Obama’s Preemptive Strike for the Hispanic Vote
Barack Obama’s re-election campaign has had some rough moments the past few months. Mitt Romney has had a single-minded focus on the state of the economy and Obama’s poor performance in that area. Job growth has stalled and unemployment numbers remain high. Yet President Obama, in a news conference, seemed to be arguing that all is well in the private sector, though total jobs in the private sector remain more than 4 million below the level before the subprime financial collapse.
In Wisconsin, voters decisively backed Governor Scott Walker in the recall election, dealing a blow to public sector unions. And yet in the same speech in which the president said all is well in the private sector, he called for more spending to pay for more jobs (and benefits and pensions) in the public sector.
Not surprisingly, the president, as he has on several other occasions in the past year, decided to change the subject. With polls showing a close race nationally and tight races in many of the battleground states, the president announced last week a change in the administration’s policy regarding the legal status of illegals under age 30 who had been brought to the U.S as children. Much as with Obama’s new views on gay marriage and the introduction of the new contraception mandate, the policy shift was, of course, a shameless pander to an important Democrat-leaning group and was universally recognized as such.
However, the political risks of Obama’s action seem smaller than with either of the prior-announced policy reversals. The president’s endorsement of gay marriage solidified his support in the gay community and among young voters, but also may have damaged his chances in some of the more socially conservative swing states, such as North Carolina and Ohio. The contraception mandate was well-received among single women, but may have cost the president the support of some independent Catholic voters — an important constituency in New Hampshire and several of the Midwest battleground states.
The policy shift on how the Department of Homeland Security will enforce current law, including allowing this one group of individuals to remain in the country unchallenged and apply for two-year work permits, was, not surprisingly, viewed as lawlessness by some critics, including Charles Krauthammer. ”This is not discretion,” he said. “Discretion is when you treat it on a one-by-one basis on the grounds of extenuating circumstances. This is the declaration of a whole new set of criteria, which is essentially resurrecting the legislation that the Congress has said no to.”
The president and his legal team seemed to have concluded the same thing earlier but, whether due to political necessity or new legal thinking, changed their minds:
The president, a constitutional lawyer, believed that creating a special class of people entitled to particular rights was something only Congress could do. At the same time, however, if prosecutors could agree on how to exercise their judgment on a case-by-case basis, without any guarantees, that would be permissible as part of their discretionary power, according to a senior administration official familiar with the decision.
Estimates of the number of people impacted by the policy shift have ranged from the administration’s number of 800,000 to Pew’s estimate of 1.4 million. In any case, the policy change will likely play very well with Hispanic voters, the one voter group where Obama’s current lead over Mitt Romney has remained as strong as his 2008 victory over John McCain.
In 2008, the exit polls suggested that Obama won just over 2/3 of the Hispanic vote, a winning margin of approximately 35%, about three times as large as John Kerry’s margin over George Bush in 2004 among Hispanic voters. This huge margin among Hispanics padded Obama’s margin in Southwestern states that shifted to the Democrats, such as Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada. Obama won Florida’s Hispanic voters (heavily Cuban) by a smaller margin (less than 3 to 2), but the change from 2004, when Bush carried Hispanics in Florida, may have been enough to move the state to the Democrats.
Polls of Hispanic voters have shown Obama with as much as a 40-point lead so far over Romney. While Obama’s support level among other strongly Democratic voting groups, such as African Americans and Jews, seems to have softened a bit this cycle, the major fear in the Obama camp about Hispanic voters has been about turnout. That fear centered on Obama’s disappointing record on immigration issues — one of many the president ignored during the year-long health-care fight when his team had the votes to do whatever they wanted on pretty much any issue in Congress.
Concerns about Hispanic turnout also reflect the high mobility of Hispanics, who move at a higher rate between the states than other groups do, and often do not register to vote in their new locations. States such as North Carolina, Georgia, and Virginia have seen very large increases in their Hispanic population in the last ten years. While there are about 10 million more Hispanics than African Americans in the U.S. at this point, there are fewer Hispanic citizens than African Americans. In addition, the Hispanic population is skewed towards the under age 18 group due to a far higher birth rate (3.5 per woman of child-bearing age) than for other groups (2 or fewer). As a result, while Hispanics make up 16% of the population, they may account for only 8 to 9% of registered voters in any cycle, barely half of their population share.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida had been considered to be one of the top prospects for Romney’s VP selection. With a new biography and autobiography of Rubio due out next week, and with Rubio working on offering up a bipartisan version of a DREAM Act in the Senate, the Obama announcement on Friday may have diminished the prospects for Rubio’s selection. Obama campaign advisor David Axelrod has seemed obsessed with Rubio, and he may have pushed Obama’s preemptive strike against him.
Now even if Rubio releases a Senate bill (one that, unlike Obama’s action, will be clearly lawful), it will seem like a Johnny-come-lately-to-the-party approach. To the extent that Romney thinks his chances in Colorado and Nevada are now not that great, it may focus his VP thinking more on the Midwest than the Southwest, and to either Ohio Senator Rob Portman or Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, who is Catholic.
Florida is a state that Romney has to win, but its Hispanic population consists mainly of Cubans and Puerto Ricans, for whom Obama’s policy shift matters far less. Romney may believe he can win Florida without Rubio, a view seconded by New York Times statistics guru Nate Silver. On the other hand, Romney’s current bus trip is through six states — four of them part of the Democrats’ “blue wall.” These are states John Kerry won in 2004. They include New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin (plus Ohio and Iowa), which suggests that Romney sees a path to victory without winning back the states McCain lost in the Southwest.
New Mexico is considered safe for Obama. Colorado and Nevada between them have 15 Electoral College votes. Michigan (16) and Pennsylvania (20) each have more, and Wisconsin (10) plus Iowa (6) would also substitute. While Nevada has looked like an uphill climb for Romney even before Friday’s announcement, Colorado was polling close to even. It will be interesting to see if there is any shift in the polls in these states following the announcement. If there is, I expect it to be small.
On balance, the Obama announcement is likely to facilitate Hispanic registration efforts and solidify Obama’s lead among Hispanics. Those who are most vocal in their opposition to Obama’s action were likely not in his camp anyway.
I wonder if this latest move by Obama will simply lock in Marco Rubio as the GOP vice presidential candidate. Such would negate any benefit for Obama from this latest piece of politically desperate law breaking.
