Skip to content

President Obama, Shamelessly and Hypocritically Lying. Again.

August 1, 2010

My latest post at RedState:

President Obama gave an interview to CBS on Sunday, wherein he attempted to explain his stance against Arizona’s SB 1070 Immigration bill. Still no word on whether or not he’s actually read the bill yet, but based on his inane murmurings, I’d have to go with No. But, to be fair, during the interview he did display a few things that he does quite well: shameless lying and absolute hypocrisy. You see, President Obama had the utter gall to say that we shouldn’t demagogue nor politicize a national problem like immigration reform. No, really. My jaw dropped too and I thought to myself “could he possibly be that shameless?” Apparently, yes:

In a CBS interview broadcast Sunday, President Obama slammed approaches to immigration reform he said “demagogue” a “national problem.”

He also defended progress in the administration’s suit against Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law — an action that states that the controversial measure flouts the federal government’s imperative under the ’supremacy’ clause of the constitution.

Does the Smartest Man Alive ™ not know the meaning of the word demagogue? He is the Demagoguer In Chief, for goodness sake. And the entire Democrat party falls in demagogue-y lockstep right behind him. Incessant race card playing? Fear mongering? Sound familiar, President? That comes from you and your fellow Democrats who brand anyone who merely disagrees with you on policy – ever- as racist. You also use demagoguing in tandem with fear to politicize every issue and further your own agendas. Remember what you said about the law when first passed, Mr. President? You tried to tell people that they’d be scooped up and whisked away, for no reason whatsoever, when out getting ice cream with their children.

You allowed a foreign leader to demagogue, denigrate and demonize Arizona from our house floor. Democrats not only allowed it, they applauded it and gave Calderon sycophantic, grand-standing ovations. Once again proving they stand up for anything but America. And it was/is Democrats who are actually wearing demagogue jewelry in the form of Arizona bashing bracelets. It is Democrats, including you, Mr. President, who have made fear mongering hyperbole almost an art form. You demagogue to the point of Godwinning yourselves constantly. Plus, you know, the outright lying as contained in this statement made during your interview today:

“What we can’t do is allow a patchwork of 50 different states, or cities or localities, where anybody wants to make a name for themselves suddenly says, ‘I’m going to be anti-immigrant, and I’m going to try to see if I can solve the problem ourself.’”

No one is anti-immigrant. That is an outright lie. There is a difference between legal immigration and illegal immigration. You sniff haughtily, in your usual holier than thou manner, about icky people “politicizing” issues. Meanwhile, you actually lie in order to politicize. For a Harvard graduate, you don’t have a great grasp of words nor their meaning.

This epitomizes why there truly is no having a dialogue with the left. Intellectual honesty isn’t their strong suit. Of course, this wouldn’t even be an issue if the federal government was doing its job — its primary job, in my opinion — and protecting our borders, not leaving states to resort to trying to do it themselves with far more limited resources. And then suing said States, all while gleefully demonizing them – for passing a law necessitated by the fact that the federal government themselves refused to act – and then feigning righteous indignation over “politicizing” and “demagoguery”.

Before preaching to everyone else, I suggest you learn the meaning of the words and the accusations that you toss about willy nilly. I also suggest Hypocrite, Heal Thyself.

30 Comments leave one →
  1. Mike permalink
    August 1, 2010 8:39 pm

    Lori,

    Could expect anything less of no-drama Obama.

  2. August 1, 2010 10:11 pm

    I just wish we stopped talking about everything and someone actually start asking him these questions in interviews. “Why do you lie about such things?”
    “Why do you keep bowing to everyone?”
    “Why DID you allow another President to address our congress?”
    “Why don’t you love America?”

  3. Molten permalink
    August 2, 2010 11:14 am

    Lori says:

    “No one is anti-immigrant. That is an outright lie.”

    So, now you’re denying the existence of white supremacy organizations, and anti-immigrant groups in this country?…WOW.

