of here. Sorry, but I just wanted to make sure those who suffer harm from the 850,000 or so criminals the far right left us knew who to thank. And even, as I said above, the actual performance was 500,000 (50%) reduction – that was 500,000 less victims too. This is the result of the hard work of the far right. I am just giving credit were credit is due. And honestly, I am sorry it hurts anyone’s feelings to be told the harsh truth so brutally. But the fear of the unknown left us the animals who prey on us and our children. Did they do this deliberately? Hell no. They did it because they were ideologically blinded to the ramifications of their actions. Just like liberals cannot fathom the ramifications of giving Iraq to al Qaeda, the far right could not grasp the ramifications of leaving all those foreign criminals here – since there are very few options to get rid of them now. The far right, crowing as the saviors of America, made that decision for all of us. They knew we would applaud their decisions to leave the mess and the criminals and do nothing.
Far right – take a bow. You deserve it. You are the “law and order” defenders. Except when you decide to leave 1-2 million deadly criminals on our streets.
Addendum: We can see the response from the oppoents of the bill that could have saved 100’s of thousands of victims. Denial. They claim current deportation laws would work just fine. Current deportation laws DO NOT expidite the red tape and limit the process for violent criminals. There is no fast track to the exits for violent criminals in current laws. They know this. They are pretending misdemeanor charges on illegal entry can be used to get at criminals. As I posted the far right is delusional in their beliefs in myths like the ones posted below. The fact is under the new law we could deport every repeat criminal we find. Of course they are not going to come forward – they won’t now. But at least when you have them they can get a fast track out of here with the new laws.. If deportation was so simple to do for convicted violent criminals they would be out of here already.
Clearly they are still here and will be until we change the laws so that committing a violent crime trumps all process and appeal otopms.. What we see from the far right is delusion and denial. They claim the new laws would not do anything! They claim the new laws would not be enforced.
They claim a lot – and they have no proof they are right. They claim these outrageous things because they need to believe not a single violent illegal alien would have an expidited and immediate deportation for a violent criminal act, short-cutting the lengthy deportation process we now have for the crime of illegal entry. And let’s not even talk about the LEGAL aliens who commit crimes who too should be deported. We cannot do anything about those criminals, thanks to the far right.
The far right continues this farce because they have to. They went out on a limb and told themselves they were our saviors. They cannot live with themselves if they are, in fact, the force that left the criminals here to prey on our citizens. But they are the ones who did this. They knew this was in the bill. And they made up rationalizations to ignore this so they could be heroes.
They are not heroes. Heroes do not enable violent criminals the opportunity to prey on more victims. If I am right and roughly 850,000 future victims could be saved from criminal violence then it was worth passing the bill and fixing holes and warts with future bills. 850,000 potential victims are now out there because some inflexible people couldn’t believe that a law that would allow immediate deportation could work. Personally, I could not stand the guilt of not first seeing if it could do some good first. Why have any laws at all if you do not believe they will work? Answer that protectors of ‘law and order’!
AJ, I come to your blog because you have a way of making points missed by other bloggerse. Basically, I agree with some, if not most, of your points about immigration. However, the bill that was before the seate made me very nervous. When a bill is that long, there are bound to be many unintended consequences.
Instead of blaming those of us who had questions, why not put blame on the senators who wanted this passed without question or debate? A good debate in the senate (oxymoron?) would have been what we, the American people, needed.
I don’t like being blamed as a wing nut when I just want to learn more about the bill.
Clarice, thank you for saying clearly what I so bumbled in my post!
AJ said
The immigration hypochondriacs are as incoherent as they are shrill. We have gang members and murderers and rapists here who we cannot deport under current law because of their violent crimes, but who we could deport tomorrow if this bill passes.
Wrong we could always deport them and you keep repeating this error.
What section of the bill provides this new capability?
All I have seen is goals stated in the bill referring to EXISTING law.
Existing law allows deportation, it simply was NOT enforced, that is why we are where we are now.
I let this speak for itself. This is the current law on the books regarding deportation of aliens. Last revisions of this law were in ’96. A few years later (still under Clinton I believe), an internal memo was circulated to the INS office that encouraged more discrection in cases after some spectacular cases hit the press where people having legal status living here for 30 years were deported when their status became “not legal”. In the same spirit of the Gorelick memo..it had the profound impact of softening the law and lessoning the prosecution and enforcement of these laws.