Good take for the most part. Rubio will be a great choice Hispanic or not.
Many here seem to forget that we have only two potential candidates that have charisma.Sarah Palin and marco Rubio. Sarah has bee savaged to the point where she can’t run, at least this time around.
Marco however is a possibility.
As for the 800k new hungry job hunters who now will get a pass you gotta wonder how that will play with all the other hispanics who have been leaving the US because of no jobs. And not to mention those that semi legal or legals who also need jobs who now find their job in jeopardy by younger competition maybe working even cheaper. then there are the unions they will just love hundreds of thousands more non union labor hunters….time will tell..
Also there is the little ditty that what happens if the rest of the young third worlders in mexico Central and South America decide that its worth a couple of hundred bucks to buy fake docs and make the trip across the open border to the promised land of milk and honey all free by the way.
Marco Rubio is not a Natural Born American and never can be. If that’s what you want, you already have Obama. We should have at least one party that believes in following the United States Constitution.
THANK YOU! It also knocks out Bobby Jindal. If people want to change the rules they need to do it right and amend the constitution.
2. FeralCat-
Marco Rubio is not a Natural Born American and never can be.
-
I thought Rubio was born in Miami, Florida.
Did the Spanish or British recapture Florida while I was on vacation?
Apparently you do not understand what natural born means.
Just to spell it out for the hard of understanding. The American Constitution made a SPECIAL exception for FIRST generation Americans ( those born in America to FOREIGN parents) to be able to run for President however they also stipulated that after that to be able to run for President you needed to be a NATURAL born Citizen i.e. born in the USA of TWO citizen parents.
If simply being born in the USA was sufficient then there would have been no need whatsoever for the differentiation and SPECIAL dispensation given to the FIRST generation and the Founding Fathers would have simply said ‘to run for President you need to be born in the USA’. No need to mention NATURAL Born Citizen at all.
BUT THEY DIDN’T.
The USA didn’t exist before 1776. Anyone who was a citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution could run for President, regardless of birthplace.
Apparently, I don’t understand what it means either, since I’ve been told all my life that anyone born on American soil is an American citizen (there may be some caveats for the children of foreign diplomats, I don’t know). You have heard the term “anchor baby”, haven’t you?
Rebecca there is a difference between a NATIVE Citizen which is what Obambi and Anchor Babies are and a NATURAL Born Citizen that needs TWO American Citizen parents AND to be born in the USA.
Read this it will clear it up for you.
http://www.theobamafile.com/ObamaNaturalBorn.htm
He is a natural born citizen.
The basic Obama calculation here is that the House of Representatives would have to impeach him and then 2/3rd of the Senators vote to remove him from office for Congress to impose its will on the executive. There is no way that 2/3rd of the Senators will vote like that so Obama feels very safe. He may also think that Congressmen of both parties, once they get used to this new way of doing business, will be happy to dodge all the tough votes (the same way he did when voting “present” in the Illinois legislature) and let the executive handle highly contentious political issues by fiat.
Obama and other politicians who think like this, however, will be overlooking something important: Lobbyists pay big bucks to US legislators exactly because they think Congress needs to vote for the government to act (or stop acting) in ways their employers dislike. If all that action now moves to the executive branch, lobbyists will start ignoring Congress and begin treating them like the potted plants they have become. At that point even the most loyal Congressional partisans will begin to look at the constitutional impeachment process with a new appreciation for why it’s there.
Obama has now made it plain to even the least perceptive how far he is willing to go to destroy our Constitutional order just because he is too lazy and solitary to play the policy game the same way all his predecessors did — which also happens to be the same way all his predecessors thought the Constitution required them to behave. The next basic step, following as the night does the day, is to use all his new-found executive power to interfere with US elections, especially his own upcoming presidential election. Watch how he acts if come November the polls start to show him facing defeat. He could use Holder’s DOJ to indict Romney (or someone close to Romney) for “mopery with intent to creep” and follow up by claiming “racism” and interfering with how the votes are tallied in the swing states. Once you start thinking about how corrupt political machines operate — about the “Chicago way” — all these tactics come naturally to mind…
“Obama has now made it plain to even the least perceptive how far he is willing to go to destroy our Constitutional order just because he is too lazy and solitary to play the policy game the same way all his predecessors did”
O, rly?
“George W. Bush’s use of signing statements was and is controversial, both for the number of times employed (estimated at over 750 opinions) and for the apparent attempt to nullify legal restrictions on his actions through claims made in the statements — for example, his signing statement attached to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. Some opponents have said that he in effect uses signing statements as a line-item veto; the Supreme Court had previously ruled such vetoes as unconstitutional in the 1998 case, Clinton v. City of New York.”
“Previous administrations had made use of signing statements to dispute the validity of a new law or its individual components. George H. W. Bush challenged 232 statutes through signing statements during four years in office and Clinton challenged 140 over eight years. George W. Bush’s 130 signing statements contain at least 1,100 challenges.”
BUT…the use of executive orders and signing statements has been limited to conduct of war and the military. No one has ever stood up and said they were ordering a department of the government to ignore the law before.
Feralcat at 2., check out:
http://www.redstate.com/ironchapman/2012/05/21/on-this-natural-born-citizen-issue-part-i-from-alexander-hamilton-to-lynch-v-clarke/
It is one segment of a very detailed review of the whole “natural-born” question. It was decided legally a long time ago that “natural born” in the constitutional context means anyone born within a country, regardless of their parents’ status. That is the significance of the Lynch v. Clark. Look it up.
Rubio and Jindal can both run–that is, if we have an election this November at all. Why should we, when we obviously have an emperor now.
An Préachán
No! No! And NO! To be president and vice-president you not only have to be a citizen of the United States, but your parents also have to be citizens. PERIOD!!! End of story!
What is means is (1) a few Hispanics that wouldn’t bother to vote might but it won’t likely effect the fact they’ll vote 7 to 1 for Democrats. However (2) it will greatly enhance Obama’s get out the voter fraud vote drive. Do the math. Give illegals some sort of legal document and, with the Dems fighting the States that are trying to figure out it folks are really eligible to vote (FL for example), and you’ll see the biggest fraud vote in the history of the world – at least outside such staunchly free nations as China, Russia. Sort of along the lines of the USSR.
