Cross posted from Kreeper's Korner
Well, The votes are in and it's safe to say that the Senate Democrats and RINO Republicans are at it again! The Result? An amendment to make English the official Language of the United States of America passes, but is Racist! And another amendment passes which would allow illegal immigrants to collect social security benefits based on past employment, EVEN IF THAT EMPLOYMENT WAS OBTAINED USING FRAUDULENT OR STOLEN IDENTIFICATION!But in the end nothing was done, and here's why:
First up, the bill to make English the National Language of the United States.
Sounds great, right? English SHOULD be the official language of the United States of America. Our road signs and government documents will finally be mandated to be English only now, right? Now our schools will be required to teach students English, right?
Senate Approves English as 'National' Language
An amendment to the Senate immigration bill would make English the "national language of the United States." The Senate voted 63-34 to adopt the amendment, which was offered by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.).
The measure declares that there is no affirmative right to receive services in languages other than English, except where required by federal law. In other words, the amendment is mostly symbolic — it will not change the way the government prints documents or conducts business.
Critics, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, called the Inhofe amendment racist, regardless of its intent. Sen. John McCain worried about making English the "official" language. "It gives the idea that any other language is excluded," he said.
That's right, the amendment does nothing. Most government documents that are already in English and Spanish will remain that way, but it's considered worrisome and racist. So what is the point of this amendment. Well, the Senate HAS HEARD YOU! They know you're pissed off and that you want something done. So the solution of the Washington Elite? We'll say we're doing something and do nothing and those rubes in the population won't pay any attention to the details.
But here's the kicker: The Republican amendment, which again does little or nothing other than pay lip service to the idea of a national language, is a RACIST amendment. That's right America, according to Harry Reid, YOU ARE A RACIST if you believe that English should be the national language and that immigrants who come here and want to succeed in life should learn to speak it.
Harry Reid is, in effect, calling about 84% of Americans, 77% of Hispanics, 92% of Republicans and 82% of Democrats racists.
Harry Reid: While the INTENT might not be there, I really believe this amendment is racist. I think it's directed, basically, to people who speak Spanish. I can remember once being so frustrated. I was a guest in a hotel. Now, I had locked myself out of my room, and there was a lady pushing the cart, and I told her I'd like to get back in my room. She did not know what I was saying! She could not converse with me in Spanish! So as luck would have it, here comes one of my sons. The minute he spoke to her in Spanish, her whole demeanor changed. She became a different person, because, through my son, we could communicate.
Senator Reid, what happened to your previous ideas regarding Illegal Immigration?
A Drudge Blast from the Past:
Reid's bill, the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993, overhauls the nation's immigration laws and calls for a massive scale-down of immigrants allowed into the country from approximately 800,000 to 300,000.
"Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs," Reid said. "The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement."
"Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes."
"Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world. Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally," Reid said.
Specific provisions of Reid's Immigration Stabilization Act include the following:
— Reduces annual legal immigration levels from approximately 800,000 admissions per year to about 300,000. Relatives other than spouse or minor children will be admitted only if already on immigration waiting lists and their admission does not raise annual immigration levels above 300,000.
— Reforms asylum rules to prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally under phony "asylum" claims.
— Expands list of felonies considered "aggravated" felonies requiring exclusion and deportation of criminal aliens. Allows courts to order deportation at time of sentencing.
— Increases penalties for failing to depart or re-entering the United States after a final order of deportation order. Increases maximum penalties for visa fraud from five years to 10 years.
— Curtails alien smuggling by authorizing interdiction and repatriation of aliens seeking to enter the United States unlawfully by sea. Increases penalties for alien smuggling.
— Adds "alien smuggling" to the list of crimes subject to sanctions under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. Expands the categories of property that are forfeited when used to facilitate the smuggling or harboring of illegal aliens.
— Clarifies that a person born in the United States to an alien mother who is not a lawful resident is not a U.S. citizen. This will eliminate incentive for pregnant alien women to enter the United States illegally, often at risk to mother and child, for the purpose of acquiring citizenship for the child and accompanying federal financial benefits.
— Mandates that aliens who cannot demonstrably support themselves without public or private assistance are excludable. This will prevent admission of aliens likely to be dependent on public financial support. This requirement extends to the sponsor of any family sponsored immigrant.
— Increases border security and patrol officers to 9,900 full-time positions.
By the way, if this woman had bothered to learn to speak the language of the vast majority of the people who live in this country then she would have been able to converse with you. Here's another thing. How does this lady know how to do her job and how does she converse with her bosses when she can't speak English?