This has always been an enforcement issue…and the proponents of this bill suggesting that people here illegally cannot be currently deported using our current laws are either ignorant of the current law..or purposefully misleading you.
Sec. 1227. Deportable aliens.
This has always been an enforcement issue. What they are proposing is to re-write these laws (below you can read for yourself) to be less broad, and soften them down to be more in line with current levels of enforcement. You can read it for yourself.
TITLE 8, CHAPTER 12, SUBCHAPTER II, Part IV, Sec. 1227.
STATUTE
(a) Classes of deportable aliens
Any alien (including an alien crewman) in and admitted to the United States shall, upon the order of the Attorney General, be removed if the alien is within one or more of the following classes of deportable aliens:
(1) Inadmissible at time of entry or of adjustment of status or
violates status
(A) Inadmissible aliens
Any alien who at the time of entry or adjustment of status was within one or more of the classes of aliens inadmissible by the law existing at such time is deportable.
(B) Present in violation of law
Any alien who is present in the United States in violation of this chapter or any other law of the United States is deportable.
(C) Violated nonimmigrant status or condition of entry
(i) Nonimmigrant status violators
Any alien who was admitted as a nonimmigrant and who has failed to maintain the nonimmigrant status in which the alien was admitted or to which it was changed under section 1258 of this title, or to comply with the conditions of any such status, is deportable.
(ii) Violators of conditions of entry
Any alien whom the Secretary of Health and Human Services certifies has failed to comply with terms, conditions, and controls that were imposed under section 1182(g) of this title is deportable.
(D) Termination of conditional permanent residence
(i) In general
Any alien with permanent resident status on a conditional basis under section 1186a of this title (relating to conditional permanent resident status for certain alien spouses and sons and daughters) or under section 1186b of this title (relating to conditional permanent resident status for certain alien entrepreneurs, spouses, and children) who has had such status terminated under such respective section is deportable.
(ii) Exception
Clause (i) shall not apply in the cases described in section 1186a(c)(4) of this title (relating to certain hardship waivers).
(E) Smuggling
(i) In general
Any alien who (prior to the date of entry, at the time of any entry, or within 5 years of the date of any entry) knowingly has encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided any other alien to enter or to try to enter the United States in violation of law is deportable.
(ii) Special rule in the case of family reunification
Clause (i) shall not apply in the case of alien who is an eligible immigrant (as defined in section 301(b)(1) of the Immigration Act of 1990), was physically present in the United States on May 5, 1988, and is seeking admission as an immediate relative or under section 1153(a)(2) of this title (including under section 112 of the Immigration Act of 1990) or benefits under section 301(a) of the Immigration Act of 1990 if the alien, before May 5, 1988, has encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided only the alien’s spouse, parent, son, or daughter (and no other individual) to enter the United States in violation of law.
(iii) Waiver authorized
The Attorney General may, in his discretion for humanitarian purposes, to assure family unity, or when it is otherwise in the public interest, waive application of clause
(i) in the case of any alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien has encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided only an individual who at the time of the offense was the alien’s spouse, parent, son, or daughter (and no other individual) to enter the United States in violation of law.
(F) Repealed. Pub. L. 104-208, div. C, title VI, Sec.
671(d)(1)(C), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009-723
(G) Marriage fraud
An alien shall be considered to be deportable as having procured a visa or other documentation by fraud (within the meaning of section 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) of this title) and to be in the United States in violation of this chapter (within the meaning of subparagraph (B)) if –
(i) the alien obtains any admission into the United States with an immigrant visa or other documentation procured on the basis of a marriage entered into less than 2 years prior to such admission of the alien and which, within 2 years subsequent to any admission of the alien in the United States, shall be judicially annulled or terminated, unless the alien establishes to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that such marriage was not contracted for the purpose of evading any provisions of the immigration laws, or
(ii) it appears to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that the alien has failed or refused to fulfill the alien’s marital agreement which in the opinion of the Attorney General was made for the purpose of procuring the alien’s admission as an immigrant.
