E Pluribus Unum describes an action June 12, 2007
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Ethnicity, Immigration, Government, Uncategorized , 1 comment so farE Pluribus Unum reminds me of scriptural proof texting at it’s worst, ignoring all consideration of context and original intent and manipulating it to meet ones own agenda.
To understand the true meaning of E Pluribus Unum understand the genesis of the phrase. Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson proposed the phrase as a national motto of unity, as the thirteen colonies were uniting in common cause of independence and forming a new nation.
Next, to further understand the meaning of this one needs to look at the sketch of the original seal. The mottos purpose is to express the imagery of the seal itself. Center to the seal is the shield itself. The center of the shield has six symbols; the rose (England), thistle (Scotland), harp (Ireland), fleur-de-lis (France), lion (Holland), and an imperial two-headed eagle (Germany) for the countries from which these uniting states were peopled. The exterior border is then formed in a circle of the thirteen shields with a letter on each representing the thirteen independent states in unity. Although their original design was not approved, the phrase E Pluribus Unum was incorporated into the Great Seal of the United States.
Today, revisionist historians and apologists use to phrase E Pluribus Unum to denote that America was meant to be this great melting pot , the most diverse of all nations. In fact there was very little “diversity” among our founding fathers with the major migrations coming from the British Isles, France, Germany and Holland , with the notable exception of the forced migration of slavery.
This uniformity of heritage was a major factor in the foundational success of what is now the world’s longest surviving republican form of a democratic society. While I am a adamant anti-federalist, I can not allow those views alter my understanding of this unions formation. The Federalist Papers , a comprehensive set of apologetic for the Constitution, consisted of 85 essays.
John Jay in the second essay, Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence , specifically cites:
“With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people–a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.
This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of brethren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties. “
From 1675 to 1950, the vast majority of U.S. immigrants were English speaking and enjoyed similar heritage and customs, with the exception of some seven million Germans, Italians and Scandinavians who immigrated to the U.S. prior to 1930. Conservative estimates are that every day, about 3,200 illegal aliens (more than 96,000 of them each month) cross from Mexico into the U.S.
There’s an old saying in Washington that, in dealing with any tough issue, half the politicians hope that citizens don’t understand it while the other half fear that people actually do. … Be feared.
The art of distraction June 11, 2007
Posted by reformedville in : Immigration, Government, Media , add a comment“A nation without borders is not a nation.” - Ronald Reagan
The entire immigration debate today is basically cast on two premises:
-
our alleged inability to secure the southern border
-
corporations who employ approximately 12 million illegal immigrants would not be able to find employees, so the illegal immigrants are:
-
doing Jobs Americans won’t
-
paying taxes which we need
-
crucial to meeting our labor needs
-
We can not allow the debate to proceed on these premises. The federal government , with the aid of the media reframed the debate to relieve themselves of culpability. We should refuse to even engage in the debate on their terms, because it gives them false standing.
The real core issues are:
-
When the federal government posits that they can no longer defend our borders, then why do we have a federal government ? Why is our military overseas defending states not our own when we say we can’t defend ourselves?
-
The president has refused to fulfill his duty as chief executive officer and defend our national sovereignty, our borders and the laws of our land. So if he is not going to fulfill his job, why do we even need a president? To impose democracy on others?
The legislation in front of Congress is merely smoke and mirrors. We have all the legislation we need today. We only need to ENFORCE it, and that is the responsibility of the President and the executive branch of the government.
Many people were upset when I posited that Pedro is not the problem, as if somehow I am soft on immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth, but if we are running after Pedro’s we never solve the problem, especially with a pourous border. This is where the federal government wants us focused, on Pedro and the border, so they can play cat and mouse with us. It is their trump in the game of distraction.
There are many parts of this country that are literal paradises to live in, but to live there, one must either come from money, or be retiring to that area, as the area itself can not support one to live there. Normally in places like these employers will have to purchase housing and make provisions for employees if it is a tourist area, because a worker simply could not afford to live there.
The concept is the same for illegal immigrants. While humans require food, water and shelter to survive; the primary are food and water, as the shelter is meaningless if they can not feed themselves. The border does not provide food and water; employers do.
Having been an employer, both in management working for a national contractor and in my own business, I am well aware of the documentation that is required to hire an employee, including a proof of citizenship form . Everyday, employers are hiring people without legitimate papers. I have heard many argue that you do not know if you are hiring someone with bad papers, you have no way of knowing. Wrong, there are I-9 compliance services to safeguard you from this.
