Worcester County Freedom Trail

Both the Boston Globe and Boston Herald have reported that Deval Patrick is trying to jump over the legislature to give in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. This is outrageous.

We need a movement to stop Deval. Signing this petition below is just a small, small start. The louder we are, the more effective we will be.

Here is the link http://www.massgop.com/GetActive/Petition.aspx to sign the petition.

The race for Worcester City Council is a bit over the top this year. There are about 20 candidates running because the general sentiment around town is to throw most of the bums out.

I can’t say as I disagree. With the exception of Mayor Konnie Lukes, who’s trying to keep the lunacy to a minimum, the rest of the City Council should be swept out of office. They can’t stop their spending-spree long enough to balance a budget. And now we’re going to stop enforcing the law regarding illegal aliens? Give me a break.

This is an interesting statement from City Council candidate Bill McCarthy, a terrorism expert and former State Trooper:

Dr. Bill McCarthy, candidate for Worcester City Council, announced that he will push for a Zero Tolerance Policy on Illegal Immigration in Worcester.  McCarthy sees the issue of illegal immigration as one that threatens our local economy, security, public safety and the city’s fiscal well being.

“For years we have waited for the federal government to take action on this issue.  Meanwhile the population of illegal immigrants continues to grow and strain our city’s budget.  The next city council must take aggressive action and I plan to lead on the issue,” stated McCarthy.  “Our city’s fiscal health is in jeopardy along with the public safety of our citizens, if we don’t.”

McCarthy’s Zero Tolerance Plan includes:
•    Making English the official language of Worcester,
•    Limiting the number of families living in single-family homes and fining landlords who rent to illegal aliens,
•    Passing a city ordinance that only allows two cars per household to be parked on city streets overnight,
•    Enacting a city ordinance requiring police to impound a car and fine a driver without a license or insurance $500,
•    Mandatory employer verification of worker eligibility or employer jeopardizes various city permits,
•    Lobbying the state and federal government for more law enforcement

Works for me!

How interesting. Senator John McCain appears to have realized the error of his ways when he backed the “what security?” immigration bill recently proposed and voted down by the Senate. Senators Graham and Kyl seem to have changed course as well. Here’s the story on GOPUSA:

Republican presidential hopeful John McCain on Thursday backed a scaled-down proposal that imposes strict rules to end illegal immigration but doesn’t include a path to citizenship.

The move away from a comprehensive measure is an about-face for the Arizona senator, who had been a leading GOP champion of a bill that included a guest worker program and would have legalized many of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in the U.S. It failed earlier this year.

”We can still show the American people that we are serious about securing our nation’s border,” McCain said in a statement, adding that the new bill would ”provide an essential step toward achieving comprehensive reform in the future.”

McCain’s immigration position has been a campaign liability among Republican voters and hurt his efforts to raise money. Other GOP presidential candidates, fellow Arizona Republicans and immigration opponents throughout the country have loudly decried his position.

Observers said McCain’s switch was political. ”He recognizes his position on the issue is killing him,” said Steven Camarota, research director at the Center for Immigration Studies, which favors vigorous immigration enforcement.

McCain’s co-sponsors include Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Jon Kyl of Arizona. All three were leading advocates for the unsuccessful comprehensive immigration measure and were bombarded with criticism for their support.

Not sure how the plan stacks up overall, but at least they’re starting to listen to the voice of the people!

I am all for helping our fellow citizens of the world carve out a comfortable space to live and raise their families. But I am absolutely NOT for this latest Senate amnesty bill. It had so many holes in it, it might as well have been an open border itself.

The good news is that the Senate saw the error of its ways and the amnesty bill went down in flames today (again). This just in on Townhall.com:

White-House backed legislation to grant legal status to millions of illegal aliens failed to get the 60 Senate votes needed to proceed to a final vote of passage late Thursday morning.

It fell 14 votes short, 46-53

Many senators speculated that the controversial legislation may not be revisited until after the 2008 elections. Sen. Jim DeMint (R.-S.C.), a fierce opponent of the bill, noted on the Senate floor that the sergeant-at-arm’s office had informed him that because so many constituents had called the Senate in the run-up to the cloture vote, their phone system had crashed that morning.

That’s a lot of calls to crash the Senate phone system! I know my husband was one of the callers (I prefer email, myself). He called several Senators who were on the fence to calmly explain that this bill is wrong for the US and for immigrants (legal and illegal). It is so wrong that we would gladly send our political donations to any candidate running against those who were in favor of it. Republicans, Independents, Democrats…doesn’t matter. About an hour after his calls, Townhall reported that at least one of the Senators he called has changed his mind and would now vote against cloture.

From NRO Corner:

Ted Kennedy on Immigration [Mark Krikorian]

1965: “The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”
1986: “This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.”

2007: “Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system.”

UPDATE:

Mark Krikorian posts this on NRO Corner on 6/1/2007:

I posted three quotes by Ted Kennedy on immigration last month, but the second one, supposedly about the 1986 amnesty, does not appear to be genuine. I got it from a normally reliable source, but it was one of those “too good to check” things; we’ve been looking for the source since then and can’t find it. It was an amatuerish mistake and there’s no excuse for it. I apologize.

Our elected representatives are about to give us one of the biggest slaps in the face yet when they vote to give amnesty to the nearly 10 million illegal aliens here in the US. It’s bad enough that our government won’t listen to the will of the people on this issue. They’re also going to hit us in the pocketbook to the tune of $2.5 trillion.

Some 50 to 60 percent of illegal immigrants lack a high school degree. Granting amnesty or conditional amnesty to illegal immigrants would, overtime, increase their use of means-tested welfare, Social Security and Medicare. Fiscal costs would go up significantly in the short term but would go up dramatically after the amnesty recipient reached retirement. Based on my current research, I estimate that if all the current adult illegal immigrants in the U.S. were granted amnesty the net retirement costs to government (benefits minus taxes) could be over $2.5 trillion.