The real reason Obama announced it now is really to have the time to get the docs out the door and ready for the fraud vote. It’s all about lead time.
It is my suspicion that this move by D’oh-bama will be one thing that will backfire on him. Not sure how, but like all the great master-plans of autocrats, their poorly conceived ideas and actions have unexpected consequences.
And I’m hoping that the republican leadership is meeting to discuss actions against the pRESIDENT. I’m hoping that they get their best legal-beagles on it and come up with a trap for him.
Lord knows we’re having very little headway on Holder.
Romney can’t do it but he needs to sic his 503C on the fact that in a time when tens of millions of Americans are out of work Obama is giving amnesty to nearly a million illegals to take their jobs.
It is now 2-3 million. That would not include all of their relatives and “anchor babies”.
So in other words, our election results will depend upon the Hispanic population and pandering and catering to them at the expense of everyone else. Years ago the Republicans were warned that they were complicit in an immigration policy that was designed to doom them to minority status in perpetuity. The Juan McCains and the rest of them thought that was not possible as long as they continued to boot lick the Hispanic. The rest of us are slowly being disenfranchised in our own country. Relegated to second class status and forced to live with the voting patterns of Hispanics. And people wonder why there is so much anti-immigrant sentiment? No longer represented, relegated to second or third tier status, but being FORCED TO PAY FOR IT ALL. Think there won’t be a civil war in this country very soon? And to add insult to injury all of them qualify for affirmative action and federal subsidies. The madness has got to end.
We really need to get rid of the term “Hispanic” and call this group what they are; Mexicans. “Hispanic” is yet another obfuscatory bulls**t term that the Marxocrats use to confuse the issue. The vast majority of the illegal immigrants to this country from south of the border are Mexicans. We have failed to fix the problem of illegal Mexicans invading this country for generations. The last president to even attempt to stop the invasion was Eisenhower with his “Operation Wetback”. Ever since, every president, including Reagan, let this problem fester and grow. Now we have literally tens of millions of these people causing crime, state and national bankruptcy, economic turmoil, and political instability. As the injustice visited on the American people due to the costs of this invasion continues to build, we may very well see people react in rebellious ways, like vigilantism and secession. In the Hussein era of the Great Depression Version 2.0 anything is possible. All of this illustrates why we simply must remove Hussein and his gaggle of Marxocrat cronies from every office in the land this November or we will truly witness the death of the American Republic.
The Nixon administration is the one that coined the term “hispanic” to create a new minority to compete with the militant victocrat black-block. It backfired when the commie-crats gathered the new minority into their bosom as a new pet victim of whitey.
Also convenient that the FBI’s criminal statistics lump them in with “White”, yet by practically every other metric they are tabulated separately. Clearly this is being done to obfuscate the ethnic disparity in criminal behavior.
well, it’s not going to end – milllions cheer the O’s ‘right thing to do’ – illegally and unconstitutionally ruling by fiat, the whole ends justify the means thing. Meanwhile 46% still think the O is the best thing since sliced bread. Steep slope w him or gradual slope with Romney.
Obama will do anything, absolutely anything, to win this election. Never mind the chaos it creates, never mind the destruction to the economy, never mind the danger from the Middle East. This is all about his re-election. Hey, if the economy is bad, he’ll always be eating. If the Iranians nuke one of our cities, he’ll be protected. It’s about him and it is always about him.
My prediction is that this move will backfire on Obama. Little Zero has a long track record of making similar pronouncements and then nothing happens. There is plenty of time between now and election day for Latinos to see that nothing happened and they’ll be even more unhappy with The One.
I am surprised that the article didn’t talk about the “independent” voters. This must have cost Obama a few of those — heck, even a few Black votes in these tough times. (Oh, but maybe he’s got a goody for them, too.)
Ladies and gentleman, please welcome The President of Certain Demographic Segments of The Unite States of America…
Good one.
“Stroke of the pen, law of the land…..cool!” Isn’t that what James Carville said once about some executive order Bill Clinton signed?
There’s just one problem. Any President that can give you something with the stroke of a pen, can also take it away. Whether it is food, freedom or just plain money.
Most people who have come to this country came from countries where this was the practice. They came here because they didn’t want that anymore. (I know there are exceptions). Maybe people need to remind them of that.
It does kind of remind me of the behavior of the stereotypical Latin American El Jefe. The Big Man is going to fix everything for us, yay! Viva el Presidente! Next thing you know, el Presidente has executed all your friends and you’re trying to escape to el Norte. Despite some of the rhetoric I read around here, I don’t think Obama will turn into a petty dictator. I’m just wondering if he’s counting on Hispanics to think of him as their saviour, the strong man who will make their problems go away and give them everything they want. If so, I hope they’ll see through the ploy.
I think it was Lanny Davis who said, “Stroke of the pen, law of the land, kinda’ cool”.
Who could have thought we’d (or maybe it’s just me)look back at the Clinton days as better. They were certainly less divergent from the norm.
Obama has set this country back by 100 years in race relations.
2010 was the last hurrah for you gringos.
You are aging and dying out; while we are undergoing a population explosion.
We are already 52 million strong; and by 2050 we will be 135 million.
You will be a minority in less than 30 years.
Our Reconquista is nearly complete — and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
Adios gringos.
I believe that’s the most racist thing I’ve read in these forums.
Sure there is: we stop using contraceptives, that’s how.
Same old Race baiting Troll, different thread, a cut and paste Commie,
Bob
La Raza, welcome back. I was afraid Immigration got you. I’ve missed your humor.
Only 52 million? Really? Cool! A couple of years ago it was up to 70 million! That means our depression has sent 18 million of your buds scittering south!
The FOREIGN born and extreme Left Wing Dictator and consummate LIAR Adolph Hitler came to power in Germany democratically and on a wave of hysterical RACE based national delusional madness (ring a bell America?)- once in power he consolidated his POLITICAL control of the Justice Dept and ignored the Constitution, circumvented the Parliament (Congress) by DECREE and eventually made himself DICTATOR. Just as Barry Soetero Kardashian and Eric Holder are doing NOW in the USA.
Coincidence……………..MUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
nvestigator: Foreigners Bought Hawaii Birth Certificates
“The lead investigator for Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s Cold Case Posse – which already has found probable cause that Barack Obama’s publicly released birth certificate is a forgery – says any Hawaii documentation for Obama’s birth that exists would probably be of little value.