Your company normally receives a letter from the U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA). The letter states that the Social Security number you have on file for one of your employees doesn’t match his number on file with the SSA. Reasons for a mismatch may include an unreported name change, a change in marital status, a stolen identity or a clerical error on your part (while processing the employee’s paperwork) or even at the SSA.
Nevertheless, the receipt of an SSA mismatch letter must prompt an employer to take some action to ensure compliance with the SSA, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
For example, first check out the employee’s 1-9 Form, which establishes the employee’s eligibility for employment. Under the Immigration Reform and Control Act (RCA), employees must fill out an I-9 form the first day on the job, arid must provide documentation proving their employment eligibility and identity within three business days of starting work.
The law does not require employers to file I-9 forms with any government agency. As a result, only you have immediate access to this information and only you can tell if the information submitted for an I-9 matches the information an employee provided on other forms.
If your review shows that these documents are incomplete or incorrect, you have a duty to investigate. If the employee cannot present acceptable documents, you have to terminate him. Under the IRCA, employers can be legally liable for the “knowing” employment of unauthorized aliens.
Even though I-9 forms are not submitted to federal agencies, they still can provide evidence that an employer intentionally hired an illegal alien. Each year the INS performs more than 60,000 audits of I-9 forms.
The danger of an improperly completed I-9 Form may not go away in the short term. Under the IRCA, when an employee leaves or is terminated, employers must retain I-9 forms for at least three years from the date of hire or one year after termination, whichever is longer. Second, employers are required to report accurate information to the IRS.
But again, this is all smoke and mirrors today. The regulations and the forms are there only to make us feel safe. Large employers know at worst they are going to pay fines. The INS is open to widespread corruption because it is self funded from fines it levies. Now one may think fines would be a deterrent, but a fine is a cost of doing business in the illegal immigrant trade. No manager pays the fine, it is absorbed or reflected in either higher price or lower yield on stock earnings, but the amount save in wages and ancillary expenses make it very profitable.
If we want to get serious about solving the immigration problem we go to the source of the illegal immigrants employer, and start sending the management of the company to prison for hiring illegal immigrants. Go straight to the oasis and cut the source of the food and water for illegals and they quit coming.If employers knew they face going to prison or having their plants shut down for hiring illegals it is no longer worth it to them to hire illegals.
If illegal immigrants can not get employment they will not stay in the United States and they certainly won’t keep coming. Word gets out when the oasis dries up, but it doesn’t look like we are in any serious danger of that happening anytime soon!
“I do solemnly swear that I will ……. ” May 24, 2007
Posted by reformedville in : culture, Immigration, Government , 1 comment so far|
These are not words to be taken lightly by a man, , especially when that man is the President of the United States of America, the Chief Executive and Commander in Chief of our armed forces. When I was growing up, at home I taught the biblical principle of James 5:12″ But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation. In school, this principal was reinforced, many times by the urbane saying, “word is bond” or ”let a man’s word be his bond” ; it’s origin from the days of the financial markets that you didn’t have to put it into writing, or put bond money down, you were going to do what you promised you would do, many times sealed by a handshake. The full oath taken by the President is contained in Article II, Section 1: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The Constitution succinctly defines presidential functions, powers, and responsibilities. The president’s chief constitutional duty is to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed by virtue of his oath to do so. However, this morning I wake up to read in the news that once again the executive branch has “thumbed their nose” at the Constitution. Uphold the laws? Protect the borders? No, “Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Wednesday that Republican conservatives (are) working to block an immigration bill risk endorsing a “silent amnesty” by insisting on deportations that are “not going to happen.” according to USA Today
In addition, the president is expected to stump for the bill next week and a “rapid response” team is countering critics, not only in the conventional media but, for the first time, on Internet blogs, said White House communications director Kevin Sullivan. The president’s press secretary, Tony Snow, already has debated talk radio host Rush Limbaugh and TV commentator Lou Dobbs, both critics of the bill. Chertoff acknowledged that there is “a fundamental unfairness” in a bill allowing illegal immigrants to stay. But trying to force them to leave would be impossible, Chertoff said, “We are bowing to reality.” He dismissed the argument of Republican conservatives, such as Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Calif., who argue that illegal immigrants will leave if strict enforcement of U.S. laws makes it impossible for them to find a job. Bilbray said his idea hasn’t worked because “there’s been a conscious