    Jan Brewer is the liar and fear-monger, Lori.

    1. In her inaugural address, Brewer promised not to raise taxes in Arizona. Fewer than two months into her term, however, Brewer proposed a tax increase in front of the State Legislature, causing two Republican members to walk out of the address mid-speech.

    2. Jan Brewer said: “God has placed me in this powerful position as Arizona’s governor”

    Maybe she thinks that God made her governor because she wasn’t elected by the people. She became governor by the line of succession after Obama appointed Janet Napolitano to the DHS. Any politician who tells you that “God” placed them in their position of power is completely “cuckoo pants.”

    3. Jan Brewer said on local Arizona television: “Our law enforcement agencies have found bodies in the desert either buried or just lying out there that have been beheaded.”

    One head found in 2008. No evidence of beheading. Medical examiner confirms that head was ripped from body by an animal after death. Medical examiners in Arizona’s border counties say they have never seen an immigration-related beheading. Brewer’s press office refused to comment when asked to defend her claim.

    4. “Knowing that my father died fighting the Nazi regime in Germany, that I lost him when I was 11 because of that…”

    Her father died 10 years after WWII, and was never a member of any branch of the military.

    5.Here are a few other whoppers from Brewer and the right: “Border violence on the rise!! Phoenix is the world’s No. 2 kidnapping capital!! Illegal immigrants are responsible for most police killings!! The majority of those crossing the border are drug mules!!

    All these fear-mongering claims are demonstrably false, Lori, and you’re trying to tell us that Obama is the one peddling fear?

    Puhleeeeze.

  4. Molten permalink
    August 2, 2010 12:21 pm

    Lori says:

    “Remember what you said about the law when first passed, Mr. President? You tried to tell people that they’d be scooped up and whisked away, for no reason whatsoever, when out getting ice cream with their children.”

    What Obama really said:

    “One of the things that the law says is that local officials are allow to ask somebody who they have a suspicion might be an illegal immigrant for their papers — but you can imagine if you are a Hispanic American in Arizona, your great, great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you’re going to be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen.”

    He didn’t “tell people” that they’d be “scooped up and whisked away”…He said that there was “potential” to be “harassed” by the police. And he never said “for no reason whatsoever”…he clearly stated that the reason such a thing may happen is because the law states that “suspicion” is evidence enough to engage someone about their immigration status.

    You shouldn’t put words in peoples mouths. If you want to quote someone, you should quote them accurately, and not put your own spin on actual quotes.

    Just sayin’

  5. August 2, 2010 2:28 pm

    The law was changed to restrict when/how but even if it hadn’t, are you opposed to police officers questioning me if they have a suspicion that I’m breaking the law? Just askin’

    Furthermore, if a Federal law exists that isn’t enforced, it is the same as that law not existing at all. Why be opposed to something that the Federal government isn’t going to enforce? Since they (the administration) have admitted as much that Federal government has a law already, how is that any less racist and why aren’t they now being tasked with enforcing the law?

    For the record though, it isn’t just Mexicans that come through our borders, people from all countries including Canada do as well. So it isn’t racist to ask our government to enforce laws to secure our borders (and it doesn’t matter who or what).

    As for Brewer’s statement about her father, she has always said who he was and how he died. He died because of making munitions for the war as a result of Hitler’s campaign. It is a causation stretch but it isn’t a lie especially when she has always been open about him working in a plant in Nevada during the war. You and the progressives are making it out to be more than it was. Obviously it was done to tug at someone’s strings but she didn’t hide the truth. You were free to make up your mind if you heard her speeches. But one small part is taken away to make her look like a liar.

    And don’t bring up any broken promises by the Governor until you comment about the one’s Obama has broken as President. How many has Obama broken? Hell, he can’t even get transparency right.

    Ask yourself why he isn’t going after Rhode Island who has the same policy (through an executive order, it’s not even legislation) as Arizona. They have done it since 2008 but not a peep from the administration. They have been pretty successful with it too. I guess since they are a blue state, we can’t question why they would do it but not Arizona.