Mike Zullo, a retired New Jersey detective now heading Arpaio’s volunteer investigative team, explained in an interview that at the time of Obama’s birth during the state’s early years, Hawaii birth documentation routinely was purchased by foreigners for children not born in the state.
Arpaio’s investigation was launched last September after constituents came to the sheriff with their concern that Obama was ineligible for the presidency and would perpetrate a fraud by placing his name on the state’s ballot. Arpaio’s investigation was launched last September after constituents came to the sheriff with their concern that Obama was ineligible for the presidency and would perpetrate a fraud by placing his name on the state’s ballot.
Zullo’s comments came in an interview with Tea Party Power Hour host Mark Gillar.
Gillar described the process in the 1960s: Foreign nationals, primarily from Japan, would fly to Hawaii and buy a birth registration for their son or daughter, not with the goal of one day having them become president, but to obtain the benefits of being a U.S. citizen.
Zullo said that when he was in Hawaii last month following up on leads, he talked to older locals who “informed us about a syndicate operation, a Mafia operation if you will, being run in the early infancy of the state of Hawaii where birth certificates were being sold to Japanese refugees on a black market basis.”
http://patdollard (dot) com/2012/06/investigator-foreigners-bought-hawaii-birth-certificates/
Trust me. When a thing stinks as bad as this whole Obama history mess stinks, there is some rotten disgusting carcass being carefully hiddden. The mind boggles. Noone goes to this much trouble to NOT claim credit for good things, only to obscure felonies.
I hereby guarantee felonies.
The Idiot-in-Chief better not underestimate Sherrif Joe. Methinks messing with him will be Ostupid’s undoing, yet.
I wonder how this announcement by Obama will play with the millions of immigrants who came here LEGALLY? After all, this just proves that if you wait long enough, there will be an amnesty and eventually you’ll become a citizen without having to go through the process of coming here legally. Will the legal immigrants support this and vote for Obama? And notice you still never, ever, hear Obama mention anything about border security. It’s as if he doesn’t think it’s a problem at all, even after the massive failure of the “Fast and Furious” scandal. We all know Obama is getting desperate and pandering to get the hispanic vote. Trouble is, he is alienating the rest of the country to do so.
Pre-emptive strike indeed, in fact it’s nothing short of a sneak nuclear attack against the fabric of America. And it’s deliberate. Other similies might also be apt. Arsonist. Poisoner. etc.
In Obama’s speech, he describes his trampling of the Constituion as ” “a temporary stopgap measure that lets us focus our resources wisely, while giving a degree of relief and hope to talented, driven, patriotic young people.”
America can give them welfare, jobs, citizenship, and all the loot they can cart away, but now that Obama has introduced this issue so poisonously, there is only one way this treason and blackmail can proceed, and it will be incendiary. Let’s just see how “patriotic” many or most of these Hispanics end up being after Obama guns up the identity politics and embitters them.. Also, just look up the curriculum many of these Hispanics receive in the anti-American public schools in America. Look up the anti-American curricula in LA where students are often taught in Spanish, on such things as the “reconquista” and the racial supremacy of “The Race” or “La Raza”.
Authentic, LEGAL Americans, of both the D or R variety, who still take their Constitution and our laws seriously, must stand up and refuse to go along with this blatant bribery to gain votes. And that’s exactly what Obama wants to create. This is not so much to give Hispanics a place, but to drive a stake through the heart of the nation he has such contempt for.
We will spend the rest of our lives watching these amnestied Hispanics bitching about America and racism because of the firestorm this treasonous bastard has set alight. We won’t see them loving this country any more than all the other embittered sub-groups which the seditious Left has so effectively divided America into. Hatred, ashes, and mayhem are Obama’s goal, so that he can herd and control the captured and divided polity with his odious bribery. with American divided from American and placed into their respective ideological holding cells, Obama becomes King.
Obama is the worst President in all of our history by several orders of magnitude. I’d accept a thousand scumbag Jimmy Carters over one Treasonous Betrayer. I don’t see how it will ever be possible to repair the damage this divisive pig is deliberately ausing.
I was telling people before the 2008 elections that the Democrats would gladly burn the US to the ground as long as they had uncontested control of the throne atop the ashes. They certainly seem to be doing all they can to burn wreck this country between debt, taxes, regulations, and race baiting.
If anyone needs to read more about the USURPER there is a mine of information on him gathered from his first appearance on the scene to the present day here.
http://www.theobamafile.com/indexArchive.html
Nice to see that this is cast in the proper light – politics. I’ve reviewed the politics of immigration reform and compared it with the civil rights movement of the mid 1900′s here:
http://www.cspringsteaparty.org/?p=204
Ron Paul Just Won The Iowa Caucuses Grace Wyler | Jun. 16, 2012
http://www.businessinsider.com/ron-paul-wins-iowa-caucuses-2012-6
This is precisely why the Founding Fathers created a Republic, to curb naked political ambition like Obama’s. Unfortunately, the Democrats a little at a time corrupted that Republic into a Democracy. The two main turning points were FDR and the Great Depression and LBJ and the Great Society. FDR set the stage for people to look to government to solve their problems and LBJ cranked out the free tickets to dependency. It was showing people they could vote themselves a living from the government that made the switch.
Now principle has no place in politics, only a willingness to hand out the most free stuff to the most people. That’s why Obama will very likely win. The county won’t last his second term because there is no way the country can sustain his spending, and it is only going to get worse, the regulations more ruinous, and the intrusions into our lives more extreme and total.
I sent this e-mail to my “supposed” representatives this morning, all liberal democrats.
“The latest attempt at buying the 2012 Presidential election leaves me with the sickening feeling that our country is finished. All this has done is to divide our country even further. If you cannot understand this then you have no business being an elected official. The obvious and unethical method of granting immunity from deportation to approximately 800,000 criminal illegal aliens used by our sitting president rather than by passing legislation through congress makes me ill. 800,000 more LEGAL Americans could potentially lose their jobs to someone who shouldn’t be here in the first place. It is a slap in the face to everyone and/or their ancestors that immigrated into the country LEGALLY. There is nothing the democratic party will not do to buy this election.
It is obvious to me that it is more important to you that the democratic party retain control than for our country to regain its freedom, liberty, and prosperity for all American citizens and those here LEGALLY.
Note: Words that require capitalization of the first letter have been left lower case intentionally.”
Well, you shouldn’t have tried to shame them – they have no shame. You should have appealed to their sense of self preservation. Simply point out that with a president whose so willing to bypass congress – them – they are now redundant and no longer needed. Time for them to grow a set and put the president in his place. Something that EVERY president, whether dem or rep, needs to have nailed home. Remind him there are THREE brnaches of government.
After the first 2.5 months in Afganistan we had the enemy running for the caves, and Pakistan. We should have then came home, and invaded Mexico.
Once the illegal invasion was stopped, we could have then spent 10 years developing the southern border on both sides with a people who want to work. We could have also taken any young men willing to serve in the military in exchange for citizenship. Some of those young men in south America trying to enter Mexico by swimming around the check points could go straight to Force Recon.
Of course, the agenda is to change American culture with the 20 million, or so illegal aliens, and millions of Muhammad followers. So, what do we have?
An energy policy that supports the oil companies with cheap security surronding Iran, a turd world invasion, and Marxist programs. This election can not come fast enough.
I am a racist, white supremacist, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-civil rights, anti-woman, isolationist, protectionist, xenophobic rabid right winger, Tea Party fascist.
Hey, I’m not anti-women!
Who is this sock puppet?
I am a proud racist, white supremacist, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant, anti-civil rights, anti-women’s rights, homophobic, bigot, isolationist, protectionist, xenophobic rabid right winger, Tea Party fascist, neo-Confederate, George Wallace-Republican, and Mitt Romney supporter.
We do not need to pander to hispanics or anyone else. Devote your time, instead,to getting those far greater numbers of politically uninvolved white men to the polls.
The way to do it? Fear. They see Obama as destroying their worlds. Make sure they understand how their lives will be destroyed by this corrupt bunch of clueless academics and communists. They already hate them. Tell them WHY to hate them.
And stop speaking in euphamisms. They don’t understand them. Keep it simple for them. “Obama wants you DEAD!” should suffice. “IF YOU DON”T VOTE FOR Romney, you’ll lose your house and job FOREVER!” will also do nicely. They don’t have a clue what “grow the economy” even means! They are tired of “family values” whatever the hell those are, anyway. Those are shifty, meaningless women’s words, devoid of anything males find valuable.
“This is a CAGE MATCH FOR THE WHOLE WORLD, Brother, and I need you to help me destroy the EVIL USURPER!”
Don’t get too caught up in facts. Obama certainly doesn’t, and National Review never wins elections. Don’t talk like them.
You gringos are fighting a losing battle.
Day by day you are steadily aging, diminishing, dying; while we are exploding in numbers, influence, and power.
We now control our own destiny. You gringos will have to learn how to adjust; you no longer are able to control us. You must step aside and let us determine our own destiny. We are the future; your time has passed. La Reconquista is nearly complete, and there’s nothing you gringos can do to stop it. Adios gringos.
You may be right, but turning a once productive area of the US into a basket case like Northern Mexico really isn’t something to brag about.
You gringos stole the Southwest from us; we are now taking it back.
Fine. You take your land back. We’ll keep the water.
Sheesh, but you Mexicans are dumb! Buncha Spaniards killed off the whole herd of you once upon a time– easily — and you forget that the English then killed off the Spaniards. On a Darwinian survival of the fittest scale, you simply don’t. Frankly, I’m surprised to see anyone posting with the name LaRaza with the intelligence to run a computer, but I’ll bet you’re doing it either on a stolen laptop or a taxpayer-financed free one at your local library.
Hey, La Ra Douche Bag: you can have California and we’ll call it even. Hugs. Me
Actually, we beat Mexico in a war using mostly poorly trained militia and a few regulars and then paid for the land after that. That’s a much better deal than your Spanish ancestors gave most of the Indian tribes. Whole cultures were wiped out in the Caribbean Islands, Amazon, Central America, etc. Millions died in the Caribbean alone.
La Razzza Said: “We now control our own destiny.”
Yup, you actually always have. Number of hispanic success stories via illegal immigration: 0
Percentage of illegitimate births of hispanics every year: 42% (2003)
http://www.cis.org/articles/2007/back507.html
Percentage of hispanics without a high school diploma: 60%
Homicides among hispanics: Second highest in the nation percentage-wise in spite of you lot being only 7% of the population.
The stats go on.
You also said:
“You gringos will have to learn how to adjust; you no longer are able to control us.”
When have we ever tried to “control” you? You mean by enforcing our borders and sending your sorry asses home? Well, that’s nothing compared to what the open toilet known as Mexico does to illegal aliens.
And then you said:
“You must step aside and let us determine our own destiny.”
Wait, I thought you just said “now we control our own destiny”. Which is it? You do or you don’t? Just askin’
And you also said:
” We are the future; your time has passed. La Reconquista is nearly complete, and there’s nothing you gringos can do to stop it. Adios gringos.”
Sounds like a purely parochial statement. In fact, it’s so narrow that it’s immeasurable. They said that about the Spaniards, the French, etc. But those nations still exist and the one thing that the US does differently is that we don’t embrace socialism.
But try this on for size: Let’s have a little thought experiment. Your utopian dream is realized and the entire nation is latino. Doesn’t take much to figure out that that you would divide yourselves between the haves and have nots, “elect” a really zippy politician who talked a good talk but, like Mexico and Spain couldn’t find their ass with both hands and lived on the ever-dwindling tax income taken from the ones of you who work. In short, you’d turn the US into another Mexico and Spain. The numbers of poor would be phenomenal. The poverty, disease, pestilence and crime would go sub-orbital.
Why? Look up the stats. The ones who have would oppress the have-nots, by your own admission. It’s why the have-nots leave Meh-hee-ko to begin with and live “under the radar” in this, the most tolerant nation on Earth. Try it in China, Russia, etc. They’d as soon kill you as look at you. Yet you claim we “have it in” for you and your lot.
What you fail to realize is that an American respects anyone ANYONE who is honest, working to raise a family and being forthright. Why? Because the overwhelming proportion of US citizens came from such stock. My own grandparents were (legal) immigrants who busted their asses so their kids could latch onto the American dream.
But people like you think that the dream is to be GIVEN to you. You did not EARN it…you want to TAKE it and then claim it was rightfully yours to begin with. The US and Meh-hee-ko fought a war….your side lost and we kept the land. That’s how it works, a$$hole. As the years passed, our relationship improved until we got so many of you coming over here looking for freebies.
Where do you think the money comes from for those freebies? And when in the future you so happily espouse will this free stuff keep coming? If all the “gringos” die off, you think you’ll be able to fend for yourselves or will it just look like another open sewer like Guadalupe or Guatemala?
Who developed nuclear power? Mexico or the US?
Who developed a rocket that could take men to the Moon? Mexico or the US?
Who figured out how to mass-produce things on such a scale as to make them affordable to the rest of the world? Mexico?
Who invented and mass-produced the television? Mexico?
Who made cars affordable, fun-to-drive with ridiculously cheap gas? Mexico?
Who invented, refined and mass-produced the airplane? Mexico?
Who developed cutting-edge technology(microchip)that resulted in the personal computer? Mexico?
Who invented the telephone? Mexico?
Where have 99% of all cutting-edge drugs that save lives come from in the past 100 years? Mexico?
I hope you get the point.
While y’all were in the great cesspool of Meh-hee-ko, fighting over each others burros and trying to rape each other’s wives over “honor” and to prove your “machismo”, the US fought two wars, developed the things you take for granted, went to school and educated our young to be producers and contributors to society.
YOU? You produce emotional miscreants who are more concerned about being “bad” and kicking the ass of whatever gang-of-the-day is out to threaten your “turf”.
I’m not impressed, though I have worked with Mexicans who have impressed me and I can call friend. And you know what? They dismiss idiots like you who spout and sputter about taking over.
I’ll be dead and gone but I would love to see what you’ve done with the place if what you say is true and you “inherit” the great piece of real-estate known as the US. You’ll surely wreck it and make it look like the dump you keep running from.
P Jay: Who invented the chalupa?
LA RAZBERRY; You a funny hombre.
IMO Obama’s executive order re immigration increases the liklihood of Rubio being Romney’s VP. Because of Romney’s tough stand against illegal immigration during the primaries, his campaign will feel the need to soften his image among that group. Because Rubio has been proposing immigrationg reforms of his own, he will be seen as less fixed on the issue. Rubio can do campaign ads himself in Spanish. I know the idea of ethnic appeals to voter blocks is (correctly) seen as a negative development by Republicans, but maybe we can beat the Democrats at their own game for a change. Besides Rubio would be a terrific candidate.
As to comments above re Rubio’s required citizenship to run for VP, I say bring it on. The Dems can’t raise the issue without being forced to question Pres Obama’s citizenship qualification to run.
Since when is Mexico a “battleground state”?
La Raza is nothing but a leftist troll posting under that nom de blog to try to get a few bigoted remarks from conservatives. Looks like he succeeded.
I agree with Cedarhill: Obama’s action has to be taken into consideration with Holder’s attempt to facilitate voter fraud. Many states (including mine, California) require very little in order to register to vote. A work permit would do very nicely. Result: masses of young, grateful Mexican nationals illegally voting for Obama (and other Democrats) while Holder prevents the states from discouraging fraudulent voting.
These actions, taken as a whole, are corrupt, criminal, and politically brilliant. I’m afraid he’s got a winner here.
Faral Cat:
Following your comment above that neither Rubio nor Jindal would qualify to be elected either to the vice presidency or the presidency, I referred to my copy of the U.S. Constitution and read that a candidate needs to be at least 35 years of age and a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.
Since “Natural born citizen” was not defined by the Framers, I went to Wikipedia to see what more I could learn.
Here is part of what they had to say:
Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for election to the office of President or Vice President. This requirement was an attempt to allay concerns that foreign aristocrats might immigrate to the new nation and use their wealth and influence to impose a monarchy.
The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. A 2011 Congressional Research Service report stated
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth,” either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.” Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen.[1]
The natural-born-citizen clause has been mentioned in passing in several decisions of the United States Supreme Court and lower courts dealing with the question of eligibility for citizenship by birth, but the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate’s eligibility as a natural-born citizen…
Unless Wikipedia is clearly off-base, I see no Constituional impediment to the selection of Rubio or Jindal as Romney’s running mate.
What am I missing?
You are missing this:-
Obama…
…is not a “natural born” citizen because his father was a Kenyan national and a British subject, as was Obama, “at birth.” The Obama Campaign describes Barack Obama Sr. as, “a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”
…is a “native-born,” 14th Amendment citizen because his mother was an American and he was born in Hawaii — assuming he was born in Hawaii . The Obama Campaign describes Barack Obama as a “native-born citizen” on it’s website.
…is a “citizen” because his mother was an American and he was born in Hawaii — assuming he was born in Hawaii. If Obama was not born in Hawaii, all bets are off.
See: Right there on Obama’s own website, where it says, “The Truth About Barack’s Birth Certificate” — “The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a “native citizen of the United States of America.”
If you cursor down the page, Obama’s dual citizenship status is described:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
And this:-
Law Of Nations
Emmerich de Vattel was a Swiss jurist who attained world preeminence in international law. This was primarily the result of his great foundational work, which he published in 1758. His monumental work — The Law of Nations — applied a theory of natural law to international relations. His scholarly, foundational, and systematic explanation of the Law of Nations was especially influential in the United States.
The Law of Nations was so influential in the United States because his principles of liberty and equality coincided with the ideals expressed in the U. S. Declaration of Independence. In particular, his definitions in terms of Law governing nations regarding citizenship, defense of neutrality, and his rules for commerce between neutral and belligerent states were considered authoritative in the United States.
Many have said that de Vattel’s Law of Nations was THE primary reference and defining book used by the framers of the U. S. Constitution. It is really not possible to overstate the influence of de Vattel’s Law of Nations as the primary reference book in the drafting of the U. S. Constitution. Emmerich de Vattel’s Law of Nations is almost beyond comparison in its value as a defining document regarding U. S. Constitution intent and interpretation. The Law of Nations, or the Principles of Natural Law, published in 1758, is the first, and ONLY, definitive work the Framers of the U. S. Constitution used for the inclusion of the “Natural Born Citizen” phrase. It nails what is meant by the “natural born citizen” phrase of Section 1, Article 2, of the U. S. Constitution.
It is amazing how perfectly, precisely, and explicitly what Emmerich de Vattel, wrote in paragraph 212, of book 1, chapter 19, of The Law of Nations entitled CITIZENS AND NATIONS, applies to the Obama FRAUD. Quite clearly and explicitly it defines why Obama, can NOT possibly be qualified to be the President of the United States. Obama MUST be disqualified from the office of President of the United States according to the U. S. Constitution Section 1 Article 2.
“The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society can not exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as a matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. THE COUNTRY OF THE FATHERS IS THEREFORE THAT OF THE CHILDREN.”
The U. S. Constitution And The Law Of Nations
The defenders of Obama and his questionable eligibility routinely reject the influence of Emmerich de Vattel’s Law of Nations on United States law. However, the Law of Nations is an integral part of and referenced by the U. S. Constitution and court findings.
Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution states, in part: “The Congress shall have Power…To define and punish … Offenses against the Law of Nations;…”
Other references in the law:
“The law of nations forms an integral part of the common law, and a review of the history surrounding the adoption of the Constitution demonstrates that it became a part of the common law of the United States upon the adoption of the Constitution.” — Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, 630 F. 2d 876 — Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1980
“When the United States declared their independence, they were bound to receive the law of nations, in its modern state of purity and refinement.” — Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199, 281 (1796) (Wilson, J.)
Dickenson, “The Law of Nations as Part of the National Law of the United States…” — 101 U.Pa.L.Rev. 26, 27 (1952)
“The plainest evidence that international law has an existence in the federal courts independent of acts of Congress is the long-standing rule of construction first enunciated by Chief Justice Marshall: “an act of congress ought never to be construed to violate the law of nations, if any other possible construction remains ….” — The Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch), 34, 67, 2 L.Ed. 208 (1804), quoted in Lauritzen v. Larsen, 345 U.S. 571, 578, 73 S.Ct. 921, 926, 97 L.Ed. 1254 (1953)
“For two centuries we have affirmed that the domestic law of the United States recognizes the law of nations” — Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 US 692 — Supreme Court 2004
Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court, “The law of nations, as understood by Justice Story in 1824, has not changed” — United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 US 655 — Supreme Court 1992
But Obama’s acolytes, like YOU Dave, will argue none of this matters all day long — insisting that all one needs to be eligible is to be born in the USA.
How hilarious that you cite WIKIPEDIA as a “trusted” source
Theres this too:-
Natural Born Citizen Was Defined In 1789
Attorney, Mario Apuzzo, contends that in defining an Article II “natural born Citizen,” it is important to find any authority from the Founding period who may inform us how the Founders and Framers themselves defined the clause. Who else but a highly respected historian from the Founding period itself would be highly persuasive in telling us how the Founders and Framers defined a “natural born Citizen.” Such an important person is David Ramsay, who in 1789 wrote, “A Dissertation on the Manners of Acquiring the Character and Privileges of a Citizen (1789),” a very important and influential essay on defining a “natural born Citizen.”
David Ramsay (April 2, 1749 to May 8, 1815) was an American physician, patriot, and historian from South Carolina and a delegate from that state to the Continental Congress in 1782-1783 and 1785-1786. He was the Acting President of the United States in Congress Assembled. He was one of the American Revolution’s first major historians. A contemporary of Washington, Ramsay writes with the knowledge and insights one acquires only by being personally involved in the events of the Founding period. In 1785 he published History of the Revolution of South Carolina (two volumes), in 1789 History of the American Revolution (two volumes), in 1807 a Life of Washington, and in 1809 a History of South Carolina (two volumes). In 1965 Professor Page Smith of the University of California at Los Angeles published an extensive study of Ramsay’s History of the American Revolution in which he stressed the advantage that Ramsay had because of being involved in the events of which he wrote and the wisdom he exercised in taking advantage of this opportunity. “The generosity of mind and spirit which marks his pages, his critical sense, his balanced judgment and compassion,” Professor Smith concluded, “are gifts that were uniquely his own and that clearly entitle him to an honorable position in the front rank of American historians.”
In his 1789 article, Ramsay first explained who the “original citizens” were and then defined the “natural born citizens” as the children born in the country to citizen parents. He said concerning the children born after the declaration of independence, “[c]itizenship is the inheritance of the children of those who have taken part in the late revolution; but this is confined exclusively to the children of those who were themselves citizens….” He added that “citizenship by inheritance belongs to none but the children of those Americans, who, having survived the declaration of independence, acquired that adventitious character in their own right, and transmitted it to their offspring….” He continued that citizenship “as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776….”
And This:-
Parents (pl)
In the official copies of the THIRD U.S. Congress (1795) margin notes state “Former act repealed. 1790. ch. 3.” referencing the FIRST U.S. Congress (1790).
Document ONE: the actual text of the THIRD CONGRESS in 1795 states, “…children of citizens [plural, i.e. two parents] of the United States…shall be considered citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States…” (THIRD CONGRESS Sess. II. Ch.21. 1795, Approved January 29, 1795, pp. 414-415. Document margin note: “How children shall obtain citizenship through their parents” Document margin note: “Former Act repealed 1790 ch.3.”) See Attachment A.
Document TWO: the actual text of the FIRST CONGRESS in 1790 states, “…children of citizens (NB: plural, i.e. two parents) of the United States…shall be considered as natural born citizens of the United States; Provided That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons, whose fathers have never been resident in the United States…” (FIRST CONGRESS Sess. II Ch.4 1790, Approved March 26, 1790, pp. 103-104. Document margin note: “Their children residing here, deemed citizens.” Document margin note: “Also, children of citizens born beyond sea, & c. Exceptions.”) See Attachment B.
Document THREE: the actual text of the Constitution from the Continental Congress and the Constitutional Convention, 1774-1789, and subsequent official printings, of the Constitution of the United States of American: Article II Section 1 Clause 5 states:
“No person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President…”
Seems you also MISREAD the laughable WIKIPEDIA too Dave,
Even Wikipedia gets it right:
“It is generally agreed that these constitutional provisions mean anyone born on American soil to parents who are U.S. citizens is a “natural born citizen” eligible to someday become president or vice-president…”
That’s parentS not parent you will see.
Two American parents and on American soil — simple as that.