Read the detailed analysis on National Review.

This interesting bit of information comes from Commercial Online out of Memphis.

US Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn) introduced legislation Monday that would prevent illegal immigrants from receiving credit cards from American financial institutions. The Photo Identification Security Act would require banks to use what Blackburn calls “secure forms of identification” to obtain credit.

This action is in response to Bank of America’s push to provide credit cards to more Hispanic residents of the US, whether legal residents or not.

Read the full article online.

File this under, “hard to believe.” From Judicial Watch:

Florida Democratic State Senator Frederica Wilson has authored and submitted a law (SB 2145) that would make it illegal to use the term illegal alien in any state document and would prohibit the term’s use by a state agency or official. If the Florida legislature passes the bill, the law would take effect in July. Wilson says she personally finds the word alien offensive when applied to individuals because, to her, an alien is someone from “out of space.”

So, the national news is filled the rantings of an idiot legislator who knows only the Hollywood definition of the word “alien,” and for whom the concept of “illegal” gives no pause for thought. Give me a break.

Brent Anderson’s crew spent today’s noon-time radio show on WTAG talking about the topic. Other than Randall, who really does seem to be on the show for comic relief, the show did a good job of highlighting the problem with “illegal aliens.” They are living under the radar, not paying taxes, committing a lot more crimes than the average citizen, and sucking up services (like emergency room health care) for which we legal Americans foot the bill.

On top of that, we’re going to penalize the people who are trying to legally gain entry by nearly tripling the fees involved. Apparently getting into the US illegally is so easy that fewer people are trying to get here legally. As a result, the government bureaucracy that handles immigration now can’t balance it’s budget. This from Fox News:

Under a proposal by the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, a green card or an adjustment to residency status would cost $905, up from the current $325. Green card holders, or permanent residents, who want to become citizens, would pay $595, up from $330.

USCIS Director Emilio T. Gonzalez, who testified before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law on Feb. 14, said the agency’s daily operations are supposed to be paid with the revenues generated by application fees each year. Those revenues are falling short and are preventing the agency from modernizing and meeting efficiency goals.

Has anyone noticed how quickly Gov Elect Deval Patrick is starting to look like John Kerry? Patrick campaigned on promises of cutting property taxes and increasing public safety. But he isn’t even in office yet and already he’s working on increasing meal taxes and undermining safety.

The latest flip-flop is his promise to rescind Gov Mitt Romney’s agreement with federal authorities that will allow specially trained Massachusetts State troopers to arrest suspected illegal immigrants and charge them with violating US immigration laws.

According to the Boston Globe, “Patrick believes that deputizing troopers to enforce immigration laws would add another burden that is ‘impractical and unwise.’”

Romney stated, “The scope of our nation’s illegal immigration problem requires us to pursue and implement new solutions wherever possible. State troopers are highly trained professionals who are prepared to assist the federal government in apprehending immigration violators without disrupting their normal law enforcement routines.”

I agree. Safety begins at home. I know a number of our troopers and they are great people who work diligently to protect the citizens of Massachusetts. We can’t sit around waiting for the federal government to do everything. Apparently Deval Patrick thinks otherwise.

Take note all of you people working in tall buildings in Post Office Square!

That’s the title of  Dennis Prager’s latest column.

I’ve got a long-running debate with a conservative friend of mine. He believes we have to put up “moderate” Republican candidates, because those are the only ones who can win. He says this despite the all of the evidence to the contrary. People who stand for the right things, like Ronald Reagan, are the most electable of all. OK, sure, make adjustments for being in a heavily blue state, but the principal still holds.

But once the candidates are in place, my firm belief is that you vote for the most truly conservative candidate who has a chance of being elected. Even if he/she isn’t particularly conservative. And work from within the party, the legislature, etc to move it rightward.

Sure, I get emotional. Like I swore I was not going to vote for President Bush in 2004 because he signed that unconstitutional abomination, McCain-Feingold “Campaign Finance Reform.”

But I voted for him anyway. Did Bush deserve my vote in 2004? No. But he got it because it was absolutely critical for the United States and for Western Civilization that he, and not John Kerry, be in the White House.

There are some conservatives now who are so angry with Republicans for being little better than Democrats on border control, immigration, government spending, throttling the first amendment (oops, sorry…”campaign finance reform”), standing up to political correctness, and a whole host of other issues, that they are talking of staying home en mass to send Republicans a message from the base. I perfectly understand…believe me I do.

There are times in history when I might go along with such a move, risking, perhaps hoping, to put the opposition in power in order to shake up those who are supposed to represent us.

This is not one of those times. Either of just two issues should be enough for you to vote Republican next Tuesday:

Federal judges, and World War IV.

(OK, everyone still calls it the “War on Terror” even though they know it isn’t, but (counting the Cold War) it is World War IV.)

We cannot afford to have those who look down their noses on Western Civilization in power, either conducting foreign policy, or appointing our judges.

Which is why I voted for Bush in 2004. And why you must all get out on Tuesday, and vote Republican.

And don’t think that it doesn’t matter in a blue state. Kerry Healey is certainly behind, but not nearly as much as the polls show. We’ve got some strong Republicans running for the state house, and we need more than the 25% we have there. And don’t think the Dems in the state house don’t look at how much they win by. 75% Dems in the state house will vote a lot more cautiously over the next two years, and will be more inclined to vote to let us vote on the Marriage Amendment, if their election day margins are thin, than if they are fat.

For a very eloquent (as always) and educational run-down of why even the most die-hard conservatives should get out and vote Republican in 2006, read Dennis Prager’s latest column at Townhall.