  6. August 2, 2010 5:45 pm

    When B.O.`s lips are moving he is probably lying. He has lied about so many things he probably can`t tell the difference.

  7. Molten permalink
    August 2, 2010 11:50 pm

    Patrick asks:

    “…are you opposed to police officers questioning me if they have a suspicion that I’m breaking the law?”

    If they question you just because they think that you look like a criminal, then I have a problem with that. Reasonable suspicion should not apply merely because a person refuses to answer questions, declines to allow a voluntary search, or is of a suspected race or ethnicity.

    That’s my opinion. I like “probable cause” better than I like “suspicion.” Anybody can suspect anyone of anything. Arizona most definitely should not have the right to detain and question me without probable cause because some officer thinks that I look like an illegal Canadian.

    Unfortunately, it’s already common practice for both criminal and immigration law enforcement officers to rely on racial profiling nationwide. Racial stereotypes result in conscious and unconscious discrimination, and that has proven very difficult to eliminate from law enforcement.

    It’s like “Don’t ask, don’t tell”…Get it? Arizona didn’t need a stupid law to do whatever they wanted to on a local level. They deserve an equally stupid lawsuit for politicizing the issue to begin with. Rhode Island was smart, Jan Brewer is using this issue to get elected, and she’s lying about it to boot…Not smart. If she didn’t crave national attention and the support of the teabaggers, she could have done this on the down low like RI, and no one would have bothered her.

    What I don’t understand is why conservatives whine so much about “securing the border,” and don’t go after the employers at all.

    If they can’t find work here…they wont come…That’s called logic.

    It took a Democrat to pass an Arizona law that prohibits businesses from knowingly hiring illegal immigrants, and rescinds the business licenses of those that do. Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, approved that law in 2007. That law took effect Dec. 31, 2007, and to this day, only one third of Arizona businesses have complied with the verification process for new employees.

    Why doesn’t Jan Brewer enforce this tough state immigration law that’s already on the books in Arizona?

    Anyone?

    That would be far more effective and less intrusive of citizens privacy than passing an un-American law that condones profiling, when most law enforcement officers in Arizona already profile anyway.

    You can call Brewer’s statement about her father a “causation stretch,” or claim that it’s out of context, but it still stinks like a lie to me. It would stink just as much if it was uttered by a Democrat.

    Patrick says:

    “And don’t bring up any broken promises by the Governor until you comment about the one’s Obama has broken as President. How many has Obama broken?”

    About 30.

    This is me commenting on Obama’s broken promises. PolitiFact has compiled about 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress, here’s 26 pages of them, check it out: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/browse/

  8. August 3, 2010 1:10 am

    You lost me at the tea bagger comment. Grow up.

  9. Molten permalink
    August 3, 2010 8:37 am

    Awww…I apologize for the “teabagger” comment, I didn’t know that you were such a sensitive conservative.

    If you stopped reading there, then you missed the best part..

    The part about how Jan Brewer and all of you conservatives cry like babies because the feds don’t enforce their own laws, when Jan Brewer isn’t enforcing her own state immigration law that would force practically all illegal immigrants from the state of Arizona.

    Since the tough law on employers of illegals went into effect in 2007, not one single business has lost their license, and only two have received sanctions.

    I wish that there was one brainy conservative out there that could explain to me why Brewer isn’t using this powerful tool to rid her state of illegals. The only explanation I can think of is purely political. That attacking the businesses that actually create the problem to begin with would ruin her chances of being elected governor.

    Someone tell me that I’m wrong….please.

    • August 3, 2010 5:16 pm

      Actually, I’m not conservative. I identify as libertarian although I would have my card pulled for my thoughts on immigration. I believe that immigration is fine done legally with the country’s consent. All other countries have immigration laws including the country that beats up for our “racist” policies.