strategy of not enforcing the law.”Bilbray could not have put in more succinctly, because we have failed to protect our borders and turned our heads as American employers have thumbed their noses at the immigration law, aided and abetted by the Bush’s administration failure to enforce it. In light of the attacks of September 11, 2001, this is inexcusable. The article goes on to directly address a position I have written on before: “Chertoff acknowledged that there is “a fundamental unfairness” in a bill allowing illegal immigrants to stay. But trying to force them to leave (enforcing the law)would be impossible, Chertoff said, “We are bowing to reality.” He dismissed the argument of Republican conservatives, such as Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Calif., who argue that illegal immigrants will leave if strict enforcement of U.S. laws makes it impossible for them to find a job. This argument is answered by “You’re not going to replace 12 million people who are doing the work they’re currently doing,” Chertoff said.Now follow this line of argument. The administration turns a blind eye to illegal immigration over the past decade. The employers hire these illegal immigrants, receive notices from social security administration on bad social security numbers, do not follow I-9 hiring procedures, and face few if any ramifications for it. I know this to be true because I worked for a national contractor who did this, and in inspecting the personnel files found the majority of our employees to be illegal, no I-9 forms, incomplete personnel files and the lowest rates of pay of any of our units. The same argument. But it is fouled logic, I was able to quickly replace them with legal citizens.The “key” came out later, these workers do not demand raises or benefits and are just happy for a job. In other words screw our citizens and the immigrants who came legally and went through the process to get here properly, they actually want a fair rate of pay and benefits, these people will work for less and who cares about all this legal garbage? The cure is to start placing the onus of responsibility not on the immigrant, not on building new fences, but on the employer. If the employer is cuffed and has criminal charges filed for intentionally breaking federal law, the well runs dry on jobs, which in turn will cause the illegal to return home or come back legally. See not only do they not hire the citizen (their neighbors), they place an extra burden on the them, in the form of food assistance, medical assistance, educational expenses for their children and increased law enforcement costs. And does this bother the employer? No. He is thumbing his nose at the community and the taxpayers of that community as well, laying extra burden on them and not providing relief in the form of jobs. Now why do you think the government has a hands-off policy on this? I mean, we have legislators like Tancredo and Bilbray who clearly state the problem and solution? No, politicians don’t want to cut the campaign funds of major contributors off to their campaigns ! But instead of enforcement we are told, “People all around the country will be seeing teary-eyed children whose parents are going to be deported.”
“The reality is, we don’t have enough people,” said Gutierrez. Hold the phone. Haven’t we been told that our jobs are all going overseas by the democrats? Which is it? Both can’t be true. The spin cycle is so heavy and is planned to play on your emotion and reasoning and avoid the tough facts; as allow the true guilty parties to be held harmless.A few examples, (all of these are linked) I.N.S. Looks the Other Way on Illegal Immigrant Labor , Execs indicted, Tyson Foods, Con Agra, Cargill and Mohawk, There is an old maxim, the risk is worth the fine, so if we fine employers who we arrest, the company pays the fine, the stockholders take a bite, or perhaps a price increase comes to reflect the cost. But the company officers does not go to prison to violating the law. You look at this and it reminds you of the RICO act, except it is the government involved in systemically breaking the law, and then claiming we have to live with the ramifications because these companies who broke the laws won’t have employees. Too bad, is it our problem? Are we supposed to be told by the government that our cost of subsidizing the illegals low wages and the added cost on the infrastructure is ours to keep so Tyson Foods can hire illegal immigrants? Incidentally, In the 2004 election cycle, Cargill and Tyson donated over $300,000 to Bush’s reelection bid. Section 3 of Article II of the Constitution states in his duties (not options) “he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed”. The President and his administration has systematically failed to uphold our immigration laws or protect our border from invasion by noncitizen. Not only has he failed to do so, now he also admits the inability to do so. Further he has made plans and is instituting a plan to silence those who demand that the law be enforced. If that is not enough, he has a new plan, (should we call him the man with the plan?) A powerful think tank chaired by former Sen. Sam Nunn and guided by trustees including Richard Armitage, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Harold Brown, William Cohen and Henry Kissinger, is in the final stages of preparing a report to the White House and U.S. Congress on the benefits of integrating the U.S., Mexico and Canada into one political, economic and security bloc. The final report, published in English, Spanish and French, is scheduled for submission to all three governments by Sept. 30, according to the Center for Strategic & International Studies. CSIS boasts of playing a large role in the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994 – a treaty that set in motion a political movement