(H) Waiver authorized for certain misrepresentations
The provisions of this paragraph relating to the removal of aliens within the United States on the ground that they were inadmissible at the time of admission as aliens described in section 1182(a)(6)(C)(i) of this title, whether willful or innocent, may, in the discretion of the Attorney General, be waived for any alien (other than an alien described in paragraph (4)(D)) who –
(i)
(I) is the spouse, parent, son, or daughter of a citizen of the United States or of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence; and
(II) was in possession of an immigrant visa or equivalent document and was otherwise admissible to the United States at the time of such admission except for those grounds of inadmissibility specified under paragraphs (5)(A) and (7)(A) of section 1182(a) of this title which were a direct result of that fraud or misrepresentation.
(ii) is an alien who qualifies for classification under clause (iii) or (iv) of section 1154(a)(1)(A) of this title or clause (ii) or (iii) of section 1154(a)(1)(B) of this title. A waiver of removal for fraud or misrepresentation granted under this subparagraph shall also operate to waive removal based on the grounds of inadmissibility directly resulting from such fraud or misrepresentation.
(2) Criminal offenses
(A) General crimes
(i) Crimes of moral turpitude
Any alien who –
(I) is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude committed within five years (or 10 years in the case of an alien provided lawful permanent resident status under section 1255(j) of this title) after the date of admission, and
(II) is convicted of a crime for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed, is deportable.
(ii) Multiple criminal convictions
Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct, regardless of whether confined therefor and regardless of whether the convictions were in a single trial, is deportable.
(iii) Aggravated felony
Any alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable.
(iv) High speed flight
Any alien who is convicted of a violation of section 758 of title 18 (relating to high speed flight from an immigration checkpoint) is deportable.
(v) Waiver authorized
Clauses (i), (ii), (iii), and (iv) shall not apply in the case of an alien with respect to a criminal conviction if the alien subsequent to the criminal conviction has been granted a full and unconditional pardon by the President of the United States or by the Governor of any of the several States.
(B) Controlled substances
(i) Conviction
Any alien who at any time after admission has been convicted of a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance (as defined in section 802 of title 21), other than a single offense involving possession for one’s own use of 30 grams or less of marijuana, is deportable.
(ii) Drug abusers and addicts
Any alien who is, or at any time after admission has been, a drug abuser or addict is deportable.
(C) Certain firearm offenses
Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted under any law of purchasing, selling, offering for sale, exchanging, using, owning, possessing, or carrying, or of attempting or conspiring to purchase, sell, offer for sale, exchange, use, own, possess, or carry, any weapon, part, or accessory which is a firearm or destructive device (as defined in section 921(a) of title 18) in violation of any law is deportable.
(D) Miscellaneous crimes
Any alien who at any time has been convicted (the judgment on such conviction becoming final) of, or has been so convicted of a conspiracy or attempt to violate –
(i) any offense under chapter 37 (relating to espionage), chapter 105 (relating to sabotage), or chapter 115 (relating to treason and sedition) of title 18 for which a term of imprisonment of five or more years may be imposed;
(ii) any offense under section 871 or 960 of title 18;
(iii) a violation of any provision of the Military Selective Service Act (50 U.S.C. App. 451 et seq.) or the Trading With the Enemy Act (50 U.S.C. App. 1 et seq.); or
(iv) a violation of section 1185 or 1328 of this title, is deportable.
(E) Crimes of domestic violence, stalking, or violation of
protection order, crimes against children and
(i) Domestic violence, stalking, and child abuse
Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of a crime of domestic violence, a crime of stalking, or a crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment is deportable. For purposes of this clause, the term “crime of domestic violence” means any crime of violence (as defined in section 16 of title 18) against a person committed by a current or former spouse of the person, by an individual with whom the person shares a child in common, by an individual who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the person as a spouse, by an individual similarly situated to a spouse of the person under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction where the offense occurs, or by any other individual against a person who is protected from that individual’s acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the United States or any State, Indian tribal government, or unit of local government.
(ii) Violators of protection orders
Any alien who at any time after admission is enjoined under a protection order issued by a court and whom the court determines has engaged in conduct that violates the portion of a protection order that involves protection against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury to the person or persons for whom the protection order was issued is deportable. For purposes of this clause, the term “protection order” means any injunction issued for the purpose of preventing violent or threatening acts of domestic violence, including temporary or final orders issued by civil or criminal courts (other than support or child custody orders or provisions) whether obtained by filing an independent action or as a pendente lite order in another proceeding.
(3) Failure to register and falsification of documents
(A) Change of address
An alien who has failed to comply with the provisions of section 1305 of this title is deportable, unless the alien establishes to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that such failure was reasonably excusable or was not willful.