By not speaking English, she is forcing more and more people to have to learn Spanish as part of their job requirements. Just look at the story of Zita Wilensky who worked for Miami-Dade County for 16 years and was referred to by co-workers as "the gringa," as the only white person in the County Unit.
Zita was told she had to speak Spanish in the office. She was given 60 days to learn. After 30 days her boss disguised her voice and called her.
Zita says, "So she called pretending to be someone who didn't speak English. And when you could not communicate she fired you? Yes…that's how it happened."
According to a county document, Zita was fired for transferring the call to the clerk's office. Zita said she transferred it because she wanted what she thought was a Spanish speaking caller to talk to someone.
Either way, despite her protests, after 16 years with the county, Zita was fired and replaced by an Hispanic.
THIS is plain ole discrimination and it's "okay" because it was discrimination against an white American citizen who doesn't speak a language that isn't common in the United States of America.
But there's more, later on in the day, another "English" amendment came up and was passed:
Also on Thursday — confusing the issue — the Senate also voted 58-39 in favor of a second, weaker amendment, offered by Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.). The Salazar amendment declared English to be "the common and unifying language of the United States."
This time, there is no "racist" rhetoric from Mr. Reid because this amendment was offered by a Democrat and doesn't do ANYTHING AT ALL except make a statement that English is the common language.
Earth to America: THE SENATE IS PANDERING TO YOU AND THINKS YOU'RE TOO STUPID TO NOTICE!
"Today's vote heeded the voices of the vast majority of Americans who believe that English is a crucial part of being an American," said Mauro Mujica, chairman of the board of U.S. English.
U.S. English points to a 2005 Zogby International poll showing that 79 percent of Americans support making English the official language of the United States, including more than two-thirds of Democrats and four-fifths of first- and second-generation Americans.
"The debate on the Senate floor today contained many different viewpoints, but the senators were unanimous in their belief that English is the unifying factor and the key to opportunity in the United States," said Mujica.
Not exactly Mr. Mujica. Pretty much every member of the Democratic Party in the Senate voted AGAINST making English the official language of the United States of America, and they instead voted in favor of making a worthless statement that English is the common language.
Let's look at it this way. If you move to Mexico, you are required to learn Spanish or you cannot receive any kind of government assistance or get a driver's license, etc. Here in America, we care enough to understand that if you are here, you might not YET be able to speak English. So we'll help you out. The problem is that there is little or no incentive to learn our language, so fewer and fewer immigrants are learning the language.
"Without a common language, we are not a nation of immigrants, but instead groups of immigrants living in a nation." – Mauro Mujica, chairman of the board of U.S. English.
Mr. Mujica us absolutely correct. America is starting to see localized and separated regions where ethnic groups are congregating and isolating themselves. We're not a melting pot anymore, we're a nation of small pockets of ethnic groups and one larger pocket of Americans. We're not coming together at a nation we're congregating into smaller groups of hyphenated-Americans.
Another advocacy group, English First, called the Inhofe amendment "the only serious approach to the language issue."
English First criticized the 25 U.S. senators who voted for Inhofe's amendment – then immediately undercut their votes by also approving Salazar's amendment.
"These weathervanes may think they have fooled their constituents back home by voting both for and against the Inhofe amendment. We'll see," said Jim Boulet Jr., Executive Director of English First.
I don't think that the American people are that stupid, but only time will tell. but what do you notice about this list of Republicans who tried to "sit on the border fence" on this issue:
Republicans accused of undermining the Inhofe amendment include Brownback (Kan.), Chafee (R.I.), Coleman (Minn.), DeWine (Ohio), Graham (S.C.), Hagel (Neb.), McCain (Ariz.), Murkowski (Alaska), Snowe (Maine), Specter (Penn.), Voinovich (Ohio), and Warner (Va.).
That's right, they're RINOs, all of 'em. These are people who run as republicans, and then sit on the fence because they can't run as Independents or Democrats in their home constituencies. They are fence-sitters at best and Democrats at worst. But there is cause for hope and some cause for alarm:
Legislation pending in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 997) also would make English the official language; that bill now has about 150 co-sponsors.
More than half of the states have passed laws making English the official language. The American Civil Liberties Union has successfully challenged some of those laws on the grounds that they unconstitutionally deny non-English speakers "fair and equal access to their government ."
And then there's the Socialist Security Problem!
Yes, SOCIALIST SECURITY. Why did I call it Socialist Security? Well, because that's what it is. Karl Marx would be proud of the Socialist Security system in America. It's nothing more than a GIANT redistribution of wealth from those who earn it to those who are retired or no longer working. It was also a system built to ensure Socialist control over the government here in America as well. Hence Socialist Security.