many believe resembles the early stages of the European Community on its way to becoming the European Union. So lets not enforce the law, lets change the borders so its not a crime, forget this sovereign nation nonsense! President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement, on May 9, 2007 signed a directive that granted near dictatorial powers to the office of the president in the event of a national emergency declared by the president. The “National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive,” with the dual designation of NSPD-51, as a National Security Presidential Directive, and HSPD-20, as a Homeland Security Presidential Directive, establishes under the office of president a new National Continuity Coordinator. That job, as the document describes, is to make plans for “National Essential Functions” of all federal, state, local, territorial, and tribal governments, as well as private sector organizations to continue functioning under the president’s directives in the event of a national emergency. The directive loosely defines “catastrophic emergency” as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions.” Now here is where the rubber meets the road, I clearly remember impeachment proceedings of President Clinton for his lying under oath. Republicans were frothing to get Clinton out of office over Monicagate and this crime of untruthful testimony under oath, and wanted to hold him to account. Now we have a republican president who has lied under oath, as he has failed to faithfully execute the office by failing to enforce the laws of the United States, and further, refuses to. He also refuses to hold law breaking employers to account for their actions and says there is nothing we can do. One of the jagging points on President Clinton with me was his profession of faith and then his actions after such profession by trying to justify his actions. But here I see a blatant refusal to uphold our law by a professing Christian who claims God wanted him to be the POTUS! And a planned spin campaign to change the issue Now some questions: Should the interests of employers outweigh the law of the United States? If not, should employers of known illegal immigrants be arrested? In your view is the problem the immigrants or is the problem the employers who lure the immigrants? Is the oath of office a binding oath in your opinion? If so, what should be the ramifications for violating that oath? If not, should it be removed by amendment to the Constitution? Is refusal to enforce the law, the major job description of the President , a cause for removal from office? If not, why ? Should the President have the power to unilaterally ignore the Legislative Branch and pick and choose which laws he will enforce ignoring our sovereign borders? If you are a Christian, can you justify supporting a President who has violated the biblical principal of let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation? What should be the consequences of his actions, if any? |
The art of reframing and distraction April 16, 2007
Posted by reformedville in : Ethnicity, Immigration, Government , add a comment(Picture laying all blame on pedro removed)
This is a typical redirection of argument tactic. One must really take a look at this situation logically. I lived in both Colorado and Florida where we had illegal immigration problems. In fact I am very much against illegal immigration , as I know legal immigrants who did it the right way and continue to do it the right way and it costs money and there is a process.
But is Pedro the problem? No Pedro is not the problem. If Pedro has no source of employment , or potential income, Pedro does not come and take the risks. But why does he come? Because employers want to hire Pedro because they can pay Pedro less money and no benefits. And who are these employers-mostly rich white guys who know if they get caught they pay a fine. But it is not only rich white guys, it is the suburban homeowner who wants to save a buck to get his lawn cut cheap so he hires a service that hires illegals to save on labor costs. It is the national contract services who employ housekeepers in medical facilites because they will not ask for benefits or raises because they know they used a fresh hot social security number to get the job and it wont check out in six months, so if they demand a raise you suddenly need to check their social security number and green card status. And who are the employers ?, white guys who know the deal.
Remember this ? Tyson Execs Charged in Smuggling Illegal Aliens
Mohawk Industries Inc. and who did these employees displace?
ConAgra agreed in April 1998 to pay $223,000 in fines and other costs for knowingly hiring illegal immigrants. http://www.visalaw.com/98may/11may98.html Note also where alot of the food poisoning has come from-con agra foods. coincidence? Cargill CEO Warren Staley reportedly has in the past admitted his company hired illegal immigrants. In May 2006, Cargill closed beef-processing plants in six states and gave more than 15,000 workers the day off to attend a pro-immigration boycott. http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA050206.1A.immigration.12b59b38.htmlIn June 2005, Tyson Foods was sued by eight former employees alleging it reduced hourly pay by hiring illegal immigrants. In December 2001, Tyson Foods was charged with 36 counts of recruiting illegal workers from Mexico and transporting them to its poultry processing plants. In May of 2006, Tyson closed its processing plants to allow employees to attend pro-immigration marches. http://www.vdare.com/fulford/lawsuit.htm In the 2004 election cycle, Cargill and Tyson donated over $300,000 to Bush’s re-election bid.So is it really Pedro we should be mad at? Why aren’t we screaming at the ones responsible for the illegal immigration the employers?
And young white guys-if you ever get your own region in seperatism, you will be the new Pedro, maybe your handlers havent told you, but if you think the white region is going to overpay it’s employees and lose profits, you need your head examined. Read a history book or a newspaper, we want the cheapest labor possible , will hire a minority in a second putting you out of work, and then bitch the first time they see a minority outside of work. And instead of the Jews handling your mortgage the company store will own your entire existence and you can be a white slave.
Yeh, complain about Pedro when you are getting your lawn cut cheap, and a white guy is fighting for survival against the illegals and the law turns their head in good old boy Florida. Don’t take your anger out on Pedro, burn your neighbors lawn for hiring Pedro. Block the plants entrance for hiring illegals. Take it out on Pedro. Now that is a great distraction but it doesn’t hold water.
The art of reframing and distraction-part 2 April 16, 2007
Posted by reformedville in : Ethnicity, Immigration, Government , add a comment
Pedro part 2Federal authorities have accused three cleaning company executives of pocketing more than $18.6 million in unpaid taxes collected from employing hundreds of illegal immigrants from Mexico, Central America, and Haiti, according to an indictment CNN obtained Thursday. The money was placed by the three Rosenbaum Cunningham International executives into “shell companies,” and then was used to purchase such “extravagant” items as beach homes and racehorses, the document stated. RCI Inc.’s president, vice president and controller were arrested along with 200 of the Florida-based company’s employees in a recent sweep by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, the assistant secretary of homeland security for ICE, Julie Myers, announced at a news conference. A message on the company’s voicemail said that “RCI has ceased operations as of February 22, 2007.” RCI Inc. provided janitorial services to numerous restaurant chains, including Hard Rock Cafes, Dave & Busters, House of Blues, Planet Hollywood, and Fox Sports Grill, the indictment states.
Tired of waiting for Washington to enforce immigration laws, small businesses have begun taking their competitors to court.I.N.S. Looks the Other Way on Illegal Immigrant Labor CHICAGO — Salvador Silva often used to worry that immigration agents would raid the commercial laundry where he works. If they did, he had a plan. He would jump onto a table, hoist himself into an air-conditioning duct, and hide there until the agents left. He practiced this more than once. “We lived with the uncertainty of raids,” said Mr. Silva, who is 26 and has worked illegally in this country for 10 years, ever since he walked across a bridge from Juárez in Mexico to El Paso and flew to Chicago to join a brother. Only now is he beginning to relax. “For the first time,” he said, “I don’t fear the raids.” Such raids have all but stopped around the country over the last year. In a booming economy running short of labor, hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants are increasingly tolerated in the nation’s workplaces. The Immigration and Naturalization Service has made crossing the border harder than ever, stepping up patrols and prosecuting companies that smuggle in aliens or blatantly recruit them. But once inside the country, illegal immigrants are now largely left alone. Even when these people are discovered, arrests for the purpose of deportation are much less frequent; such arrests dropped to about 8,600 last year from 22,000 just two years earlier, the I.N.S. reports. The agency now concentrates on picking up aliens who have committed a crime. The rest are in effect allowed to help American employers fill jobs. “It is just the market at work, drawing people to jobs, and the I.N.S. has chosen to concentrate its actions on aliens who are a danger to the community,” said Robert L. Bach, the agency’s associate commissioner for policy and planning. U.S. illegal labor toils in a parallel universe … years in prison for taking cash and cars from smugglers, allowing them to shuttle illegal immigrants from Mexico into the United States. , worked at the world’s busiest border crossing, the Port of Entry between Tijuana, Mexico, and … … who fired at a vehicle loaded with illegal immigrants, has heightened the outcry. T.J. Bonner, the … urban white-collar crime to drug smuggling and illegal immigration in a district that includes 660 miles … one person in the history of the United States, in our view,” said Bonner, the president … |