      I’m not sensitive but when you start needing to demean someone’s ideology by calling them names, you have lost the power of your argument.

      As for Brewer, I can’t say why she is or isn’t using these policies or even that she isn’t. I’m not from Arizona or familiar with what tools the law enforcement are using.

      However, I have long yelled that all states should be going after the business but your side (assuming your liberal tendencies) needs to stop making this about racism. The law was changed rather quickly when it was pointed out that it wasn’t clear enough and that it should apply to only those people already having the police involved through arrest or traffic stops, etc.

      Points to consider from ALIPAC
      Do we believe that if 1 million French-speaking Canadians were invading New England, we would then be likely to suspect an African-American English-speaking citizen pulled over for speeding as an illegal alien? Ponder the current Border Patrol: it apparently profiles near the border any Mexican nationals who are spotted in the general vicinity (and who speak no English?), but yet at some magical spot — 10, 20, or 30 miles from the border — it mysteriously loses that ability or legal sanction?

      If the Border Patrol can question those on the American side of the fence on reasonable grounds, then why cannot the policeman do so too a few miles distant? If not, the Mexican national, by reason of his stepping one foot on American soil, could say, “Wait, I am just walking by the fence, breaking no law, and so how dare you inquire whether I am legal?”

      In fact, the Border Patrol makes millions of such inquiries yearly and in the vast majority of cases has developed logical criteria that are applicable as well a few miles inland. In passing, I note in a recent 7 day period (I counted), I produced an ID six times, once to gain admittance to a radio station, four times to validate a credit card usage, and once to check into a hotel. Were they profiling me as a credit risk, possible criminal, undesirable?

      • Molten permalink
        August 3, 2010 8:49 pm

        Patrick says:

        “…when you start needing to demean someone’s ideology by calling them names, you have lost the power of your argument.”

        Teabaggers?…Really? That’s so offensive? We are talking about those folks that wear teabags hanging from the brims of their hats, and raise signs calling Obama a communist, nazi, terrorist, anti-christ, socialist, fascist, marxist, etc…Right?

        According to your logic, the Tea Party members lost the “power of their argument” a long time ago.

        Do me a favor, Patrick. Go to the top of this post and click on the Red State link to this same article, and then read the first 20 or so comments.

        These are actual quotes from those comments:

        “The black people would have put a pig in office as long as it was black ( and they almost succeeded not much differencee as you can see).”

        “Were I God, this man would already be dead.”

        “To call Obama a lying, mongrel dog would be an insult to lying, mongrel dogs everywhere”

        “I believe that BHO is the Muslim “Trojan Horse” supported and planted here to destroy the American way of life.”

        “Let’s stop calling them Leftists…Socialists….Progressives…Marxists!! Let’s call them Communists”

        “What he is, is the greatest Demagogue on the world’s stage since Hitler – perhaps greater”

        I get your point, Patrick, but “teabaggers” is is a term of endearment compared to this crap.

        • August 4, 2010 1:14 am

          Sorry… I was under the mistaken belief that this was a discussion between me and you and not what 30 other people said. My bad. Carry on.

        • Anny permalink
          August 22, 2010 5:44 pm

          I find the term teabagger incredibly condescending. But, I guess if you are a liberal and directing it at a conservation, then that seems to be okay….

  10. Tennessee Budd permalink
    August 3, 2010 1:39 pm

    Molten, I’d love to be able to.
    Pre-1986, it was my state’s policy to pull a business license if that business was caught employing illegal aliens. Since ’86, of course, the feds say that that’s their prerogative, and solely theirs. I’d be quite happy were it to be standard practice once again to do so.
    If we deny illegal aliens jobs and social services (other than, of course, emergency services), they’ll leave. Many liberals like to protest that we might as well give them citizenship, since “we can’t deport 12 million people!” We won’t have to. We didn’t import them.

    • Molten permalink
      August 3, 2010 4:23 pm

      Budd,

      The Arizona law requires employers to use the free online federal system (E-Verify) to check the legal status of all new employees.