Built from the ground up as a Government Wealth Redistribution system, those who are working to provide for themselves are also tasked with providing for the welfare of those who are not working or cannot work. So it's Socialist Security in the fact that it's firmly grounded in Socialist ideals.
But wait, there's more! Since it was written into law, Socialist Security has been a tool for the buying of votes and SECURING the power of Socialists everywhere. Look at how Socialist Security has become the Third Rail of American Politics. Ever election cycle it's trotted out as a blunt object with which to bludgeon conservatives about the head. "Why, he wants to cut your social security old folks!" or "He'd cut your social security poor disabled person!"
Now, anyone who's keeping track here will be able to tell you that Socialist Security is in trouble. It's underfunded due to the slow aging of American Society (thanks Abortion! Whatta pal!) and that fact that the Baby-boomer generation didn't exactly boom out any babies of their own. The end result is that fewer and fewer people are working and contributing to the so-called "trust fund" and more and more people are holding out their hands for the fruits of the labors of others.
So we're rapidly approaching a time when a decision will have to be made to either cut benefits to everyone participating the the Socialist Security system or taxes will have to be raised on everyone else. Knowing this, how much sense does it make to grant illegal immigrants access to the Social Security system?
Well, that's what the Senate has voted to do!
The Senate voted yesterday to allow illegal aliens to collect Social Security benefits based on past illegal employment — even if the job was obtained through forged or stolen documents.
Yes, you read that right. If you broke the law by crossing the border illegally, worked illegally, and got that job by breaking the law and using stolen or fraudulent social security numbers or identification, you will be able to collect social security thanks to the United States Senate.
"There was a felony they were committing, and now they can't be prosecuted. That sounds like amnesty to me," said Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican who offered the amendment yesterday to strip out those provisions of the immigration reform bill. "It just boggles the mind how people could be against this amendment."
The Ensign amendment was defeated on a 50-49 vote.
An amendment to the Senate Illegal Immigration reform bill that would not allow criminals to profit from their crimes was defeated by 1 vote in the Senate, meaning that both Democrats AND Republicans voted against it.
In effect, the new bill would make Identity Theft little more than something an illegal has to do in order to get a job in America and secure his place in the Socialist Security soup line.
"We all know that millions of undocumented immigrants pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for years and sometimes decades while they work to contribute to our economy," said Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican.
"The Ensign amendment would undermine the work of these people by preventing lawfully present immigrant workers from claiming Social Security benefits that they earned before they were authorized to work in our community," he said. "If this amendment were enacted, the nest egg that these immigrants have worked hard for would be taken from them and their families."
You can always count on Senator McCain to say something ignorant and stupid. Let's examine that statement, shall we?
First we'll tackle the idea that "we know" that these people are paying taxes? Do we? How do we know that these people are paying any taxes? If they are working with stolen or fraudulent identification, how do we know who is paying the taxes?
Second, even if they are working legally and are legally entitled to work in America, since when does that qualify anyone for Socialist Security?
And finally, the comment that "If this amendment were enacted, the nest egg that these immigrants have worked hard for would be taken from them and their families." is utter ignorance. A "nest egg" is a little something that someone puts away for their own retirement or for a rainy day. It's theirs. They build it, save it, and depend on it later in life. Socialist Security is not a "nest egg." It's a Socialist Wealth Redistribution system that is broken. Oh, and there is no Socialist Security Trust Fund. It was rolled into the General Budget by President Lyndon Johnson (Democrat) and the democratically controlled House and Senate in 1968 in an attempt to "float the budget" during the Vietnam War.
Mr. Ensign was among 44 Republicans and five Democrats who voted to block such payouts.
"It makes no sense to reward millions of illegal immigrants for criminal behavior while our Social Security system is already in crisis," said Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican. "Why in the world would we endorse this criminal activity with federal benefits? The Senate missed a big opportunity to improve this bill, and I doubt American seniors will be pleased with the result."
Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat, said it would be unfair to deny illegals the benefits.
"We should not steal their funds or empty their Social Security accounts," he said. "That is not fair. It does not reward their hard work or their financial contributions. It violates the trust that underlies the Social Security Trust Fund."
Here's the bottom line. In order to pander to the so-called "Hispanic Vote," the Democrats and a few RINO Republi-crats are willing to open the Socialist Security system to illegal immigrants who either committed Identity Theft or Fraud. They are going to reward these crimes with inclusion in a program that is already broken and may well not be here when they retire anyway.
Within hours, the vote had become an issue in this fall's elections, raised by a Republican challenger to Sen. Debbie Stabenow, Michigan Democrat.
"Instead of protecting the retirement security of Americans who are earning an honest living and abiding by the laws of our country, Debbie Stabenow sided with people who are here illegally and abuse our Social Security system," Oakland County, Mich., Sheriff Michael Bouchard said in a press release. "Allowing illegal immigrants to use their illegal work history as credit towards receiving Social Security benefits shows that Debbie Stabenow has forgotten who she is supposed to be working for in the U.S. Senate."
A great point! Who are these Senators representing when they voted for this bill? It surely wasn't the vast majority of the American populous that is angry and fuming over the issue. It's the businesses who want to pay THIRD WORLD WAGES to workers here in America. It's the people who marched in the streets on May Day (a communist holiday, by the way) demanding to exempted from the laws of our land.
How is America benefited by further taxing the Socialist Security system by letting people who break the law raid the program based on years of criminal activity?
On Wednesday, senators narrowly approved an amendment to require a foreign worker to have a job lined up in the United States before applying for a green card. The purpose, supporters say, is to ensure that the job market isn't flooded with foreign workers. Also, it prevents foreign workers from coming to the United States only to wind up unemployed and dependent on public assistance.
But yesterday, the Senate essentially gutted that amendment by allowing foreign workers to apply for permanent residency without having a job lined up.
Both of these provisions reside in the same bill. This is how far political double speak has come in America today. They go so far as to include amendments to the bill that basically cancel each other out and make it a meaningless exercise in pandering and vote seeking.
So you can come to America if you have a job lined up, but you can apply for permanent residency without having a job lined up? What's the point? If they are so-called "guest workers," then doesn't it stand to reason that they should be here WORKING? No, we can't discriminate against a guest worker who isn't actually a worker… That wouldn't be politically correct of us.
No, we must allow anyone who wants to come to America and partake in our expansive Socialist Welfare State come to our shores. We must have victims and those susceptible to vote buying in order to regain/retain our political power!
"What that means is that up to 200,000 unskilled workers a year would become eligible for a green card, regardless of economic conditions, regardless of whether that worker has been actually employed for four years, and most importantly, regardless of whether there are unemployed U.S. workers available to fill those jobs," said Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican.
EXACTLY! How is it that Democrats and Republi-crats don't see this? There are 7.1 Million unemployed Americans out there who could be working and should be working. And yet we're wasting our time with "Guest welfare recipient" programs, "guest worker" programs, and "Guest voter" programs. All for the sake of political power. We should be putting Americans to work instead of keeping them on welfare and if there is room left after that, then think about allowing people to come here and work.
So what can WE do about this?
Well, contact your Senator and express displeasure. Contact President Bush and DEMAND that he not support Amnesty, Socialist Security for illegal immigrants, and tell him to seal up the border while you're at it. Contact your Representatives in the House, and above all, keep informed.
Here is a list of all the Senators who voted for this completely ignorant and foolish legislation. If your Senator voted for this travesty, vote against them. Plug your nose and vote for the other guy, otherwise we can look forward to seeing this kind of Politically Correct crap from the Senate for years to come.
Senators Voting YEA on Senate Bill 2611
| Democrats |
Republicans |
Independent |
Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Clinton (D-NY)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dayton (D-MN)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Wyden (D-OR)
|
Bennett (R-UT)
Chafee (R-RI)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
DeWine (R-OH)
Domenici (R-NM)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA) |
Jeffords (I-VT) |
**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let me know at what level you would like to participate.
Like this:
Like Loading...
. I am told that a real Christian would not support in the fight against illegal immigration. Let me put it like this. If someone comes into your home uninvited eats your food, takes your money steals your job and even your identification; as a Christian what would you do? If you see someone breaking the law as a Christian what would you do? On the other hand if you see someone hungry, hurt, in need of help? What would you do? I would have to help the hurting person. Ok, but it is my duty as a Christian to help someone break the law, to turn the other cheek as some would say? I think this is a matter of opinion and that it is a choice having to do with what that person feels inside as to whether they should choose to join in the fight. It is not for anyone to say who is and isn't a Christian. It is up to the individual what they chose to do or not to do. If you look at it in terms of the law, what illegal invaders are doing is a violation. Who are you to tell me or anyone else that what I am doing is wrong? Who am I to tell you or any one else that what they are doing is wrong, unless it is a direct violation of the law. You Choose.
And I’m sure many of you do not agree with me, and that’s OK. But one thing I have begun to realize is that no one cares anymore about themselves. I am not saying to be selfish is the goal. But, to truly look out for our children, and taking our current societal decay into account, are we really making a better world for them? Is their future sound? Are my two daughters going to be able to go out at night and be safe? Can my girls take a Senior Trip in High School and come home – not end up kidnapped and dead?
This is not what I teach my children.
Coalition Against Illegal Immigration 
Recent Comments