(B) Failure to register or falsification of documents
Any alien who at any time has been convicted –
(i) under section 1306(c) of this title or under section 36(c) of the Alien Registration Act, 1940,
(ii) of a violation of, or an attempt or a conspiracy to violate, any provision of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938 (22 U.S.C. 611 et seq.), or
(iii) of a violation of, or an attempt or a conspiracy to violate, section 1546 of title 18 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other entry documents), is deportable.
(C) Document fraud
(i) In general
An alien who is the subject of a final order for violation of section 1324c of this title is deportable.
(ii) Waiver authorized
The Attorney General may waive clause (i) in the case of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if no previous civil money penalty was imposed against the alien under section 1324c of this title and the offense was incurred solely to assist, aid, or support the alien’s spouse or child (and no other individual). No court shall have jurisdiction to review a decision of the Attorney General to grant or deny a waiver under this clause.
(D) Falsely claiming citizenship
(i) In general
Any alien who falsely represents, or has falsely represented, himself to be a citizen of the United States for any purpose or benefit under this chapter (including section 1324a of this title) or any Federal or State law is deportable.
(ii) Exception
In the case of an alien making a representation described in clause (i), if each natural parent of the alien (or, in the case of an adopted alien, each adoptive parent of the alien) is or was a citizen (whether by birth or naturalization), the alien permanently resided in the United States prior to attaining the age of 16, and the alien reasonably believed at the time of making such representation that he or she was a citizen, the alien shall not be considered to be deportable under any provision of this subsection based on such representation.
(4) Security and related grounds
(A) In general
Any alien who has engaged, is engaged, or at any time after admission engages in –
(i) any activity to violate any law of the United States relating to espionage or sabotage or to violate or evade any law prohibiting the export from the United States of goods, technology, or sensitive information,
(ii) any other criminal activity which endangers public safety or national security, or
(iii) any activity a purpose of which is the opposition to, or the control or overthrow of, the Government of the United States by force, violence, or other unlawful means, is deportable.
(B) Terrorist activities
Any alien who has engaged, is engaged, or at any time after admission engages in any terrorist activity (as defined in section 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv) of this title) is deportable.
(C) Foreign policy
(i) In general
An alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable.
(ii) Exceptions
The exceptions described in clauses (ii) and (iii) of section 1182(a)(3)(C) of this title shall apply to deportability under clause (i) in the same manner as they apply to inadmissibility under section 1182(a)(3)(C)(i) of this title.
(D) Assisted in Nazi persecution or engaged in genocide
Any alien described in clause (i) or (ii) of section 1182(a)(3)(E) of this title is deportable.
(5) Public charge
Any alien who, within five years after the date of entry, has become a public charge from causes not affirmatively shown to have arisen since entry is deportable.
(6) Unlawful voters
(A) In general
Any alien who has voted in violation of any Federal, State, or local constitutional provision, statute, ordinance, or regulation is deportable.
(B) Exception
In the case of an alien who voted in a Federal, State, or local election (including an initiative, recall, or referendum) in violation of a lawful restriction of voting to citizens, if each natural parent of the alien (or, in the case of an adopted alien, each adoptive parent of the alien) is or was a citizen (whether by birth or naturalization), the alien permanently resided in the United States prior to attaining the age of 16, and the alien reasonably believed at the time of such violation that he or she was a citizen, the alien shall not be considered to be deportable under any provision of this subsection based on such violation.
(7) Waiver for victims of domestic violence
(A) In general
The Attorney General is not limited by the criminal court record and may waive the application of paragraph (2)(E)(i) (with respect to crimes of domestic violence and crimes of stalking) and (ii) in the case of an alien who has been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty and who is not and was not the primary perpetrator of violence in the relationship –
(i) upon a determination that –
(I) the alien was acting is1 self-defense;
(II) the alien was found to have violated a protection order intended to protect the alien; or
(III) the alien committed, was arrested for, was convicted of, or pled guilty to committing a crime –
(aa) that did not result in serious bodily injury; and
(bb) where there was a connection between the crime and the alien’s having been battered or subjected to extreme cruelty.
(B) Credible evidence considered
In acting on applications under this paragraph, the Attorney General shall consider any credible evidence relevant to the application. The determination of what evidence is credible and the weight to be given that evidence shall be within the sole discretion of the Attorney General.