      The feds are in on this one. They’re obviously not saying that it’s solely their prerogative anymore.

      I agree that hitting employers is by far the most cost effective way to “thin the herd” of illegals already in this country.

      Unlike you, I’m not opposed to some sort of path to citizenship for skilled workers who pay a stiff fine, learn English, pass a citizenship test, and have no criminal record during their time here.

      I believe that the combination of this path to citizenship, strict employer accountability, and the increasing emphasis on border security is the key to reducing border crossings to a trickle.

      I endorse this three-pronged attack, unfortunately, most conservatives only want to attack with one prong. They think that our border can be “secured” and that’s just naive.

      The entire U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long. The Border Patrol is responsible for securing a total of 8,607 miles of border, including the U.S.-Mexico border, the U.S.-Canada border from Washington state to Maine, and sectors of coastline in the Gulf of Mexico, Florida, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

      It would take countless billions of dollars to effectively seal our borders, and even then, people would find a way to get in. If conservatives think government spending is out of control now, then they should be careful what they wish for.

      All this talk doesn’t change the bald-faced hypocrisy of Jan Brewer who will not enforce her own state law to achieve what she claims to be so important to her state. Instead she lies about violent crimes in U.S. border towns, equates illegal immigrants with terrorists with her “beheading” BS, tries to convince us that the “majority” of border crossings involve drug smuggling, and blames all this on Obama who hasn’t even been in office for two years yet. Her motives are purely political, and are designed to ensure that she spends some more time in the governor’s mansion.

      • August 3, 2010 4:31 pm

        Molten, I agree that govmt. agents can`t secure the borders but if you built a high wall along the Mexican border it would help immensely. And don`t tell me that a wall won`t work because it does in Israel. However unless we penalize employers for hiring the illegals we are wasting our time and money.

        • Molten permalink
          August 3, 2010 11:59 pm

          johnnywood,

          This isn’t Israel, or China, or East Berlin, this is America.

          You do realize that you’re talking about a taxpayer funded wall that’s 25 feet high, and 1,954 miles long, right?

          I can see the satellite photos now.

          And how deep under ground does this wall have to go so that no one can tunnel underneath it?

          10-20 feet? More?

          And how do I explain a wall like that to my great grandchildren after it becomes the ultimate symbol of America, the land of the free?

          Here’s my prediction of the history of your wall:

          We build it, it takes 20 years to build. Illegal immigration stops. We spend the next 30 years looking at a wall and picking our own fruit. We become embarrassed by the wall. We apologize for the wall. We tear the wall down.

          The End.

          • August 4, 2010 5:48 pm

            Blah, blah, blah!

          • Jim_NH permalink
            August 5, 2010 1:49 pm

            It’s obvious that those who support “The Wall” have never heard of the Maginot Line

      • August 3, 2010 5:21 pm

        Molten,
        So forget about Jan Brewer. Stop making this about Jan. The original post that you are commenting to is about Obama’s lying about SB1070. What she is using or isn’t using has nothing to do with this post.

        If Jan isn’t using other tools at her disposal, I agree with you. She should be using everything in her power. However, can you imagine if she did? The Progressives (I really have to stop calling them Liberals) would go after her for going after businesses that hire illegals because well.. now the illegals can’t find gainful employment and that would be… racist. Arizona can’t win here as anything done against illegals will be noted by Obama and his party as racism.

        • Molten permalink
          August 3, 2010 9:04 pm

          Patrick says:

          “The Progressives (I really have to stop calling them Liberals) would go after her for going after businesses that hire illegals because well.. now the illegals can’t find gainful employment and that would be… racist.”

          Why would Jan Brewer care what progressives think? They’re not gonna vote for her. The reason she doesn’t enforce that law is because the “pro-business” conservatives would banish her from the kingdom.