I will say this DS, that MM or CAP has you prepared for the subjects you comment on. At some point, though, I’d like to hear your own opinions and arguments for or against the topic. You do know you come across a little too prepared-like the subjects are the ones you get paid to comment on. Just say’in.
Tool.
La Raza means the race. That is very racist.
Like other turd world individuals the illegal alien is about division. Changing the facts on the ground to destroy culture. Quicking the pace to region 1 of GATT.
As La Raza is an example of their role. They are even full of hate. Wanting to destroy the government sugar tit that feeds them.
Hey, Leatherneck, my friend: I understand that the most literal translation of La Raza is “limp appendage.”
the hispanic know when their being duped or used as a pawn, we have all woken up to obama’s agenda, we want our country back!!!!!
There is a factual error in Baehr’s analysis. He says the Obama margin of victory among Hispanics in 2008 was “three times as large” as John Kerry’s margin over Bush in 2004. Not so. While early exit polls showed a 44% Bush vote among Hispanics, later more professional analysis of data showed this margin to be only 40%. Thus, in truth, Obama increased the Democrat margin from 60% majority to 68% — clearly far from a 300% increase. Moreover, the Obama margin of 68% was not unprecedented. Clinton earned over 70% of the Hispanic vote against Dole in 1996. In sum, to score an historically unprecedented margin among Hispanic voters, Obama must win 73% or more in November, which is highly unlikely.
…it is incorrect, wildly so, to describe the president as a constitutional lawyer since he never practiced law as such nor has written on the constitution in legal journals or books but only taught constitutional law as a senior lecturer
Pandering works. This is the #1 problem of our age. Everybody panders, including Romney. Nobody tries to critically reason what is best for the country, and convince the majority of that.
About 9-10 million Latinos voted in the 2008 election. That’s out of 131 million total voters, 50 million Latinos (about 30 million are registered voters, if I’m not mistaken) The Latino vote is important, but they’re not make or break.
Turnout will be key. Some Latinos are excited now, but things can change in 5 months. The more cynical among them (including those over the age of 30, let’s say) will ask what they gained from Obama’s stunt. Most of them were not under real threat of deportation. The college will be just as debt ridden and jobless in the market, and they’re still not eligible for some benefits. The job permit is effective for two years.
The game plan doesn’t change for Romney. Focus on the economy, and do nothing to aid the increase of turnout among Latinos. They should feel disillusioned by the economy.
And what is the opposition party saying and doing? The last immigration bill signed into law was under Reagan, and if comprehensive reform had passed the Senate in 2006, it would have been enthusiastically signed into law by Republican President George Bush. Republican elites are pretty much on the same page as Democrats and there is no reason to believe Romney won’t push the same agenda as Bush especially if Rubio is his VP .
I like what Israel is doing about its illegal immigration problem today. Anyone want to explain to us righteous gentiles why we can’t do the same in America?
The Obama presentation of his new process is fascinating. It appears sloppy and leaving a lot out. Anyone could make a better case than he did if given the task to support the measure. I suspect the explanation was meant to be divisive. His explanation would be accepted by most all hispanics and by progressives. The explanation is incomplete and invites attack, but attacks would appear weak to the uncommitted observers.
There are two unnoticed factors. One is the court processing. How much time is there between apprehension and either deportation or release to come up on the court calendar or else completing court action and being allowed to stay? My bad memory tells me the time passage is lengthy and pumps a lot of money into the immigration tort industry.
The second unnoticed factor is that Social Security Suspense Fund has a half of a trillion $ of work credits in it from workers who cannot be identified. Most all of the work is from illegals with bogus SSNs. The SS FICA tax from those work credits cannot be credited to the three SSA Trust Funds. Congress wasnts to zero out the Suspense Fund so they can spend the money. That would involve robbing the workers of their work credit. The Mexican banking system apparently did that with the retirement contribution made by the Bracero workers. Now that they are of retirement age, the earnings from being a Bracero cannot be found.
American Exceptionalism is real. The country is made of itchy-footed, reckless folks. That alone makes us different from everywhere else. We have the New England Patricianism talking about the City on the Hill and philosophical stuff. That keeps Academia and Punditry busy. They landed at Plymouth Rock and carried out all that theory about the right way to live. However, most all of America descends from New Amsterdam, where a shipload of itchy feet was decanted to do what they wanted and no one cared and by the way no one starved. The vacuum of governance was filled by their own ingenuity. After a while, New Amsterdam was a monster of wealth on the East Coast and the British king had to have it, and did. New Amsterdamism spread everywhere. It shaped the giant cultural vacuum that is America. Nationalities get exploded, or something, leaving a residue of interesting food and fun music and festivals and parties. The La Raza and Reconquista folks can say what they want, but they are pursuing it as New Amsterdamers and whatever success they have will be mostly talk because it will be as exploded as all the other nationalistic enthusiasms.
The “undocumented” should be issued 900-series Social Security numbers, with cards saying “undocumented individual.” They should sit down with SSA interviewers to extract everywhere they ever worked, and all the bogus numbers they used so the work credit in the Suspense fund can be allocated to the new 900 number. They will also get a digital photograph and fingerprints added to their 900-number as well as birth information and home country and city. ICE could maximize their daily work by pursuing folks with warrants outstanding, felony convictions, and other persons of interest. As is, there are so many illegals here that they can reproduce faster than ICE and the immigration courts can expel them. With the information then at SSA, a gotcha would be quick. With home country identified, we could send them voters pamphlets for the upcoming elections at home. There could be other fun which could be had.
Not mentioned at all are all the young folks lawfully waiting in the queue. For every person under Obama’s program, a person of similar age etc. should be allowed to jump the queue over older folks to enter the US.
Here in California over-breeders are swarming in like flies, while multiplying their demands as fast as they multiply themselves.
Many of them openly brag about out-breeding the hated gringos and “taking over.” They fantasize a glorious new “bronze empire” — but they’re actually recreating the very mess they came here to escape.
Meanwhile, those who control the media are quite successful in censoring the outrage of most us Californians — so far.
This an obvious attempt to get the Hispanic vote. He doesn’t seem to care about the 36.5% unemployment among 16-19 year old African Americans or the 22 unemployment of White Americans in that age group. I hope he looses more votes in those 2 groups than he gains from the Hispanic community.