(b) Deportation of certain nonimmigrants
An alien, admitted as a nonimmigrant under the provision of either section 1101(a)(15)(A)(i) or 1101(a)(15)(G)(i) of this title, and who fails to maintain a status under either of those provisions, shall not be required to depart from the United States without the approval of the Secretary of State, unless such alien is subject to deportation under paragraph (4) of subsection (a) of this section.
(c) Waiver of grounds for deportation
Paragraphs (1)(A), (1)(B), (1)(C), (1)(D), and (3)(A) of subsection (a) of this section (other than so much of paragraph (1) as relates to a ground of inadmissibility described in paragraph (2) or (3) of section 1182(a) of this title) shall not apply to a special immigrant described in section 1101(a)(27)(J) of this title based upon circumstances that existed before the date the alien was provided such special immigrant status.
Great post AJ
Also AJ is not talking about everyone here as to the bile. GO to the blogs and comment sections. #0 to 40 percent of the comments are horrible. IF I was hispanic I would be disgusted
ALso, as to the bill we all know what is going on. Massive negative publicity against it so people have negative reactions it in polls. That is nothing new they are picking up n the background noise by the anti bill PR camapaign. However when polled on the individual parts of the bill people still like those provisions.
I am not really concerned about the state parties. HEck the Texas state party convention was horrible last year. A lot of long time hispanic republican activist were pretty much treated rudely. It was embarrassing.
Bush on his radio address that is available at the white house site or you can click here where I linked to it
http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/messagetopic.asp?p=4764163
shows that he is going to fight on this issue. Thank God for brave people in our Party like Bush, Cannon, Flake, Martinez, BRownback,McCain, Lindsey Graham , and of course Senator Kyl just to name a few
No Merlin, we cannot deport them. Not because of their felony crimes. You can try to take them through the deportation process for being here illegally. But that doesn’t work and has a lot of appeals and waiting periods. The new bill was clear and efficient. Any violent crime you are out of here, no appeals.
You don’t even know what you have done to this country – do you? You still cannot fathom the fact we need these laws to deport the criminals – since we HAVE NOT been able to for 20 years. Keep telling yourself you did not enable murderers and rapists. Keep telling yourself it could not possibly be me.
It won’t change what the far right has done. But if it is the only way to deal with what the far right did – be my guest. I do not expect the denial to go away for the far right. I expect the rest of America to see it and act accordingly.
(Now Dale, you know what I am up to).
Merlin,
You do KNOW that in deportation hearings you cannot bring up priors, just like you can’t in ANY OTHER case? Right? You are innocent until proven guilty and prior behavior is only used in sentencing – not in determining guilt. So the deportation hearings cannot distinguish murderers from nannies?
I mean, you folks are such bloody experts on the law and all – you were aware that for the first time deportation hearings could weigh other infractions???? They could say murderers are automatically out?/
Well, they could if the far right had not torpedoed the bill. You break it, you own it. Add that to the long list of glorious achievements by the far right. And yes, only someone way out there would torpedo this deportation change because of some fantasy fears about imperfect laws. Sorry, that kind of thinking is not mainstream. And it is not coherent.
Clarice,
I am sorry, but I can not listen to Malkin and some other people and assume there is not some nativist stuff going on there myself.
I was talking to a farmer from southern Indiana not long ago who said that if the migrants did not show up every year to help him he would have to sell out. He pays above the minimum wage and every year the same people show up to help him. He is glad they do because the locals will not do that kind of work. They just won’t do it.
I know other people in ag for whom it is the same story. In fact in a town called Washington not far from here there is a turkey plant where several hundred people work. The locals are afraid the place will be forced to shut down and they will lose their jobs because there are not enough people in the area to keep it open without the Mexicans. These are not all criminals and dope dealers and gang members and LaRaza people either.
So I would say there has been a certain amount of hysteria on both sides of the issue.
However, I think the right employed the same tactics with this bill that the left and the Democrats did with social security reform. They scared people to death without ever bothering to come up with an alternative that could get past a Democratic controlled Congress. And they used emotion and exaggeration to do it.
This bill will not destroy America anymore than private acounts in social security will leave little old ladies to starve.
And Merlin, there is a huge back log for deportation. If people want laws enforced they need to face that fact that government needs more people and resources as well as a streamlining of the process if we are to enforce the laws and that means Congress has to authorize and appropriate the resources.
For instance, this bill included an employee verification system that made it possible for employers to check and see if prospective employees were or were not legal. These are the kinds of tools they need if they are going to enforce the laws.
Just saying enforce the laws is not going to solve the problem. That is not that hard to understand that the current system is not working. Half the illegals here did not cross the border and we need to deal with as well or their numbers will only grow as the border gets tighter.
I watched the entire interview last night. Michelle was way too sensitive to the deportation issue, which is a red flag on the emote meter. She did not want to acknowlege the deportation crowd is real and loud. She called them marginal. O’Reilly has evidence to the contrary. Rarely does O’Reilly tell Michelle to calm down, so to speak. Why was she so worked up? Too much of an “investment in the outcome”, ie a deeper issue going on, imho.
Regardless, this discussion only highlights the complexity of this issue and how there are many viewpoints that can’t get heard because of the hysteria and intellectual dishonesty of those who want to shred the meaning of words. And I am not saying that that is happeningon this site, just around the blogosphere and on the airwaves…
As I posted above, and AJ seemingly has relented..the problem with the current law is not the laws as they are written…but with how they are being enforced (or..not).
Contrary to earlier suggestions…current law DOES provide for deportation of illegals. The problem is/always has been…they don’t enforce it. Nor will the “new” bill, whatever that is..mean anything without enforcement. What does it matter if they “can” deport them…if they “don’t”?
Lastly, I hate to inform you…but I doubt any of those illegals who’ve committed crimes are going to try and sign up for your 500 dollar get legal drives. So, you are “still” left with the exact same problem as before. (ie..who’s going to go find the, detain them, and deport them?). Current law provides for this as well….they just don’t do it.
What in this current bill even remotely suggests to you…that they “really, really mean it” this time?? and will enforce the provisions as they are written..and not simply send memos to each other..suggesting they use their own discretion in enforcing the very same laws they wrote? Some of these senators…WROTE the laws I posted above.
It is hard to believe that we can not find a way to deal with us. A way to secure the borders and meet legitimate labor demands. Why is that so hard?
And it should be remembered, if it is our intent to cherry pick every law that comes along and accept only that we agree with 100% then the process is doomed from the outset. governing requires give and take.
TerryE,
My preference is that we enforce existing law and deport those that are here illegally. I do understand that we’re not going to go door to door and check immigration status, nor would I want to. My point is we have been misled time and time again by congress’ before this and President’s before Bush. All I want is the border secure so that we stop the flow of illegals. Once we do that then I, like most others, am willing to discuss some facet of legal status for those that are here to work. I have no problem with that but I think that congress needs to secure the border and prove to the people that it is secure before we discuss legalization of any that are here illegally.
conservativesuperiority.com
DC,
Current deportation laws DO NOT expidite the red tape and process for violent criminals. There is no fast track to the exits for violent criminals. As I posted the far right is delusional in their beliefs in myths like the one you posted. If deportation was simple to do for convicted violent criminals they would be out of here.
Clearly they are not. What we see from the far right is delusion and denial. They claim the new laws would not do anything! They claim the new laws would not be enforced.
They claim and have no proof. They claim because they need to believe not a single violent illegal alien would have an expidited and immediate deportation for the criminal act, short cutting the lengthy process for the crime of illegal entry. And let’s not even talk about the LEGAL aliens who commit crimes who too should be deported.
The far right continues this farce because they have to. They went out on a limb and told themselves they were the saviors. They cannot live with themselves if they are, in fact, the force that left the criminals here to prey on our citizens. But they are the ones who did this.
As ti Malkin it is a disgrace that maniline conservates have not called her out on here linking and at times writing I think for VDARE. I realize that people are not racist just because they oppose this bill but good cause VDARE is intolerable
They want even allow links to that on Free Republic
No proof? We don’t enforce the immigration laws we have now. What proof do you need?
Brandon,
Some of us are too old to believe in the tooth fairy and the myth current laws will suffice. Clearly, anyone who says we did not need to make a change to expidite deportation for convicted criminals is just plain foolish. It would TOUGHEN current laws. Just like the tamper proof ID would TOUGHEN the laws. See, this is why the far right is hypocritical. If enforcing the laws is good, making them tougher and more enforceable is good. And this billl would have made them tougher and more enforceable. There is no doubt it would be progress.
The complaint was it was NOT ENOUGH! LOL! Yeah right. The far right can live in their delusions. But they just made our streets less safe for our good citizens, made it harder for our law enforcement to enforce the laws, and kept the foreign criminals here longer.
The far right is clearly creating a foreign criminal friendly environment by not toughening the laws and making deportation trivial for convicted criminals. All the theories and fantasies cannot change THAT REALITY. That is a defacto result of killing the bill. Not a theory or a prediction. A fact. The far right allowed foreign criminals a repreive. They gave them tacit amnesty to stay here longer.
Thanks – a lot. For nothing (which BTW the far right was all proud of until someone like me points out the fallacy of their ‘logic’).
Christoph,
LOL! I am not the one who will be out on the fringe when this battle is over. And it is about over. Please, send my regards to the Buchanans.
I too don’t believe in the tooth fairy which is why I believe that only the parts of the bill that makes everyone legal would ever be enacted. I will grant you that the name calling, and questioning of people’s patriotism is only going to put one group of republicans against the other. However I think the vast majority of conservatives only ask that we secure the border FIRST and then we are open to other parts of the bill.
We are one of the worst countries in terms of enforcing our own laws, whether its immigration or any of the millions of laws we have. That is why the minute you enact a bill that legalizes 20 million people who are here illegally you have a flood of millions more come across the border. That’s not speculation, it’s not fear mongering, it’s fact. 1986 proved that.
Sorry guys, but most of the folks Ive talked with that opposed the bill were willing to work on the guest and current residents side , but we HAVE to be shown that the border control is IN PLACE first and Working. Is was never enforced or in place in the last ones….and we believe it would NOT be in place in these combined ones.
If they would have put the Sensenbrenner enforcement in place and working for 3 to 5 years and then have an OUTSIDE firm Audit it…(no – not the DHS) then we could move on to the other issues.
Do not even talk about other immigration waves from Europe in the same sentence. We have an OCEAN between Italy, German et al. We can not sustain this ongoing full time migration with a nation that has unlimited and uncontrolled borders. This blog is Wrong as is todays NYT editorial. The immigration of today is NOT like is used to be. We have borders with the country of origin.
And unless Familial immigration is completely stopped it will never stop. I looked into how many could come from one person. For gods sake, one person could bring in over 120 people with brothers, cousins uncles, wives etc. Either stop this or repeal the 14th amendment. Ireland and Australia stopped their Birthright citizenship recently for the same reason. They simply can not absorb it.
Plus they actually have the balls to stand up and say and print in the paper they want to PRESERVE their CULTURE to your face.
Something some are lacking here.
Some also think we ALLOWED the various immigrations out of some “goodness” of our hearts. Wrong. One set was to populate a sparsely populated country. One was to provide labor for an agrarian society.
We havent been an agrarian society for 50 years. Plus, we can provide our own “..poor huddled masses…” without someone else sending us theirs.
Jay Cost, that brilliant young political scientist says it best–This was not a failure; it was democracy as Madison envisioned it:
“I must admit that I find myself disappointed when journalists with years of experience covering Washington watch our system stultify efforts to alter the status quo, and then declare – in so many words – that a failure has occurred. There was no failure here. A sole senator from North Dakota effectively vetoed it. This was an archetypical Madisonian moment! This was a sign that our system is functioning well – regardless of whether the bill’s policy prescription was an objectively prudent course of action to take. It was a divisive bill whose supporters constituted only a faction of the public. Even if the faction was the so-called “moderate,” “sensible,” “middle” – this bill’s coalition was never anything more than a faction within the whole. Thus, their bill was effectively vetoed.
The proclamations of failure from journalists like Mr. Franken discourage me because they engender in the public a sense that our system is not working as it should when, in fact, it is working exactly as it should. Our governing system is extremely complicated, our education system gives short shrift to civics training, and so there is a wide divergence between what the average citizen thinks our system was intended to do, and what it was actually intended to do. Misguided criticisms from journalists who look fondly upon those halcyon days of programmatic efficiency that never existed only exacerbate this disconnection.
When there is a nationwide consensus of significant size on the issue of immigration, then there will be reform. In the meantime, let’s stop implying that our system has failed us. It hasn’t. This “failure” is actually all part and parcel of the Madisonian system. Learn it, love it, live it. Believe me, you have no other choice. It’s not like you can change it.”
Madison