          Jan Brewer is relevant here because Lori calls out Obama for hypocrisy, fearmongering, demagoguery and lying. I’m showing that the other side of the argument is guilty of all those things.

          • August 4, 2010 1:15 am

            And like I said.. I really don’t know that she “isn’t” enforcing that law. Do you? I have your word for it but so far I haven’t been impressed.

      • Anny permalink
        August 22, 2010 5:46 pm

        I didn’t think one person could basically say what all conservatives think.

  11. Molten permalink
    August 5, 2010 4:11 pm

    Patrick,

    It’s an Arizona state law that’s been in effect for over 2 years. The law requires ALL employers with more than two employees to comply.

    They are not. Which means that Jan Brewer, the governor, is not taking responsibility for enforcing the law.

    Here’s a basic outline of the law:

    http://hr.blr.com/HR-news/Staffing-Training/Visas-and-Eligibility-to-Work/Arizona-Enacts-Nations-Strictest-Immigration-Law/

    Here’s a right-wing opinion:

    http://azresistance.wordpress.com/2007/07/03/arizona-hb-2779-finally-a-victory-for-the-good-guys/

    Here’s the proof that it’s not being enforced:

    http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/28/20100728arizona-employers-ignoring-e-verify.html

    Here’s a link that shows that Arizona border violence is down, not up:

    http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/05/02/20100502arizona-border-violence-mexico.html

    Here’s a link that discusses crime in the US border town of El Paso:

    http://reason.com/archives/2009/07/06/the-el-paso-miracle

    Here’s a link that outlines the Obama administrations efforts against illegal immigration:

    http://host.madison.com/ct/news/article_99b0f63e-98c5-11df-97f7-001cc4c002e0.html

    That should keep you busy for a while, if you want more, let me know.

    Now if you could supply me with quotes from administration officials using the word “racist” to describe the current Arizona law, I would appreciate it greatly.

    • August 5, 2010 7:50 pm

      So…

      a) why aren’t the 70% of the Arizona population who are in favor of sb1070 harping to the state government about enforcing LAWA and going after the businesses more? Could it be this?

      “Arizona, like many states, does not track who is using E-Verify and doesn’t have the resources to go after the “mom and pop” businesses which may be ignoring the law. Some employers have also complained that the setup and training required for E-Verify is onerous, especially for small companies without HR departments.”

      I read somewhere that it takes a year for the sheriff to investigate each case and out of 37 cases, Arpario has only been able to close one business.

      b) why can’t this law be used in conjunction with the “e-verify” law that you linked? And please do not bring up profiling or racism because any enforcement, of any law, could be done through profiling or racism.

      c) If violence is down, why do we have the sheriff of Pinal Countysaying exactly the opposite? He said that the county is being overwhelmed and they are not in control anymore. And also, I notice those two middle articles are from AZ Central. Would you say they are left, neutral, or right biased because I have seen those same articles on newscenters that I would say lean left. Perhaps that news source is biased? Honestly it is to the point that I can’t believe any news center.

      d) Not really such a big deal that Obama is deporting more than Bush (10% more, whoooo). Bush did little to nothing to deport. I’m not a fan of either of them.

  12. Molten permalink
    August 6, 2010 6:10 am

    Patrick, your question to me was this:

    “I really don’t know that she (Brewer) “isn’t” enforcing that law. Do you?”

    And your comeback is this?

    “Arizona, like many states, does not track who is using E-Verify and doesn’t have the resources to go after the “mom and pop” businesses which may be ignoring the law.”

    Arizona passed the law, the toughest in the nation, and Arizona is not tracking who uses E-Verify?? They’re not allocating resources to go after “mom and pop” businesses??

    Whose fault is that? Obama??

    Is it the responsibility of the feds to enforce Arizona state laws now? No. It’s Jan Brewer’s responsibility to enforce her own laws.

    Then you say:

    “Some employers have also complained that the setup and training required for E-Verify is onerous, especially for small companies without HR departments.”

    Too bad. It’s the law, and the law mandates that ALL businesses comply. The one single problem that’s mentioned in any of those reports is that “the federal agency sent a form in a file format that was difficult to open, and it took a few days to iron the problem out.”

    Soooo “onerous”…Businesses may have to update their obsolete software to comply with a state law…boo hoo.

    Then you say:

    “I read somewhere that it takes a year for the sheriff to investigate each case and out of 37 cases, Arpario has only been able to close one business.”

    You read somewhere?? Sorry Patrick, but “I read somewhere” isn’t good enough anymore. You questioned my “word” and I provided you links. Now I’m questioning your word. Please provide a link for this factoid if you wish to maintain a semblance of integrity in this conversation.

    Then you ask:

    “Why can’t this law be used in conjunction with the “e-verify” law that you linked?”

    It can. One third of Arizona businesses are already using it successfully.

    Then you say:

    “If violence is down, why do we have the sheriff of Pinal County saying exactly the opposite? He said that the county is being overwhelmed and they are not in control anymore.”

    Overwhelmed by what?? Illegal immigrants, or violent crime? Link please.

    And then:

    “I notice those two middle articles are from AZ Central. Would you say they are left, neutral, or right biased”

    “Honestly it is to the point that I can’t believe any news center.”

    Judging from their home page, they appear neutral to me. I see an article stating that Mexican visits are down 17% since the new Arizona law passed (an apparent victory for Brewer), and another article updating the states lawsuit against Obamacare.

    Face it, Patrick, anything that disputes your core beliefs is going to be considered “biased” by you…You’re not capable of extracting truth from different sources, or admitting that just maybe there is misinformation on your side of the argument.

    And finally:

    Not really such a big deal that Obama is deporting more than Bush (10% more, whoooo). Bush did little to nothing to deport. I’m not a fan of either of them.

    You don’t mention that Obama has quadrupled workplace audits since Bush, and that he’s levied over 6 million bucks in fines to businesses that employ illegals.

    Even at 10% more deportations last year, and on track to deport 25% more this year, the right-wing argument that Obama isn’t enforcing immigration laws falls flat. Obama is deporting more than any president before him, even as illegal immigration is at a 30+ year low, and he’s hitting businesses that employ illegals harder than anyone before him.

    By the way, I’m still waiting for proof that anyone in the Obama administration has used the word “racist” in respect to any Arizona law.

  13. Molten permalink
    August 6, 2010 7:02 am

    This just in…Senate approves $600 million for border security.

    Sponsored by Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, the legislation includes $176 million for 1,000 new border patrol agents to form a strike force to be deployed at critical areas, $89 million for another 500 customs and immigration personnel and $32 million to deploy unmanned aerial vehicles or drones.

    It provides an additional $196 million for the Justice Department to bolster its forces of U.S. marshals, and FBI, DEA and ATF agents along the border.

  14. Godzilla permalink
    August 7, 2010 4:50 pm

    Molten,
    Have you ever lived in AZ and had to deal with this situation on a daily basis?
    I believe that if certain politicians and persons such as yourself were forced to live in, say Tucson or Phoenix, you would rapidly change your tune.
    THe point is, the citizens on the ground experiencing this problem, and all of the collateral problems it creates, are infinitely more qualified to decide what to do about it than someone like you, or some washington politician who never spent more than a weekend there. The people of AZ overwhelmingly agree that this is the course to take, especially when the feds are doing the equivalent of waving a bandage over a femoral artery laceration.
    AZ, NM, TX and CA are at the border, the line in the sand; the government of mexico and the criminal element are at war and invading this country, whether you agree with that or not.
    SOmeone needs to do something, I’m glad there are patriots like Governor Brewer who recognize that fact, and have acted upon it.

  15. Godzilla permalink
    August 7, 2010 4:51 pm

    I can only wish that the likes of shwartzenegger, richardson and perry had the intestinal fortitude to do the same.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 263 other followers

%d bloggers like this: