Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Hazleton Decision: Tyranny

By Greg L | 30 July 2007 | National Politics, Illegal Aliens, Prince William County | 125 Comments

The Virginian Federalist is the first out of the gate with an evaluation of the decision in Hazelton, PA and how it might apply to what is happening on the illegal alien front in Prince William County. Since this topic is certainly going to be raised at the next meeting of the Prince William County Human Rights Commission, the timing of this post is perfect. The core issue in this debate is federal preemption versus the powers granted to localities under the Tenth Amendment.  I think Virginian Federalist is absolutely on the right track here:

As the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution reserves to the States or the people all powers not granted to the United States by the constitution, it can be argued that no power was granted under Article I section 8 or elsewhere for the Congress to regulate the employment of individuals not in interstate commerce. If the Congress had no power to regulate such employment it had no power to preempt state or local laws on the subject of employment. It is a federalist issue here of over reaching federal authority preempting the power of states and their political subdivisions to ensure that business that they license not carry out illegal activities. I posit that the Congress has exceeded the powers granted to it to the detriment of the people, a tyranny.

The power of localities to enact ordinances regarding permitting and licensing under this provision of the constitution has been upheld numerous times and has never been effectively challenged as long as the action wasn’t inconsistent with state or federal law.  Given the utter failure of the federal government to effectively address the illegal alien problem, holding localities hostage to the federal government’s inaction is not only nonsensical, but runs contrary to the plain meaning of the United States Constitution.  If preemption in this regard freezes all local autonomy, we no longer have a federal republic.

Yes, the federal government has the power to regulate immigration, and nothing in Prince William County or Hazleton, PA seeks to undermine that power.  But since hiring, sheltering or providing benefits to illegal aliens is prohibited under federal law, having localities control licensing and permitting so as to require compliance with existing federal law, and requiring state and local companies to comply with federal law helps to address demonstrated state and local problems, saying that federal laws somehow preempt these ordinances makes little sense from both a practical and legal perspective.  This doesn’t contradict federal law, but buttresses it.  To say that is contrary to federal law actually undermines the laws we do have.

Of note, the recent decision in Hazleton is not entirely damaging to what Prince William County is trying to do.  The court upheld that restrictions on illegal aliens do not violate the Fourteenth Amendment, which is largely the basis of the arguments offered by detractors, and which undercuts their legal position rather severely.  Hopefully, as the Virginian Federalist has the opportunity to delve into this further, further legal analysis will help to bolster his commentary.  He’s on the right track, and I’d like to see him run this down to it’s conclusion.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.

125 Comments

  1. OPDitch said on 30 Jul 2007 at 6:38 am:
    Flag comment

    Fred Thompson, a pretty good Federalist, thinks this court rulling should be appealed also:

    “So what the court said in this decision is that Congress has passed laws that preempt the field of immigration. As a result, state and local governments cannot enact laws to control illegal immigration or even the effects of illegal immigration.

    Think about what this ruling means. Congress has preempted the field, so state and local governments are powerless to act. Then, Congress and the federal authorities do next-to-nothing to prevent illegal immigration, burdening the states and local communities around the country. But those communities cannot act because Congress said they couldn’t. What sense does that make?

    None. Congress could not have meant to prevent state and local governments from exercising their traditional police and regulatory powers over businesses and landlords to address the problems caused by uncontrolled illegal immigration.

    No doubt, this ruling will be appealed. And it should be.”

    http://fredfile.imwithfred.com/

  2. Legal2 said on 30 Jul 2007 at 7:38 am:
    Flag comment

    sic semper tyrannis!

  3. NoVA Scout said on 30 Jul 2007 at 8:40 am:
    Flag comment

    It’s a fairly sound, if over-lengthy, Supremacy Clause decision. Conservative federalists are familiar with why it had to come out the way it did. Although the genius of the Constitution is that it retained to the individual states considerable latitude, where powers were expressly afforded the federal goverment, those powers are paramount. Immigration, Naturalization, citizenship policies are among those powers, as are the foreign affairs and commerce powers, and one can’t have every village, town, and county in the country making its own policy about immigration. Virtually everyone knows this and knows that measures like Hazelton and PW are highly suspect, but it’s great theater and local pols love the attention, so we’ll probably get a lot more of this stuff. I’m sure the thought process is “the Constitution be damned, this stuff is fun and it may get me votes.” Of course, the PW measure does little and will await implementing policies before we know whether it has any real effect. I suppose it is invalid on its face to the extent it deals with subject matters that are exclusively federal, but it is more likely to have to take a visit, at taxpayors’ expense, to the federal courts if the implementing decisions actually affect anything.

  4. Andy H said on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:36 am:
    Flag comment

    Nova:

    I don’t know about all the constitutional stuff but I think it is pretty flip to characterize the efforts of the locals as “fun and will get me votes”. How about “our community is being crushed under the weight of this problem and we are so desperate that we will chance having to go to court”? I’ve been in the middle of these discussions and I do not find it to be much fun.

    My hope is that all of this “theater” may finally get the attention of Congress and they will actually do something of use like looking after the responsibilities delegated to them in the Constitution.

    I’m not looking for grand plans, compromises or mass deportations; just baby steps. We could start with some modicum of control on the southern border or funding ICE to a level where they can function year-round.

  5. Mary said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:26 am:
    Flag comment

    The real reason the globalists want the local pro-enforcement laws scratched is because they work:

    http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5650671,00.html

    Illegals are leaving Colorado — or not coming in the first place — because of that state’s recently established immigration enforcement laws. Same with Georgia.

  6. monticup said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:30 am:
    Flag comment

    The problem is, my local government (Frederick, MD) says there is nothing they can do about illegal aliens because it is the responsibility of the federal government. They voluntarily give up their authority to govern locally! Meanwhile, Frederick is being swamped and trashed by illegal aliens.

  7. Dolph said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:50 am:
    Flag comment

    Andy H,

    I agree with you.

    Also, if the president and congress adhered to the laws and the Constitution, this would all be a moot point.

    Dolph

  8. Dan Arnold said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:22 am:
    Flag comment

    Well said, Andy.

    A group of volunteers and I were signing up members to Help Save Manassas in the Park on Saturday morning and it was a real eye-opener. I worked the area back around Lambert Drive way back there off of Manassas Drive and I can tell you there was nothing funny about what has happened to that neighborhood. It has been totally decimated. We had to walk past house after house of illegals before finding homes where besieged citizen taxpayers lived. And let me tell you, they are desperate for help. Old folks who have lived there for 40 and 50 years who don’t have any control over the ghetto that is growing around them. One nice older lady told me that her neighbors, while “very nice folks”, have 3 families living back in the garage. New, hideous “super boarding houses” abound, built exclusively as hotels for illegals.

    There is nothing fun or funny about this problem.

  9. BL said on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    That judge should be rode to the Mexican Border on a rail and tossed over!

  10. BL said on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    Six years have passed since 9/11 with President Bush in office. We have borders that are controlled by criminals doing $140 billion in narco-trafficking and hundreds of Millions in Human trafficking while Illegal Aliens are killing, raping and robbing American citizens by the 10,s of thousands. Rogue armed Mexican military personnel in the employ of criminal cartels wearing Mexican uniforms are violating our borders in military vehicles. Mexican military personnel in uniform are assaulting National Guard troops stationed at the border. Terrorists can easily come through our borders undetected. President Bush is not and will not build a 700 mile fence along the southern border that both houses of Congress passed with large margins in October of 2006 and that he signed into law. President Bush can tell us the exact size of the “surge” needed to ensure victory in protecting Iraq’s borders but he will not tell us what surge in personnel in uniform is need to secure our borders.
    When have you read or heard President Bush calling for months long 3 to 4-hour cabinet level meeting 3 to 4 times per week with 10 senators and the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Commerce and the U.S. Attorney General in tow to secure our borders and enforce illegal alien employer sanctions and current immigration law enforcement?
    NEVER! It is not a priority for this Administration and he has no intention of abiding by our Constitution against Invasion or enforcing Immigration Laws!

  11. Just saying... said on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    But, NoVa Scout, the Hazelton case isn’t about defining immigration. If the town of Hazelton declared it was going to set its own rules regarding who may or may not enter the United States, then we have a clear case of the Supremacy Clause overriding such a rule. In this case, however, the town rule was not regulating immigration or interstate commerce. Rather, it was regulating the conduct of business within the bounds of the local jurisdiction. I don’t think the Supremacy Clause should have come into play. The Hazelton rule did not redefine immigration (a power reserved to the federal level) or regulate interstate commerce (also reserved to Congress). Rather, it used the federally mandated definitions of legal vs. illegal residents as the basis for issuing and maintaining local administered and issued business licenses.

  12. Advocator said on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    Jorge Bush has gotta go. He cares more about his buddies like Vincente Fox and the House of Saud, both of whom have played him for the fool he is, than he does about those of us who are paying the freight.

  13. Advocator said on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dan:

    I hope you told the folks on Lambert to start accumulating pictures of people and cars (with license plate nos.) frequenting the flop houses.

  14. John Light said on 30 Jul 2007 at 12:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Think the Dems are any better? (rhetorical question). In today’s Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070725/NATION/107250079/1001) it states:

    “Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, an architect of the Democratic campaign that regained control of the House last year, says his party will not attempt comprehensive immigration reform until at least the second term of a prospective Democratic president.

    The congressman’s statement was reported by a Hispanic activist and confirmed by Mr. Emanuel. “Congressman Rahm Emanuel said to me two weeks ago, there is no way this legislation is happening in the Democratic House, in the Democratic Senate, in the Democratic presidency, in the first term,” Juan Salgado, board chairman of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, told the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) at its annual convention last weekend.”

  15. Advocator said on 30 Jul 2007 at 1:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Think the Dems are any better?”

    John:

    This issue is not one of Republican v. Democrat. It’s an issue of who has the guts to enforce the law. Both parties assumed they would benefit during the past 20 years from an uncontrolled influx of illegal aliens. Consequently, nobody did anything about it. At least the Democrats are a bit more honest. They want to destroy America and will admit to it. I may start voting Democratic just because I prefer to have an admitted thief in power than a good ole boy hypocrite like Jorge. I’d rather have a party that’s actively working for this country’s demise than one that will let it slip into darkness through inaction. A few years of Dems in power will hasten the revolution that’s going to be required to get this country back on course. It’s like a drug addict that needs to hit rock bottom before he can heal.

  16. Dolph said on 30 Jul 2007 at 1:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Aren’t the soldiers who are to be placed along the border going to be given rubber bullets? Did I dream this or is it really true?

  17. JR said on 30 Jul 2007 at 2:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    you dreamed it…..actually they will be given no bullets, …….nor rifles for that matter

  18. anon said on 30 Jul 2007 at 2:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    “But, NoVa Scout, the Hazelton case isn’t about defining immigration.”

    Wrong. In order for the City of Hazleton to impose fines or punishment in either the case of employing or housing an “illegal,” the city is rendering decisions regarding the immigration status of the individuals in question; which is exclusively the jurisdiction of the federal government, hence, a clear violation of the Supremacy Clause.

    You can’t fine employers or landlords without first making a determination about the person’s legal status to be in the country. Local governments have no authority to making such decisions.

  19. Dolph said on 30 Jul 2007 at 3:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    JR,

    What a nightmare. Then why will they even be there?

    I am trying to avoid making snide remarks about rolling out the red carpet, passing out water, providing picnics………

    I really hope you are kidding me, but I fear you arent.

    Dolph

  20. Not4Nothing said on 30 Jul 2007 at 4:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    What is being missed here, I think is that most businesses, including apartment complexes, are licensed locally. If they hire - or rent to - illegal aliens, yank their licenses. Sound like a plan?

  21. Greg L said on 30 Jul 2007 at 4:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anon, federal law compels the DHS to respond to any inquiry made by a state or local agency or official regarding the immigration status of any person, as long as it’s for official business. Local governments have explicit authority to make these inquiries.

    Under the 10th Amendment, states and localities have the power to regulate licensing and permits. In some cases federal law specifically authorizes business permits to be revoked because of hiring illegal aliens. While localities cannot independently enforce federal immigration laws, they can choose to issue permits and licenses based on whether a business is complying with federal law.

    It’s all working it’s way through the court system, but I disagree that localities are not allowed to do anything to protect communities from the impacts of illegal aliens.

  22. NoVA Scout said on 30 Jul 2007 at 5:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    Just Saying: Anon 1459 pretty much took care of your question to me. Localities can’t usurp federal functions by calling what they’re doing something else. To give an example, I could be a County Supervisor in the middle of Kansas and push through an ordinance banning the serving of alcoholic beverages in the county, including on aircraft passing overhead. I would wrap it up in a lot of local police powers rhetoric, but I still would be invading the exclusive province of federal aviation authorities and my little legislative exercise would be null and void, no matter how popular it made me with local temperance partisans. It was very clear in Hazelton, as it is in PW, that the localities are arrogating to themselves responsibility for enforcing and regulating immigration and naturalization issues that are the sole province of federal action. I don’t really think the local pols are so dim (well, there may be one or two exceptions) that they don’t understand this. Certainly the legal advice they are getting, if it’s at all competent, makes it clear even if they don’t remember it from high school. So I assume they are just being opportunistic and using the Constitution as toilet paper to advance their own ambitions. Not at all a Conservative trait, at least in some Conservative circles. The Constitution can be a pesky, inconvenient thing at times. Particularly in this case, where federal policy leaves a lot to be desired. But a few determined Senators and Congressmen have been working to find a comprehensive solution on the federal level. That’s where everyone’s energy should be directed.

  23. Not Bill Howell said on 30 Jul 2007 at 5:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    There is no mystery here:

    The GOP Establishment does not want our immigration laws enforced by ANYONE because it’s first constituent is big business, which wants wages depressed. The Democratic Establishment does not want our immigration laws enforced by ANYONE because it figures a bigger underclass will soon translate into a bigger Democratic base. The courts merely reflect these establishments.

    To all these elites, the Constitution and the welfare of American workers are secondary considerations, at best. All they care about are their stock portfolios and the tennis court schedule at the country club.

    If you white collars think this doesn’t concern you, think again. Illegals dragging down wages at the bottom eventually pulls down the middle, and gradually expanded legal immigration is introducing direct downward pressure there. Don’t even get me started on the cost of services and benefits.

    Time for a new party that stands for enforcing the law and representing the ignored and exploited 80% of American citizens. Tancredo/Dobbs ‘08!

  24. Scott said on 30 Jul 2007 at 6:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    The current Federal government does not want a solution for the problem, that is painfully obvious at the expense of everyone including the aliens that are being exploited for cheap and slave labor. I was just watching that Virginia wants to institute the 287 (g) program statewide but was told by ICE that this is not possible. Apparently the training costs one million per jurisdiction, the budget for it is a whole five and a half million. Basically they are doing this for lip service.

  25. Mr. Hall said on 30 Jul 2007 at 8:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    Trying to bring the discussion back down to earth and into the practical realm of addressing the problems in the community….

    I repeat my earlier question… Are any of you willing to spend any money (in the form of public/civic improvements) to make Manassas more attractive to people other than the poor or selfish. The City of Manassas is rock-bottom in spending (per capita) on virtually every measure of quality of life investment. You guys need to put your money where your mouths are and make Manassas more attractive to professionals and aspirational citizens in general. The primary reason people choose to live in Manassas now is because of the cheap (read, “crummy”) housing stock and low (lowest of the low) real estate taxes. With all of the illegal aliens choosing Manassas as their Northern Virginia mecca, we are only reaping what we have sown. Can’t even one of you say anything about how we make Manassas more attractive to a desirable demographic. I mean, are we going to lift a finger, or spend a dollar, to make this place better…. or are we just going to keep advertising to the World what a dump Manassas has become, thanks to the “no new taxes” live-cheap-then-die-crowd.

  26. NoVA Scout said on 30 Jul 2007 at 8:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    That last comment (Mr. Hall’s) was one of the most constructive and challenging I have seen in a long time. A lot of this debate is formed by phenomena that implicate other issues beyond immigration reform. Given the reality that there are thousands of subsistence workers trying to exist in a fairly wealthy region, the negative impacts will tend to manifest themselves most dramatically where legitimate local planning issues have been handled most incompetently. Communities that short-change infrastructure development and upgrading business and housing stocks will feel the impacts more than ones that have, by design or good fortune, been more prosperous.

  27. AWCheney said on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    Actually Mr. Hall, we are very familiar with your “tax and spend” philosophy (Manssas Park’s “Taj Mahal”) and that you avoid being too adversely affected by it yourself, given your admission that most of your investments (meaning money) are sheltered overseas. The fact is, even honest, fairly well-off people appreciate keeping taxes down…you are an anomoly. I hardly think that low taxes is the big attraction to the illegal alien population seeing as taxes seem to be as low on their radar as complying with local ordinances. But, please, spin your “raise taxes on everyone but me and spend, spend, spend” philosophy on every issue possible. It’s always amusing to watch you stretch to appy it, whether it remotely applies or not.

  28. anonymous said on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    So, then, how to explain Manassas Park, which has THE highest real estate taxes in the entire state?

    In all of the measures you have mentioned, it is worse than Manassas, except for the higher real estate taxes which you apparently view as a good thing.

  29. AWCheney said on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    NoVA, I believe that this is the very first time that you and I have differed on a major issue. Because of that, I will agree to disagree with you. I do ask, however, that you consider the possibility that this is really an issue with which you must be rather up close and personal before you can get the entire picture and understand why it impassions so many people of all philosophical and political stripes. Sounds like it might be time to pay PWC another visit…how ’bout that lunch?

  30. park'd said on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    Umm yeah Mr. Hall, sorry but that theory of yours is flat out wrong. MP’s real estate taxes are the highest in the entire state of Virginia and that fact is verified by real estate agents. I pay almost $1000 a year more for an equivalent valued house as my friend does in Fairfax County in Centreville. We also have THE largest problem with illegals in the surrounding areas, maybe even in the entire state as well. Increasing taxes for civic improvements has done NOTHING for this rat town except feed the fat cats at the top like the mayor, city council and police leaders. I can’t believe that my taxes go for anything else but services to illegals, because it sure isn’t going anywhere else as far as I can see…

  31. Sals said on 30 Jul 2007 at 9:40 pm:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout
    “Virtually everyone knows this and knows that measures like Hazelton and PW are highly suspect, but it’s great theater and local pols love the attention, so we’ll probably get a lot more of this stuff. I’m sure the thought process is “the Constitution be damned, this stuff is fun and it may get me votes.” Of course, the PW measure does little and will await implementing policies before we know whether it has any real effect. I suppose it is invalid on its face to the extent it deals with subject matters that are exclusively federal,”

    My interpretation of the resolution is that it directs PWC police to become involved in 287g and requires eligibility be verified for all services that are limited to legal residents and citizens. What is invalid or suspect about that?

  32. NoVA Scout said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:03 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWC: I understand that folks are genuinely unhappy and that impacts are unevenly distributed in the region. My disagreement rests primarily on two points: 1) this is very much a federal issue and there is very little that local governments can legitimately do other than to enforce local zoning, traffic, and criminal laws. Politicians or political wannabees who contend otherwise are either ignorant or are taking sinister, opportunistic advantage of genuine community angst. Virtually every single complaint I’ve heard voiced could be addressed by even-handed, non-ethnically targetted enforcement of existing local law (housing codes, etc.). Barking up the wrong tree on this just delays meaningful federal reform (as happened last month) and takes pressure off those in the Congress who would run away from this issue; 2) the issue as discussed here and elsewhere has become so fevered and freighted with sweeping generalizations and almost urban-legend-type anecdotal disucssion (remember the “gang-rape-in-the-middle-of-the- street-by-five-illegal-immigrants-and-the-cold-blooded-murder-of-the-Good-Samaritan-who-attempted-to-save-the-victim- that-the-MSM-and-police-have-covered-up-to-protect-the-illegals-that-perpetrated-the-heinous-crime-with-impunity”?), usually with a strong anti-hispanic tinge, that I hear very little close analysis of what is reasonable to do about the facts as they now exist, and what impacts such moves will have politically and economically for the impacted communities and for the Nation.

    We probably agree more than most people around here are willing to let on. When I voice my concerns about the lack of good data on impacts, constitutional legalities, negative effects on local fiscal policy and law enforcement , I get back charges that I make money from illegals (yeah, as if. Just call me Coyote Scout), that I favor illegal immigration (I’m agin it), or worse. As I’ve made very clear, I’m against unauthorized entry, I oppose amnesty (although some people have a very different idea than I or Mr. Webster (Noah, not Daniel) on what constitutes “amnesty”, I oppose “line-jumping” for processing and I support securing the borders in a way that takes away the incentive for evading lawful entry.

    These are very complex problems that require a helluva lot more thought than “man, I just go nuts when I see all these illegal aliens: a. living 75 to a house; b. with their chickens in the yard; c. sitting outside the 7-11 waiting for work ogling native-born women; d. all of the above.” The “deport them all” faction and even the “drive them out of this neighborhood so they go somewhere else” factions are doing the country no good whatsoever. As a conservative Republican, I also have great concern that the prevalence of these sentiments among people who profess to be Republicans will also have extremely damaging impacts on the Party (although that is a secondary concern at this point).

    The most immediate downside of all of this is that passions are so high that a lot of really unimpressive, underwhelming, undeserving pols have glommed onto peoples’ unhappiness in a way that may save the skins of a lot of folks that we would be well rid of this election cycle. People are selling their votes very cheaply if they allow this issue to obscure the shortcomings of some elected officials and challengers who are not up to what we all deserve.

    We will have that lunch someday soon, I’m certain.

  33. anonymous said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Since you consider that bill “meaningful Federal reform”, what are your thoughts on the 1986 immigration bill, and what would this one have done differently?

    “I support securing the borders in a way that takes away the incentive for evading lawful entry.”

    How would you do that?

  34. anonymous said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    “My interpretation of the resolution is that it directs PWC police to become involved in 287g and requires eligibility be verified for all services that are limited to legal residents and citizens. What is invalid or suspect about that?”

    I’d like to know the answer to that, as well. But I suspect no answer is forthcoming.

  35. Dolph said on 30 Jul 2007 at 10:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout,

    Finally! Thank you for your well-written contribution directed to AWC. Your words were music to my ears up until the …as a conservative Republican… part. And that part is ok also, I am just a moderate who is not on board with either political party. My guess is that both parties will be out in full force pimping for votes.

    I feel that someone who can write far better than I can beamed my own thoughts into the written word. Thanks for expressing what I have also been thinking.

    Dolph

  36. Lafayette said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    Looks like Greg L is going to be on Channel 5-The News Edge, show is on from 11-11:30. I saw this as the show was coming on air. He’s on NOW!!!

  37. manassascityresident said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    He did a great job. What is the “big” announcement that Mexicans without Borders is going to make tomorrow? The boycott? I can’t wait - no traffic - quiet streets - less cars……it should be a nice few weeks! Enjoy it while you can, folks!

  38. manassascityresident said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    No crowds at stores…….

  39. anonymous said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    I wonder if their boycott includes the emergency rooms and welfare offices?

  40. manassascityresident said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:39 pm:
    Flag comment

    Signs should be posted on both the ERs and Welfare Offices “Attention all Illegals! Due to the current boycott, we assumed you meant us too - so we have sent half of our staff on a well deserved vacation. Therefore, there’s no room at the Inn! See you in a month! Or if we’re lucky - NEVER again!”

  41. NoVA Scout said on 30 Jul 2007 at 11:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sals and anon 2245: My statement was worded conditionally and is a sound one, but you’re quite right to note that the modified PW resolution was not particularly substantive and may be mere rhetoric without constitutional meaning (or practical effect). A mere directive to move forward on a federally sanctioned cooperation program shouldn’t in itself be a problem, and the concern about police inquiries in the original was significantly lowered by limiting status checks to situations where the suspect was already in custody AND where there was probable cause to think there has been an immigration violation. How one establishes ProCa remains to be seen. I imagine the local police wouldn’t have it in most situations. Much of my impression of the resolution was based on the Stirrup resolution and was formed prior to its modification. As enacted, it had been significantly sterilized so that it may have no practical effect and may not be unconstitutional on its face. Of course, then the problem is that it is a waste of time and effort. The test will be more clear when some of the implementing elements come to the fore (like the report on eligibility or lack thereof for county programs).

    Anon 2242: I thought at the time that the 1986 legislation was a vast improvement over the status quo. I think that view is still hard to controvert. The problem since then has been the lack of an effective federal effort to control unauthorized entry, particularly on the southern border. We’re back where we were pre-1986 in many ways, except the numbers are worse. Of course there’s much more to immigration policy than unauthorized entry. The countries that succeed economically in the next 50 years will be the ones that have the least restrictive immigration policies that attract and keep valuable labor, particularly in the sciences, engineering, medicine and related professions. To secure the in-flow of these skills, the immigration atmospherics have to be positive and welcoming. Efforts to make acquisition of citizenship an inviting and integrative process can’t be confined to the high end of the immigration spectrum.

    Anon 2242 (again). The border should be a convenient, safe, and efficient place for immigrants to cross and register. If it is considerably better than walking 50 miles across the desert, people will use it. Doesn’t seem like a high standard to meet. Of course, this also means that our overall statutory structure for regulating immigrant labor has to be flexible enough to permit seasonal and temporary workers to come and go without hassle.

    thank you, Mr. (or Ms.) Dolph for your courtesy. This issue seems to fracture party lines fairly effectively. My conservative aversion to localities usurping limited federal powers probably guides much of my thinking, but I’m certain any citizen of good will and concern about the Nation would have concerns about the tenor of this discussion, regardless of where he sees himself on the political spectrum. I’m also sure that solutions that are good (or “least bad”) for the country can come from any quarter, as long as the motivations are doing what’s in the national interest and people take the time to understand the ramifications of the problem.

  42. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:27 am:
    Flag comment

    manassascityresident
    Well said(all above comments)!!!!!!
    When does this boycott go into effect and how long? I wonder does this mean they won’t be spending their food stamps or claiming any benefits that might be coming to them in the mail?

  43. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:38 am:
    Flag comment

    I bet there are fewer if not any shopping carts all over the streets ofWest Gate/Sudley.
    Will the illegals not be sending their “anchor babies” to summer school during the “big boycott of ‘07″?
    I guess they won’t be lining up at the Health Dept. for the Thursday night “free clinic” at 11am for services not even available until 6pm. I sure hope not. I get so sick of seeing this on Thursdays, and the weather DOES NOT stop them.

  44. NoVA Scout said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:38 am:
    Flag comment

    Lafayette: Are unauthorized entrants eligible for food stamps? I didn’t know that. What are the benefits that are mailed to illegal aliens?

  45. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:45 am:
    Flag comment

    “Are unauthorized entrants eligible for food stamps?”

    Probably not. If not:

    Is the legal status of food stamp applicants verified? If not:

    Why not?

  46. AWCheney said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:05 am:
    Flag comment

    “Of course, then the problem is that it is a waste of time and effort.”

    Here’s where we really differ NoVA. The problem is, neither the police nor the social services are enforcing the law. The purpose of the resolution, in its current form, was to drive home that the law will now be enforced locally in its entirety and to warn that stronger measures will be explored. Sad, isn’t it, that citizens have more to fear from the law than illegal aliens who are here by virtue of ignoring it in the first place.

  47. NoVA Scout said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:17 am:
    Flag comment

    AWC: The “law” on immigration is not the PW Police’s to enforce. Immigration and naturalization is a federal precinct. while we probably all agree that federal policy is in a shambles, it is definitely not for local police forces to sort it out or make it better. If federal authorities opt for a policy of benign neglect, no local authority can deviate from that (I’m not saying that happened here - I think federal policy is a mess because Congress and Clinton didn’t want to deal with it, not because they consciously thought there was wisdom in inaction). “stronger measures” are nowhere in the picture. Either people are entitled to public benefits at the local level or they are not. And I don’t think citizens have anything to fear from the law.

  48. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:28 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout
    I believe the food stamps, wic and free/discounted lunches at schools are federaly and/or state funded. We all know we live in place where they don’t ask legal status. I believe it’s the children of the illegals that are getting these benefits. I’m not certain, but if we must educate illegal children then I think they are also benefitting from free lunches.
    As for benefits in the mail. I think there are plenty of illegals with fake SS Cards & #’s, that are getting Social Security, Medicare and/or Medicaid, and maybe even Disability benefits that would be mailed or even worse yet just direct deposited to their bank accounts at Nations Bank.
    Nations bank is known for it’s dealings with illegal aliens. Earlier this spring they announced they’d be issuing credit cards to illegals. I and others have talked about Nations Bank on other threads. I bet the default rate on the credit cards will be way worse than the default rate on mortgages.
    I’d like to add something I heard about benefits in Petersburg, WV…One Medicare or Medicaid card issued to one person, and Social Security paid for three babies to be delivered in less than a year. Three women and their babies. I bet some of them were illegal.This seems like illegal activity. I want to know how many other times has this happened, and why doesn’t Social Security catch this? This is a county with about 10,000 residents, and about 50 foreigners. Imagine this ratio of error in our county with the number of possible illegals.

  49. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:49 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVa Scout,
    I’m sorry, but “unauthorized entrant”, why not ILLEGAL ALIEN?
    Well, either way their mere presence in our great nation is BREAKING THE LAW!!! I mean no harm, I’m just interested. Please, don’t confuse me for Interested Party. I have lived my entire life in PWC. I don’t live a “stones throw away” from PWC.

  50. AWCheney said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:50 am:
    Flag comment

    Actually NoVA, you need to check out some of those Libertarian blogs like “The Agitator” and Reason Magazine online before you say, “And I don’t think citizens have anything to fear from the law.” Although it is more “law enforcement” than the law, they’ve documented considerable information that refutes that statement.

    But there is absolutely no question (at least in this area) that, until recently, the illegal aliens openly flaunted it (and before someone comes in here and says “how do you know they’re illegal,” there is considerable anecdotal evidence that they are). Insofar as the police involvement in enforcing the law regarding illegals, it quite simply has to do with the “sanctuary policy” being snuck in on us in violation of PWC’s agreement with Homeland Security, for which the County actually received funds which were endangered when that policy became public. Illegal aliens are also routinely receiving public assistance to which they are not entitled by existing law under a policy of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” THAT’S why localities are forced to take a stand on what might seem to be a “waste of time and effort,” NoVA…State, County, and City employees taking upon themselves the roll of protector FROM the law of the poor little illegal alien underdog.

  51. NoVA Scout said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:51 am:
    Flag comment

    Lafayette:

    Why would the government pay Social Security to a baby?

    What’s the connection between Medicare and Social Security for having babies?

    My mother benefits from Medicare and Social Security. She’s 86 years old. Babies aren’t really part of the equation for her. Maybe I just don’t understand these programs.

    I buy disability insurance on the private market. Is that what you’re referring to? If an illegal immigrant buys disability insurance on the market, should he/she be able to claim benefits under the policy?

    Are the children you’re referring to re school lunches U.S. citizens?

    If the law requires that education cannot be denied illegal alien children living within a district, do we benefit from denying them food?

    Isn’t it fairly clear that one of the “benefits” to the rest of us of illegal immigration is that the net inflow to Social Security from illegals exceeds the outflow (because of withholding that cannot be reclaimed by illegal aliens)?

    Why does a person’s immigration status matter if a bank decides to take a risk on issuing a credit card? Should we take the position that illegal entrants should not have credit cards? drivers’ licenses? insurance? other? I can see economic, safety and social advantages to them having all of these things.

  52. NoVA Scout said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:55 am:
    Flag comment

    AWC: As someone having a stong libertarian substratum in my conservative leanings, I take your point that law enforcement abuse is not an imaginary phenomenon. It does happen and is reprehensible.

  53. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:10 am:
    Flag comment

    The medical benefits are issued through the Social Security Administration.
    Folks can get disabilty benefits for a number of reasons..
    1. Mental Health
    2. Unable to work due to medical reasons.
    3. Worker’s comp benefits if they’re hurt on the job.
    4. Alcholics, that can’t function can also get disability benefits.
    These benefits are paid monthly instead of them going out here, and working for a living. Then after that comes medical and food stamps because they’re at almost if not poverty level.
    I do mean illegals getting free lunches in schools as well as US Citizens.
    I don’t think illegals should be rewarded with government “handouts” or credit cards, driver’s lisense etc. We must remember alot of these illegals have fake documents of all types. They also use couple of last names, but not all the time. I’m a title examiner in PWC, I see this sort of thing on a daily basis. They buy the house with one last name then a year or two down the road there’s another last name you’ve never seen before.
    We must remember all the while these agencies and PWPD, don’t ask of legal status. This plays a huge part in rolling out the “red carpet” and feeding the cancer called the “Illegal Invasion”
    I’ll go back and see what other questions I may have missed.

  54. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:13 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVa Scout
    The illegals are not easy to track down like you or I. Therefore, no, the banks should NOT give them a credit card for them to skip out of town on like the foreclosed on houses around here.

  55. bake ootmm said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:20 am:
    Flag comment

    whats all the complaining about we let this nightmare happen we are all in the bucket together i just dont understand it this started a long time ago and now when someone starts to do something about the illegals there wrong for trying to do the right thing i do know that the ones here that took the us test to become citizens are just as pissed about whats happening as any one else but we got to many people who waited to long and now if all of us dont stand together we will fall apart start doing like that movie a few years back i mad as hell and im not going to take it anymore.stand up for what is right if there here illegal do what you know has to be done dont turn your back because im tired of them on the side of all the roads ,sneeking in the back of the building going to pee drink beer etc and ruining arlington,fairfax,prince william counties etc.the police drive bye wont do the correct thing and arrest them for vagency wont ask for id its even getting so bad you cant even go to 7-11 to get a cup of coffee that you dont hear you got any change unbelievable .nuff said for now

  56. Scott said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:44 am:
    Flag comment

    This kind of stuff makes things worse:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20044213/

  57. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 3:23 am:
    Flag comment

    Scott
    You sure got that right. Thanks for the link. I’ve already forwarded it to about 15 people. I hope everybody reads this link. Classic, not only did they do this Arlington, but also in Fairfax and Prince William. When will folks learn these types of crimes also add to the lawlessness that so many seem to deny.

  58. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 6:58 am:
    Flag comment

    Social Security:

    I haven’t figured out what US citizens are entitled to much less what non-citizens and those who are here illegal manage to get when it comes to the social security administration. I went with my husband for his interview with them before the magic month of turning 65 and came away just baffled.

    Also, there were many people in there who were no where near age 65. What exactly does social security administer and exactly what comes out of the social security funds? There are so many urban legends out there I have never figured it all out. I guess what I am really asking is the following: I pay FICA. What comes out in the form of payments to people from the FICA money the government holds?

    School lunches:

    I believe that free lunches are paid for jointly by the state and federal govt. HOWEVER…..parents fill out a form stating income, number of family members etc. The form is turned in to the local school. I think the cafeteria manager is the middle man here. I don’t believe that this information is routinely verified. I don’t see how it could be. I think people are just taken at their word. It says right on the form what income needs to be for free lunch based on number of family members. It gives the same guide for reduced cost lunches.

    How easy can they make it! The guidelines are right in front of you. If you make 40k and have 7 family members (just making this part up here) and you get free lunch…well…write that down. I would be very interested to know what kind of checks and balances, if any, are being used.

    Here is the real kicker: All levels of government keep track of the number of poor students. All sorts of entitlements have historically been given to schools based on the number of economically disadvantaged students enrolled. (head start, title 1, etc) Additionally, economically disadvantaged is a big part of sub grouping for school sanctions with the No Child Left Behind Act. Poverty is determined by number of students on free and reduced lunches.

    This is so interwoven and complex that I don’t even think I can explain it. Plus a large portion of what I said above is cloaked in mystery so the average person can never figure it out. Ask a question and you either get bs and blather or a stupid look because most people really don’t know.

    I don’t mind kids being fed. I mind blatant abuse. I resent seeing a kid dropped off in the morning for free breakfast when the kid climbs out of a Lexus SUV. I mind their trashy a** parents thinking they are pulling one over on the system. I really mind the system making this possible.

    The abuse transcends all ethnicities, however, I know who are the greatest abusers currently. Three guesses, the first 2 don’t count.

    I also really resent an abused system being used to create statistical data. The raw data is flawed before it becomes a statistic because of dishonesty. Therefore, the statistical data used to determine policy, instruction, federal money, state money, the list goes on and on is horribly flawed.

    I would be very interested in seeing any information someone might be able to ferret out on either of the topics here.

  59. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 7:11 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout,

    re your 1:17 am post

    Where do you see George Bush fitting in to this reign of benign neglect?

    Before George Bush was president, I felt I lived in a diverse area. Since he became president, I have felt overrun. A saturation point was hit somewhere after 2001.

    Dolph…..and that would be Ms…but you may drop the formalities

  60. NoVA Scout said on 31 Jul 2007 at 7:45 am:
    Flag comment

    Dolph: I think there has been a complete continuity of ignoring the issue between Bush I/Clinton/Bush II. Bush I may get a partial pass because most of his Administration was close enough to the 1986 statutory changes to perhaps justify the illusion that “we fixed this.” The othe two have no excuse. I think the numbers just finally accumulated to the point where a lot of people get constant visual reminders of the problem (or think they’re getting constant visual reminders) in recent years.

  61. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 9:14 am:
    Flag comment

    “Isn’t it fairly clear that one of the “benefits” to the rest of us of illegal immigration is that the net inflow to Social Security from illegals exceeds the outflow (because of withholding that cannot be reclaimed by illegal aliens)?”

    The Social Security Administration (SSA) recently signed a highly controversial agreement that could add millions of Mexicans, some who worked here illegally, to the Social Security rolls. The U.S. - Mexico Totalization treaty is still in the preliminary stages of ratification and can be disapproved by Congress. It would allow persons who divided their careers between both countries to “total” the amount of work credits from both countries in order to qualify for benefits. TSCL is vigorously opposing the agreement and urging seniors, families and others concerned about their earned benefits to support legislation, H. Res. 720, that calls for Congressional disapproval of recently signed agreement.

    The U.S. has signed some twenty such agreements with other countries like Canada, but TSCL believes that an agreement between the U.S. and Mexico would be different. Although the SSA fact sheet says that, “a totalization agreement with Mexico would have a negligible long-range effect on the Trust Funds,” both Social Security’s own Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have said that the cost of the agreement is “highly uncertain” because the Social Security Chief Actuary did not take into account an estimated 5 million Mexicans who are in this country illegally. TSCL is concerned that the uncertain cost could put the Social Security trust fund at risk.”

    Under U.S. Social Security law, illegal immigrants cannot claim benefits, but, if an illegal immigrant works using an improper Social Security number, the illegal worker will earn U.S. Social Security work credits. If an immigrant later obtains a legitimate U.S. Social Security number, the worker can then claim those work credits if the earnings can be documented.

    http://www.tscl.org/NewContent/102239.asp

  62. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 10:16 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout,

    I feel Bush 2 has been almost flippant and defiant about immigration issues.

    To be very truthful, I didn’t pay that much attention to these issues when Clinton was in office.

    I did look up yearly ESOL stats for Prince William County Schools. While those statistics give only a snapshot of our demographics, I think a trend is clearly indicated.
    Year # students enrolled
    1996 801

    2000 1781
    2001 2050
    2002 3657
    2003 5014
    2004 6104
    2005 8368

    Not all hispanic students are in ESOL but I believe these stats definitely show a trend of growth, for lack of a better word. This information is certainly more than visual and at least gives us some firm numbers with a population that is fairly unverifiable.
    I think the only valid conclusion we can draw from these numbers is that the number of non English proficient students in Prince William County has increased 10 fold in a decade.

    If someone wanted to make some fairly accurate assumptions, one could pull other information and start drawing some conclusions that would give more information not quite as statistically valid.

    Dolph

  63. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 10:18 am:
    Flag comment

    Rats! My carefully tabbed year and numbers column did not translate. Grrrrr Sorry. I did try.

  64. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 10:26 am:
    Flag comment

    The countries that succeed economically in the next 50 years will be the ones that have the least restrictive immigration policies that attract and keep valuable labor, particularly in the sciences, engineering, medicine and related professions. To secure the in-flow of these skills, the immigration atmospherics have to be positive and welcoming. Efforts to make acquisition of citizenship an inviting and integrative process can’t be confined to the high end of the immigration spectrum.

    The countries that succeed in the next 50 years will be those that protect the citizenship rights of their native-born and legal citizens. Those that don’t will be rended by civil strife and possibly even civil war, and/or the widespread abandonment of them for countries that DO protect citizenship rights.

    Native Britons are leaving their country at the rate of 500,000 per year, most of them specifically because of the havoc that their “inviting and integrative process” of mass Third World immigration into their country has caused. Their government has ceased to protect their citizenship rights and thus, their property rights.

    They are being replaced by people of an incompatible culture, who on the whole are less educated and less wealthy than the ones who are leaving. Great Briton is definitely not going to be among “the countries that succeed in the next 50 years” — they will be lucky to avoid an extremely bloody and costly civil war. Ditto France — ditto most of Europe.

    People aren’t simply economic units — they are people. Culture matters. Wholesale importation of other cultures changes or challenges the host culture, often in not very desirable ways. This has a huge economic impact.

    The idea that countries will “succeed” by importing mass labor from willy-nilly with no regard to cultural compatibility or quality of recruits, is absurd. China isn’t importing 80 million culturally incompatible people from India, Africa or Europe. (In fact they’ve militarized their border with North Korea to keep starving illegal alien North Koreans out.) Their economy is booming. Finland is one of the most homogenous countries in the world, with very strict immigration policies– they are at the tops in world economic competitiveness tables. Finland is growing its own future work force with its own culturally compatible people — less stress on its own people, less potential civil strife that will prove costly and demoralizing. Maybe it’s time other Western nations do the same.

  65. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 10:35 am:
    Flag comment

    AWC: The “law” on immigration is not the PW Police’s to enforce. Immigration and naturalization is a federal precinct. while we probably all agree that federal policy is in a shambles, it is definitely not for local police forces to sort it out or make it better. If federal authorities opt for a policy of benign neglect, no local authority can deviate from that (I’m not saying that happened here - I think federal policy is a mess because Congress and Clinton didn’t want to deal with it, not because they consciously thought there was wisdom in inaction). “stronger measures” are nowhere in the picture. Either people are entitled to public benefits at the local level or they are not. And I don’t think citizens have anything to fear from the law.

    287(g) is a federal program and is allowed under federal law. It is only allowed to be used with illegals who have been arrested for a crime — many of them serious crimes. Nonetheless, the pro-illegals want even 287(g) to be thrown out.

    I’m curious as to your belief that local governments can not make laws taht affect immigration policies. Does this extend to the many “sanctuary” cities that are also making immigration law on their own? I find it extremely hypocritical for the pro-illegals to say, on the one hand, localities like PWC or Hazelton PA can’t make their own immigration laws, while at the same time, supporting the ability of Los Angeles or Houston to make laws that protect illegal aliens from federal immigration authorities. The ACLU for instance, isn’t suing LA for its “sanctuary” law - in fact the ACLU supports the sanctuary law.

    It seems the whole point of those screaming “immigration is a federal purview” is not to uphold federalism or the Constitution, but to make sure that native-born people can never win against illegals, no matter what. If it were simply a matter of upholding federalism or the Constitution, there would be consistent position on Hazleton-type laws AND on “sanctuary” laws. There isn’t.

  66. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 10:39 am:
    Flag comment

    Dolph,

    It seems readily apparent that the illegal invasion went from a relative trickle under Clinton to an enormous huge flood under Bush II.

    Even in Mexifornia, I did not see my first Spanish-language billboard (on a regular traffic route transitted by native-born people as well as “immigrants”), until a year ago. In Clinton’s time I do not recall seeing much Spanish at all in my neck of the woods — now it is everywhere.

  67. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 11:12 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVAAWC: As someone having a stong libertarian substratum in my conservative leanings, I take your point that law enforcement abuse is not an imaginary phenomenon. It does happen and is reprehensible.

    This is one place where the open borders libertarians like yourself fall apart. You can’t have open borders and a welfare state at the same time. Even St. Milton of the Chicago School admitted as much. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you seem to be one of those “conservative Republicans” who advocate that middle-class Americans subsidize “cheap” labor for corporations out of our tax dollars?

    The other place where you fall apart is assuming that all people are simply interchangeable economic units (just as Marxists do). You discount the importance of culture and national unity in building and maintaining a nation’s wealth.

  68. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 11:14 am:
    Flag comment

    Again NoVa Scout:

    If the law requires that education cannot be denied illegal alien children living within a district, do we benefit from denying them food?

    Do we benefit from taxation without representation for the native-born? This is what you are advocating/defending.

  69. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 11:21 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVAVirtually every single complaint I’ve heard voiced could be addressed by even-handed, non-ethnically targetted enforcement of existing local law (housing codes, etc.).

    Not really an answer to the problem. In Mexifornia such laws have fallen by the wayside in many communities as pro-illegal-alien politicians have gained local political power. Building codes, occupancy codes, residential zoning etc are a joke in many parts of our state, especially in SoCal. Illegals are selling used cars out of their homes in some communities, or operating illegal restaurants out of their garages.

    The lack of building code enforcement and occupancy enforcement is especially dangerous because we live in an earthquake zone. The next Big One to hit SoCal will bring a lot of those over-crowded apartment buildings down and also destroy a lot of the gimcrack, code-deficient “homes” the illegals are adding onto houses and garages. The loss of life could be great.

  70. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:07 pm:
    Flag comment

    Plenty of native born children also get free or reduced lunch. This is not a perk granted only to hispanic kids of immigrant parents. As current conditions stand, it does us no good to deny any kid a basic education (plus that issue has already been ruled on.) Education has to have a goal that all children can and will learn. An education is basically the cutting edge of what kind of life you will lead as an adult. While not an absolute, in most cases, those with an education will lead productive lives. Those without basic literacy will be dependent on society and if there are enough, will suck our resources dry. Hungry kids don’t learn as well as non-hungry kids.

    This emphasis on literacy hasn’t always been true. However, this being the 21st century and all, an individual is seriously handicapped if they are not literate and numerate. Unfortunately, many young people do not see the correlation between attaining an education and being a productive member of society, but that is another topic for another day.

    Kids who aren’t in school tend to be out in the neighborhood doing nefarious things. That is just what kids do, because they are kids. I want them in school and I want them learning so my kids and grandkids don’t have to support them.

    Dolph

  71. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    Kids can do nefarious things in school, too. Just because a given child is in school does NOT mean they are learning. In fact, their presence may be detrimental to the safety and learning of other students; this has been used for many years as the basis for expelling a student. Quote from the “Prince William County Schools Code of Behavior”, of any edition from 1988-1994: “When a student is expelled, they are PERMANENTLY denied the right to attend Prince William County schools”.

    I don’t know what the current editions say, or if expulsion is still “permanent”.

  72. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout has said he is not for open borders and I take his word for it. I agree with him about enforcing local ordinances. Will doing so solve all our problems? Of course not. However, it is a start and to do nothing is a cop out. It will help preserve community standards and will help preserve the culture of the local community.

    Mary, please stop addressing our local problems as though they are California problems. Ours are different in many respects. Just the different geography makes them different. We are also dealing with a predominently different hispanic population.

    Most of the people in this area and on this blog are attempting to do what they can to remedy problems that have hit very suddenly and without the infastructure to accommodate those coming in. There are enforcements that can be handled locally. There are also enforcements that are very much out of our control unless there is a serious regeime change and change in philosophy in Congress and the White House.

    The bottom line is, West Gate and Sudley people will have more concerns than Gainesville people in the newer more expensive houses. City and Park people will have more concerns. Many of us made a bunch of money on our houses during the housing boom. Many folks moved out to the more affluent neighborhoods. The houses that were sold were sometimes bought by people who turned them in to multiple family dwellings. Economic prosperity is one root cause of what is happening now. My hat is off to those who are attempting to make grass roots changes to preserve their community standards. I might not always agree, but I do respect.

  73. NoVA Scout said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    OK, Mary, you stand corrected. I’m all for local law enforcement and I’m sorry to hear that in California that has fallen by the wayside. You guys ought to do something about that. I’m also against taxation without representation. Seems sort of fundamental. Not sure what it has to do with the topic at hand. I’m no fan of welfare states either, so I don’t see where you’re going with that. RE “culture and national unity”, I see America’s great strength in the dynamism and change of its culture over time. I’d be hard-pressed to identify a single “American” culture. If everyone were like me ethnically, we’d all be sitting around eating boiled meat and potatoes. Culture is dynamic, not static. Nations that try to put it in a jar and preserve it, lose it.

  74. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anonymous….I am rolling on the floor with laughter…YOU are telling ME that kids can be bad in school. Ya think? Tell me it isnt true. Sorry, I just couldnt help myself.

    Students may apply for readmittance after their expulsion time has been served. It is up to the School Board whether to readmit them or not.

    I have no problem with expulsion for students who are a danger to others or who habitually keep others from learning.

    Of course not all kids in school learn. However, even an amoeba absorbs something through osmosis. I guess I am trying to understand your point. You can find a current copy of the Code of Behavior on at www.pwcs.edu

    Not all immigrant kids are behavior problems in school…not even close. Many are hardworking and value the education they are receiving. I wish I could say the same for all of kids of all ethnicities.

  75. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 12:52 pm:
    Flag comment

    We are a patchwork of cultures because of our vast size and because our people have come from all over the world.

    I can’t think of a single American culture either. In fact, I was thinking about what to serve British friends when they came to visit. I wanted to serve an American dish. That was not easy either.

    Hell Bratwurst is now found in Cajun cookbooks. Go figure.

  76. Just saying... said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dolph:

    In regards to your table of ESOL stats (31 Jul 2007 at 10:16 am), please keep in mind the following:

    1. All ESOL participants are not hispanic. There is a growing population of Chinese, Korean, Iraqi, Pakastani, Afghani, and other non-hispanic ethic groups in the county.

    2. Not all Hispanic ESOL participants are illegal aliens or “anchor babies.”

    3. Without corresponding data as to the growth in the size of the school district as a whole, it is impossible to use the numbers you quote to show anything. Has the overall population of ESOL students increased as a proportion of the total school population or is the proportion still the same (indicating that your conclusions are false)? The county as a whole grew by more than 27% from 2000 to 2006, with over 44% of the households in the county having children of school age.

    According to stats from PWC schools, over 50% of the students in the ESOL program were born in the United States, which under the law makes them citizens eligible for all of the services and programs available to citizens.

    anonymous (31 July 2007 12:27): Expulsion has *never* been permanent in the sense that you are reading. There have always been procedures for reinstatement (even under the 1988-1994 Code of Behavior you quote). That said, the fact that the expulsion path exists by no means refutes Dolph’s statement that kids otherwise occupied in schools aren’t on the streets doing nefarious things. There is lots of research out there that supports Dolph’s contention. The number of students expelled under the ground you quote is very small. The updated code of behavior for the PWCS is available at http://www.pwcs.edu/studentservices/codeofbehavior.pdf

  77. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Economic prosperity is one root cause of what is happening now.”

    The housing boom had all appearances of economic prosperity, didn’t it? But it didn’t last, and in fact has created severe problems that may in fact lead to a recession. I expect that housing lenders will be before Congress asking for a bailout, that’s how bad this has the potential to be. How many houses can a lender lose $50K-$100K on before they start having problems? How long before their problems become our problems?

    “I guess I am trying to understand your point.”

    I guess the point is, in some cases, there’s not much difference in outcomes between the kid roaming the streets for 6 hours and spending that 6 hours in school.

    “However, even an amoeba absorbs something through osmosis.”

    Learning is something that one needs to be take active participation in for it to be of any effect.

  78. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Expulsion has *never* been permanent in the sense that you are reading. There have always been procedures for reinstatement (even under the 1988-1994 Code of Behavior you quote).”

    As I figured, since K12 education is considered a “right”.

  79. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    “According to stats from PWC schools, over 50% of the students in the ESOL program were born in the United States, which under the law makes them citizens eligible for all of the services and programs available to citizens.”

    I recall reading in the Washington Post some years back that ethnic enclaves make it easy for a child, born in this country, to get to kindergarten age without learning much, if any, English.

    So much for assimilation.

  80. AWCheney said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dolph, just feed them good, wholesome, NON-greasy food and they’ll think you’re a 5-star chef. I’ve traveled all over Europe and England and I can tell you, England is a great place to go on a diet!

    Insofar as the education/school situation, I agree that the children must be educated WHILE THEY ARE HERE. The main problem has been prematurely integrating them (the ESOL students, that is) into classes with non-special needs students (getting children and teens caught up with their age group is really a “special needs” case). I’ve proposed, and it’s being explored, the possibility of establishing one or more “special needs” schools where these students can be bused and given the special attention they require to speedily bring them up to the educational/language level for their age, when they can then be integrated back into the general student population to compete on an even playing field in an expeditious manner. This would benefit both the ESOL and non-special needs students in that one could get the individual focus needed (and perhaps avoid feelings of inadequacy) and the other would no longer run the risk of being held back by the overwhelming numbers in the classrooms. Both groups (and, importantly, both sets of parents) would benefit enormously from this.

  81. TH said on 31 Jul 2007 at 1:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    In some cases the schools just need the money and put students into all these programs.

  82. Sals said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWCheney
    That’s going down a really slippery slope. There would be complaints of segregation. Also, by law, children with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. I would imagine that right would apply to all children. The other danger is that the well meaning ESL classes would become bilingual and then monolingual (in Spanish). I think it would make assimilation more unlikely.

  83. Mando said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Also, by law, children with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate education in the least restrictive environment.”

    Children with disabilities have there own special needs classes based on the severity of their disability.

  84. AWCheney said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    The whole point, Sals, is that they receive “special education” including a concentrated language program. If you’ve ever taken language classes, you know that the best ones are the ones where the instructors require that you ONLY speak the language you are learning in class. There’s no “seperate but equal” situation here. The goal would be to integrate these students into the general student population in an expeditious manner and do so without hindering the education of the non-special needs students, including that of those former ESOL students who are also being adversely affected. It’s a win, win situation all the way around and would enable the School Board to concentrate their ESOL funds in one place, making those ependitures far more efficient.

    How much you want to bet that the greatest resistance to something like this would come from the individual school administrators who will be losing that ESOL money and from the ESOL teachers who know that consolodation will require fewer of them and that they will therefore be held to a higher standard?

  85. AWCheney said on 31 Jul 2007 at 2:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Typos: “eXpenditures” and “consolIdation”

  86. Sals said on 31 Jul 2007 at 3:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    I have taken language classes and I agree 100% that to learn a language one must speak it. We do the Hispanic population a huge disservice by catering to them in Spanish.
    My fear is that it will be easier to convert those classes to the bilingual classes they have in Texas and California.

  87. AWCheney said on 31 Jul 2007 at 4:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    That would be the idea of having a school staffed by experts specializing in getting these kids the help that they need to succeed in our schools. That can’t be accomplished with mini-programs in every school where “ESOL” teachers often have to be hired on an emergency basis just to fulfill the minimum requirements. It’s unfair to the students…ALL of the students. I’m a firm believer in EFFICIENT spending in government, and that simply is not efficient…or logical.

  88. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 4:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    Just saying,

    I didn’t mean to imply that all the ESOL students are Hispanic. It has been my experience, however, that the majority are Spanish speaking. Actually, on the subject of immigration, it is fairly irrelevant where the ESOL students come from. I am also aware that all ESOL students are not anchor babies. In fact, many of them are American citizens. I was just hoping we could avoid going there…to avoid unleashing the hounds of hell. ESOL also does not have a thing to do with legal or illegal status.

    I am not so sure my conclusions are false. Has the student population of Prince William County Schools increased 10 fold since 2000? If the readers here are interested, they will obtain the additional information for themselves and draw whatever conclusions they want to draw. The information is available on the Prince William County Schools website.

    My point was, basically, that this area has been impacted by immigration. In this area, as you are well aware, data is rather sketchy as to actual number of people. Since schools are fairly immune to skirting around census issues, I felt that using ESOL data was a good indicator of community impact. If there are better examples out there, go for it.

  89. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 4:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    I do not know of any ESOL class being taught in Spanish. (or any other non-English language) The idea is to learn English. I would consider an ESOL class a transition class.

    AWC, I believe the flaw in your plan would be that kids learn English by hearing and speaking English. If they are segregated (no political implication in the use of that word) into special language classes, they would lose the opportunity of interacting with those English as a first language students. I am quotinig you the party line rather than giving you my opinion, which is actually irrelevant.

    On the subject of naughty children, I do not think you want hordes of unsupervised kids running around your neighborhood while you are at work for 7 hours a day. Not everyone learns but that condition has been around as long as education has been around. It certainly knows no racial boundaries.

    I guess I have opened Pandora’s Box bringing up this issue. I find it amusing that I have been hung as both a naive liberal and an arch conservative here. Sigh, jack of all trades and master of none.

  90. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 4:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWC,

    Write to George Bush and Ted Kennedy and demand that the No Child Left Behind Act not be renewed. That act is what is causing the situation you described in your comment about minimum requirements. Then write to your senators and congressman.

  91. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 4:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    AWC/Dolph
    My daughter had a teacher at SMS last. He got the full-time teaching position in mid-August, and only to find out in mid-September, he no longer had a teaching position. They had to hire more ESOL teachers, to accommodate the non English speaking students while the English speaking students were all out ROBBED of the chance to have an excellent teacher. Three other positions at the school were eliminated. As always I must add none of us know for sure who’s ILLEGAL.
    NoVa Scout
    There are just so many benefits for illegals it just makes my head hurt. Here are some links, and I hope will check them out.
    Let me know if I left in other questions unanswered..
    http://ssa.gov/international/Agreement_Texts/mexico.html
    http://www.numbersusa.com/hottopic/totalization.htm
    http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18998
    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200512%5CPOL20051208a.html
    There’s just not enough hours in the day, to really digest it all.

  92. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    “On the subject of naughty children, I do not think you want hordes of unsupervised kids running around your neighborhood while you are at work for 7 hours a day.”

    Well..what happens during June, July, and August?

  93. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Anonymous,

    re: naughty kids in the summer time

    And do you like it?

  94. Sals said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    I would not be so naive as to believe that none of the ESOL classes are using Spanish. At least if they’re being taught in a regular classroom it can be guaranteed that they’re being taught in English. What has served other students from other cultures for so long will work for Hispanics because they are just as capable as any one else.

  95. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sals
    ESOL, has served students from other places around the world just fine, and they’ve learned English, and assimilated to the American culture. This is NOT what’s happening with the Spanish speaking children. My daughter is going to the eigth grade, she has classmates that have been taking ESOL classes since Kindergarten. Don’t you think eight years of ESOL classes is more than enough? I sure do. My German immigrant neighbors didn’t have this luxury for their children when the entered PWCPS, in the late 50’s and early 60’s, and all of the other luxuries that we the legal citizens are paying for. While are children are being robbed of quality teachers.

  96. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dolph
    Is it me or do notice the number of kids roaming the streets when school is open, and they are of school age? I could be wrong, but I swear their are less kids on the streets in the summer daytime than when school is open.
    Where have the Truant Officers gone? I got out of school early to go to work, and I was always asked by Truant officers to show me my Early Dismal for work card. My employment was part of DE, I wonder if that still exists in PWC.

  97. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    “And do you like it?”

    I don’t see more kids being naughty during the summer months than I do at any other time.

    In fact, of those times when I’ve seen naughty things that would likely to have been done by kids, they were done during times of the day when they would have been out of school anyway, like after 3pm.

  98. anonymous said on 31 Jul 2007 at 5:49 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Where have the Truant Officers gone?”

    Good question? I know of a case in another state where the juvenile was not going to school and the school did nothing about it, even when it was brought to their attention.

    I have never seen or heard of a real-life truant officer. I’ve read about ‘em and seen ‘em in old movies, but I guess maybe they are a relic from the past.

  99. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 6:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sals,

    I never said that no Spanish was being used in any ESOL class. What I said was that instruction wasn’t in Spanish, or something to that effect. I am certain if you were teaching a science class and wanted to clarify a concept, and you were Spanish speaking, that you might utter a word or 2 in Spanish. Big deal. That also would probably be mighty useless to the Asians, the Middle Easterners, and the African students.

    You obviously believe I am incorrect so call the county, Manassas City Schools or Manassas Park Schools and ask them what their policy is. That is a reasonable question to ask.

  100. Lafayette said on 31 Jul 2007 at 6:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    anon 5:49
    I’m sure that there others around here that remember them.
    Yep, right here in PWC. I know about six years ago even Manassas Park still had a Truant Officer.

  101. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 6:10 pm:
    Flag comment

    Lafayette,

    I do not know the answer to your question. I have noticed the same thing. I would say they were cutting school. I don’t think truant officers, in the traditional sense of the word, exist any more. Or, if they do, perhaps they are just too overwhelmed.

    I think kids sit up half the night watching TV or talking to their friends on the computer, then sleep in. They get up, it is too hot, so they go back to TV or computer.

    When my kids were coming along, and right here in our neighborhood, they were out of here and I didn’t see them for hours. I don’t think it is safe to let kids do that nowadays. Too many perverts. Perhaps that is why we don’t see them. Their parents might be afraid to allow them outside. How sad!

    Dolph

  102. Sals said on 31 Jul 2007 at 7:31 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dolph,
    Actually, I was told that there was an ESOL teacher that instructs at least partly in Spanish at one of the Manassas Park Schools. You’re right, that is a reasonable question to ask.

    There’s a book (One Nation, One Standard) written by an Hispanic ex-liberal who sponsored legislation in 1973 to establish bilingual education. It was never carried out the way it was intended and gave rise to the monolingual education in Spanish that they have in Texas & California. With increasing numbers of Spanish speakers demanding rights, I don’t want that to happen here.

    The book discusses why Hispanics aren’t successful in school like previous waves of immigrants. The author at one point states: “Bilingualism and multiculturalist identity politics have produced an ingrained resistance to acculturation. This resistance must be overcome if Hispanics are to enter the American mainstream.” He also blames the lack of success on a culture that doesn’t place enough priority on education and “failing public-school systems” as well as power struggles and politics. The main point I got from the book is that we should not lower the standards for them but to maintain the same standards that we have for everyone else.

  103. Dolph said on 31 Jul 2007 at 7:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sals,

    There very well could be. I know nothing about Manassas Park Schools.

    I know in the county instruction is supposed to be in English.

    English is the language of empowerment. This is my mantra. If you live in this country and do not speak English, you will always be on or near the bottom rung socio-economically. There are a few exceptions but not many.

  104. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 11:35 pm:
    Flag comment

    Dolph and NoVA,

    I’m sorry but I found your responses to my points very lame and poorly argued. In some cases my points were not even addressed at all. First with Dolph:

    NoVA Scout has said he is not for open borders and I take his word for it. I agree with him about enforcing local ordinances. Will doing so solve all our problems? Of course not. However, it is a start and to do nothing is a cop out. It will help preserve community standards and will help preserve the culture of the local community.

    NoVA Scout said that he considered the function of the border as a place to legally let in as many immigrants as possible who want to come here. That is open borders. The function of a border is to enforce a nation’s sovereignty, not act as a conduit for unlimited, indiscriminate immigration.

    Community ordinances about housing occupancy, residential zones, building codes are only good as long as there are people who are willing to enforce them. You have a photo of a someone on this blog holding up a sign protesting the enforcement of your local occupancy codes. What happens when people who agree with them get elected to your city council or county supervisor’s board? Forget about any kind of enforcement. This is what happened when the Mexican-”Americans’ took over the government of many of our cities. Code enforcement went out the window.

    Mary, please stop addressing our local problems as though they are California problems. Ours are different in many respects. Just the different geography makes them different. We are also dealing with a predominently different hispanic population.

    If you think this, you are exceedingly naive. There is NOTHING on this blog that you people post here that is new to me. The only difference is that it’s not as severe there as it is here, yet — for example, you don’t seem to have elected state officials pledging outright allegiance to the Mexican flag, and you can still organize and protest without being physically beaten up. That’s the major difference. Other than that, the issues are exactly the same as in California. You see a person drowning in quicksand yelling “don’t jump in the quicksand, run away” and you say “Oh, la di da, OUR quicksand is different from your quicksand.” Sometimes I wonder if this nation deserves to be saved, with thinking like yours being so prevalent among our population.

    I can’t think of a single American culture either. In fact, I was thinking about what to serve British friends when they came to visit. I wanted to serve an American dish. That was not easy either.

    Yes, we do have a unique culture. It is Northern European protestant, spiced by West African and Native American culture. To say we have no culture is to say we have no country. I don’t accept that. Moreover, food is a very superficial barometer of culture. I am not talking food, I am talking respect for rule of law, respect for property rights, and belief that individual initiative can make a difference. All aspects of Anglo-American culture that are distinctly lacking in Hispanic culture.

    You sound like someone who believes that “diversity is our strength.” That is not true. Assimilation i.e. the melting pot — was our strength. That’s what made us unique — and strong. That strength is being dissipated by a thousand cuts inflicted by immigrants from less successful cultures who want to “keep” their culture rather than blend in with ours.

    I live in the most “diverse” state and I have seen the future, and it doesn’t work. This many cultures were not meant to live next to each other without some kind of unifying aspect. That unifying aspect is now dying, at least in California. Or, more accurately, it’s being replaced by another unifying culture, that of Mexico. I do not doubt that within 15-20 years, the “new” California will try to secede from the Union. All the signs are already there. My life savings is in my house, so we will need to sell up and move before that happens. I hoped there would be some place still American to move to when that happens — that’s why I’m interested in the goings-on in Virginia, Colorado, Georgia etc.

  105. Mary said on 31 Jul 2007 at 11:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout:

    I already responded to many of your points above but will repeat myself for the sake of your convenience, as well as add a few new things:

    OK, Mary, you stand corrected.
    No, I don’t. Your initial post that I responded to was blatantly pro-open borders. You see the border as a conduit for unlimited legal immigration, not as a demarcation of our nation’s sovereignty. That says a lot about you and your opinions on this subject. Moreover, you didn’t respond to my point about growing our own work force rather than importing it. We have poor black kids with no hope living in ghettos, and we have Bill Gates demanding that Congress give him the right to import more Indian programmers from the Subcontinent. Why doesn’t he take a few of his billions and found programmer academies for poor black (and white, and Latino) native-born kids, and grow his own workforce instead of demanding that we import it from abroad. Be better for our country if that’s what he did.

    I’m all for local law enforcement and I’m sorry to hear that in California that has fallen by the wayside. You guys ought to do something about that.

    We would like to, but the Mexican-”American” politicians who have taken over many of our cities won’t let us. That’s why your facile post about “enforcing local ordinances” is nonsense. When you get people like the young lady holding up the sign protesting local housing ordinances authorized to vote in your elections, code enforcement will be thing of the past. Guaranteed.

    Court-ordered “entitlements” for illegal aliens is

    I’m no fan of welfare states either, so I don’t see where you’re going with that.

    You can’t have an open border (which you support) and a welfare state at the same time. You seem to support both (see your response about free school lunches for illegals). It’s illogical.

    RE “culture and national unity”, I see America’s great strength in the dynamism and change of its culture over time. I’d be hard-pressed to identify a single “American” culture. If everyone were like me ethnically, we’d all be sitting around eating boiled meat and potatoes. Culture is dynamic, not static. Nations that try to put it in a jar and preserve it, lose it.

    See my response above to Dolph on the same subject. In addition, if culture doesn’t matter, why do you think Canada and the US look like we do, and why do you think Latin America looks like it does? Anglo-Protestants founded two technologically advanced, First World democracies in the Americas. Iberian Catholics founded — Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Nicaragua etc. Dumps, all of them, with long histories of violence, poverty, unstable governments, tyrannies.

    Do you really think we can replace millions of Anglo-Protestant cultured people with millions of non-assimilated Iberian Catholic-cultured people and remain a First World nation? I don’t. I have already seen that happen in much of my homeland, and we have gone from being first in almost all quality of life categories in the Union, to being down at the bottom. Meanwhile the overwhelmingly Anglo-Protestant states like New Hampshire are at the top of the indexes in almost all quality of life indicators — low crime rates, high quality education rates, lowest poverty rates, lowest rate of income inequality, the works. California is down in the 30s and 40s in all of those rankings while New Hampshire, Vermont, Idaho, etc are near the top. When I was a child, and our state was much more homogenous in culture, we were near the top in all of those categories too.

  106. Mary said on 1 Aug 2007 at 12:11 am:
    Flag comment

    Sorry something happened to my response about taxation without representation. Here it is again:

    Court-ordered, taxpayer-funded “entitlements” for illegal aliens are taxation wthout representation. We have no rights to petition our elected officials for relief from this form of taxation. That is taxation without representation. Combined with open borders delivering an unlimited number of “entitled” people into our communities, our “future” is legalized tax slavery. There could theoretically come a day where we could literally be taxed for everything we own in order to meet these “entitlements” and still not have enough money to pay for them all.

    I don’t think that day will come though. There will be an armed tax revolt before then. Already native-born people are talking about it, all over the Internet. I would have joined a tax strike if the Bush-Kennedy Shamnesty bill had passed.

  107. NoVA Scout said on 1 Aug 2007 at 12:39 am:
    Flag comment

    Mary: you have very poor reading skills. A lot of your confusion over what I said is coming from inside your head.

    I’m pretty WASP-y genetically, but I’d be the last to say that this is a basically Northern European Protestant culture. It may have been up to 1850, but it hasn’t been for a long time. The culture shifts fairly rapidly. It may take turns that this or that group doesn’t much care for (I’m really down on modern popular music), but, historically, I think the kaleidoscope has been exciting and positive. I wouldn’t change it for a thousand European homogeneous (boring) scenes (think Sweden - they make good cars, but . . .)

    I view open borders as an ideal of economic and individual liberty, but I have said clearly that in the present age we need secure borders for security purposes. You seem to see a border as a wall that keeps things out. That kind of border kills economies and kills the adaptive power of the country behind the wall. No country on earth can grow a successful economy purely internally, without immigration. It simply can’t be done. Try that here, and this country will be in the middle third of world economies within my actuarial lifetime (that means, like, real soon).

    Glad to know where you stand on Catholicism. I’m Anglican, but I wouldn’t spend any time (beyond the few minutes I’m spotting you now) with someone who runs down the Catholic Church as a force for good in the world.

    And therein lies the problem with this issue. A lot of the ardent folks attracted to it are people like Mary. One doesn’t have to scratch the surface very deeply to find a throw-back to the Know-Nothings of the 1850s or the anti-Catholic/anti-this/anti-that groups of the late 19th and early 20th century. America became great despite these people, not because of them. They are to be shunned and avoided as inimical to the American ideal and counter to our strengths as a nation. A nation of Marys would have us cowering behind our walls of stone and barbed wire, totally without confidence in our ability to compete in a world economy, not being able to dance very well, at the lowest economic standards in the world, with no major league pitchers worth a damn, eating overcooked beef, Wonder Bread and only the occasional vegetable (no garlic), no Jesuit schools (two of which did this Protestant a very good educational turn), and fearing our shadows. It ain’t for me boys and girls. I hope it’s not for you, either. Be careful of the company you keep on this issue.

  108. Dolph said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:07 am:
    Flag comment

    Mary, I am going to try to say this as kindly as possible. First of all, if NoVA Scout says he is not an open border advocate, then he isn’t. To say otherwise is to strongly imply he is a liar. I find that offensive.

    Secondly, I find your combativeness offputting. I am not here to debate anyone. I am not going to. It is too much like work to me. If I don’t respond to a point you are making, then it is because I either do not agree or do not care.

    Basically I want to find out what is going on in my community. That is my purpose for even coming to this website. Many people have far worst problems in their neighborhoods than I do.

    You seriously might want to consider looking at Utah as a future home. It is the most homogenious state in the union. Beautiful country. It is a little too much of a theocracy for my tastes but that might not bother other folks. I expect New Hampshire is acquiring many of our same problems, but I don’t know this for a fact. Plus it is colder than the devil there in winter. Beautiful country though.

    Actually, you have no clue how I really feel about diversity. I am going to inform you. I didn’t have a diversity-laden childhood by any stretch. I adapted through the years when I moved to Northern Virginia. I actually believe ‘celebrating diversity’ divides us. I believe that when people look at what they have in common, even though they may be very different, they tend to get along better. I tend to ignore what is different about people and try to emphasize what the commonalities are. That is probably about as deep as it gets with me.

    Our future cyber encounters will probably be more productive if you ask me how I feel about something, rather then informing me how I feel. You probably have some very good points to make. You have obviously done a great deal of research on issues that interest you. However, your delivery system is so aggressive and strident that I tend to just glaze over and move on. Exhange of ideas is not a blood sport to me.

  109. Mary said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:11 am:
    Flag comment

    Glad to know where you stand on Catholicism. I’m Anglican, but I wouldn’t spend any time (beyond the few minutes I’m spotting you now) with someone who runs down the Catholic Church as a force for good in the world.

    Heh, heh? Stereotype much? I come from a long line of Roman Catholics. My mother and aunt were both former nuns. Want me to recite the Act of Contrition for proof?

    I have come to appreciate the difference between Protestant nations and Catholic ones though. All Protestant-majority nations are at the top of human development indexes, even now with massive immigration from the Third World. You can look it up. The top 20 countries in terms of education, economic development, social development, technological advancement, honesty in government etc. are all Protestant majority except Austria and a couple of Asian nations that used to be British colonies (Hong Kong and Singapore). Catholic nations except for a few that are close to the Protestant ones in Europe are pretty much at the bottom, although not doing quite as badly as most Muslim ones.

    And therein lies the problem with this issue. A lot of the ardent folks attracted to it are people like Mary. One doesn’t have to scratch the surface very deeply to find a throw-back to the Know-Nothings of the 1850s or the anti-Catholic/anti-this/anti-that groups of the late 19th and early 20th century. America became great despite these people, not because of them. They are to be shunned and avoided as inimical to the American ideal and counter to our strengths as a nation.

    This is short-hand for “I can’t refute a word she says, so I’ll play the race card and the bigotry card. I’ll even accuse the daughter of a former nun of being anti-Catholic because I’m so sure I’m right.”

    A nation of Marys would have us cowering behind our walls of stone and barbed wire, totally without confidence in our ability to compete in a world economy, not being able to dance very well, at the lowest economic standards in the world, with no major league pitchers worth a damn, eating overcooked beef, Wonder Bread and only the occasional vegetable (no garlic), no Jesuit schools (two of which did this Protestant a very good educational turn), and fearing our shadows.

    This is again shorthand for “I can’t refute a word she says, so I’ll throw in a bunch of red herrings about baseball pitchers and bad dancing.”

    at the lowest economic standards in the world,

    Finland and Japan are at the highest economic levels in the World. Finland even beat the US a few years in a row as most competitive economy in the world. They are not “diverse” — they both have strong unifying cultures. I guess they can’t really compete in the global economy though. Japan will have to import 20 million incompatible and uneducated Pakistanis to compete with such future world-beaters as Great Britain (from which 500K native born Britons flee every year, specifically to get away from massive immigration from incompatible cultures.)

    You haven’t really read a single word I wrote or considered a single point I made. You just reacted and then blathered emotionally and irrationally. I’m disappointed — and alarmed. We apparently do not teach logic or rhetoric in this country anymore.

  110. Dolph said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:27 am:
    Flag comment

    I have thought for years that the predominently Protestant nations prospered more than Catholic nations because of literacy. Historically, Catholics were not encouraged to read the Bible.

    In contrast, Protestants were encouraged to learn to read so they could read the Bible. The by-product of this religious emphasis has been an overall generally better educated population in heavily Protestant nations.

    On the other hand, I give the Catholic Church full credit for preserving literacy, history and religion for two thousand years.

    The above is my own theory and certainly a simplification of a very complex topic. Probably thousands thought of it before I did.

  111. Mary said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:29 am:
    Flag comment

    Dolph,

    I’m sorry if you think I’m aggressive. You have a way of being passive aggressive and lobbing insults at people while pretending to be nice. It’s a bit irritating. This is a good example of that:

    You seriously might want to consider looking at Utah as a future home. It is the most homogenious state in the union. Beautiful country. It is a little too much of a theocracy for my tastes but that might not bother other folks. I expect New Hampshire is acquiring many of our same problems, but I don’t know this for a fact. Plus it is colder than the devil there in winter. Beautiful country though.

    Right, and I’ll be happy to take my sheet and pointed hat with me.

    I actually believe ‘celebrating diversity’ divides us. I believe that when people look at what they have in common, even though they may be very different, they tend to get along better. I tend to ignore what is different about people and try to emphasize what the commonalities are. That is probably about as deep as it gets with me.

    You made a very good point here and I agree. Too bad your friend decided to unload full-bore on me without reading a word I wrote.

    For NoVA Scout, here is the Human Development Index for the world, notice anything, er, um, unifying about the ones in the top 10-20?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

    You know the funny thing is, if I’d written something about Microsoft being a better managed company than Apple (or vice versa), I’ll bet Mr. NoVa scout would find that perfectly reasonable.

    I say some cultures exhibit better management and organizational skills than others, I’m a “racist.”

  112. Mary said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:37 am:
    Flag comment

    In contrast, Protestants were encouraged to learn to read so they could read the Bible. The by-product of this religious emphasis has been an overall generally better educated population in heavily Protestant nations.

    Other cultures encourage literacy, but other cultures did not invent the Industrial Revolution and all that has sprung from that. It’s more than that.

    It has to do with a belief in the rule of law instead of rule of men, belief in transparency and honesty in government and business, the honoring of individual achievement rather than belief in fatalism, and so on. Believe it or not these things are not universal values.

    I don’t see anything wrong with trying to preserve those cultural traits and neither do I think there is anything wrong with believing that they are at least in part, responsible for our (former) greatness as a nation.

    NoVa Scout can go on blathering about boiled potatoes as if that were the essence of the culture that invented parliaments, the industrial revolution and most of the scientific and technological advances of the past 350 years or so.

  113. Mary said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:52 am:
    Flag comment

    I somehow missed this. Here is NoVa saying that he does indeed see open borders as a libertarian ideal:

    I view open borders as an ideal of economic and individual liberty, but I have said clearly that in the present age we need secure borders for security purposes.

    Open borders, even in an age of perfect security, simply aren’t sustainable. All countries with decent political, social and economic systems would be over-swamped, and then these countries would be just like the undesirable countries that the swampers left behind. This is utopianism, plain and simple. It doesn’t have any place in the real world. It’s basically nuts.

    You seem to see a border as a wall that keeps things out. I see the border as protecting my nation’s sovereignty and ability to effect self-determination. We don’t have that anymore. Mexico has a great deal of power over our political affairs in some of our most important states. Without self-determination we are no longer a nation.

    That kind of border kills economies and kills the adaptive power of the country behind the wall.

    Lack of self-determination kills nations - and peoples — a lot more quicker than whatever you are going on about. I don’t relish the day when Mexico has even more power in my homeland than it already has — and it has a lot.

    No country on earth can grow a successful economy purely internally, without immigration.

    This is a sweeping statement, with little proof behind it. China is not importing immigrants, it has a successful economy although many social and political problems.

    It simply can’t be done. Try that here, and this country will be in the middle third of world economies within my actuarial lifetime (that means, like, real soon).

    There is no proof to this statement whatsoever. What about the social costs of forcing incompatible cultures to live together? Europe will have a civil war within 15 or 20 years between its non-assimilating Muslim imports and its native-born people (the ones who don’t run away, that is) — that will certainly bring them down quite a bit in world economic status, you can count on it.

  114. Dolph said on 1 Aug 2007 at 1:54 am:
    Flag comment

    Mary, I think I said I was going to try to be kind. It doesnt always work. However, I was not trying to imply that you were KKK (I am assuming that is what you meant by sheets and a pointed hat although it took me a moment to grasp what you were saying). Had I thought that, I would have suggested you check out Louisiana or Mississippi. ..or a few rural towns here in Virginia I can think of.

    I have gotten the impression that you are just more comfortable with less diversity. If that is the case, then Utah is seriously a place to consider. Most of the people there are descended from white northern europeans. Even the skycaps at SLC airport are white….which was phenomena I had never seen before. As I told you before, the theocracy component of the state would not be a place where I would be comfortable but I sure do like to visit there.

    I work fairly hard at not being aggressive. No one that knows me has ever accused me of being passive aggressive. Perhaps you have found the inner me. I do try to be polite. I am not always and when I am not, it weakens my point.

  115. Mary said on 1 Aug 2007 at 2:02 am:
    Flag comment

    I have gotten the impression that you are just more comfortable with less diversity.

    I am not “uncomfortabe” with diversity, I have black grandchildren (or EuroAfrican to be precise.)

    I am just saying that it doesn’t work. It’s not a “strength” as the slogans go. A moderate bit of diversity might be good, but huge amounts of it are not good. There has to be something to hold people together. Otherwise you get The National Formerly Known as Yugoslavia. The historical record on this is very clear.

    In the US the main thing holding us together is the English language and the Constitution — and yes, the AngloProtestant majority. And all three of those things are under serious attack by the open borders lobby and their allies.

  116. anonymous said on 1 Aug 2007 at 9:39 am:
    Flag comment

    “I wouldn’t change it for a thousand European homogeneous (boring) scenes (think Sweden - they make good cars, but . . .)”

    Ever been to Sweden? I have. I must say I didn’t find it boring.

  117. NoVA Scout said on 1 Aug 2007 at 9:47 am:
    Flag comment

    Yeah, actually I’ve spent a fair amount of time in Norway and
    Sweden and they are both lovely countries. I was trying to think of places where there was a very high degree of ethnic homogeneity. Iceland would have been an even better example. Also a strikingly pleasant an beautiful place. But I do think I would find it less exciting and interesting to live in any of those places than in polyglot America.

  118. Dolph said on 1 Aug 2007 at 10:13 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout,

    The blockading of the South during the Civl War seems to illustrate your point about borders. re: That kind of border kills economies and kills the adaptive power of the country behind the wall.

    Send Sherman though and you have sealed the deal.

    Dolph

  119. a nonny mouse said on 1 Aug 2007 at 11:11 am:
    Flag comment

    “But I do think I would find it less exciting and interesting to live in any of those places than in polyglot America.”

    Well let me tell you..living in MP is sure exciting. You’ve got the RnR scandal, the $33 million elementary school, they hd a problem with an overflowing sewage pump last year, the mini-motels on the west side of the city, etc.

    But none of this is really what I’d consider “good” exciting. It’s exciting the same way a disaster is.

  120. Dolph said on 1 Aug 2007 at 5:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    Mary,

    It is pretty hard to ‘invent the industrial revolution’ with an illiterate population.

    Where is the cause and effect between Protestantism and the Industrial Revolution?

    I simply do not feel you can leave literacy out of the equation. Literacy sets the stage for all other things to happen. I dont think literacy caused any one particular event to happen, but I think its overall presence is a common denominator in how far a society advances. People who can read can absorb new ideas.

    While we are at it, the printing press sure didnt hurt the advance of man either. I tend to look at history holistically rather than a linear series of events.

  121. Mary said on 5 Aug 2007 at 1:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    Where is the cause and effect between Protestantism and the Industrial Revolution?

    It would take writing a book to explain it to you and I don’t have the time. You might want to compare the fatalistic world view of Catholicism — particularly Iberian Catholicism which was heavily influenced by Arab and Islamic cutlure — to the non-fatalistic world view of Protestantism.

    Yeah, actually I’ve spent a fair amount of time in Norway and
    Sweden and they are both lovely countries. I was trying to think of places where there was a very high degree of ethnic homogeneity. Iceland would have been an even better example. Also a strikingly pleasant an beautiful place.

    Sweden is no longer homogenous, it has imported hundreds of thousands of Arab Muslim immigrants, for no good reason as they don’t even work in the Swedish economy. Not content with being at the top of world quality of life indices, Sweden decided it needed to be “enriched” by “diversity.”

    It’s third largest city, Malmo, is nearly Muslim-Arab majority. The Muslim immigrants riot and burn down Malmo with depressing regularity. They also like to sexually harass and do worse things to indigenous Swedish women, including under-age girls. Swedish women who live near Muslim enclaves have taken to dying their blonde hair dark because it lessens the harassment. (I have Scandinavian friends and have heard chapter and verse about what’s going on over there.)

    “Enrichment” is more important after all than the safety of little Swedish girls who previously were able to walk about their homeland freely.

    Denmark and Norway are also in the process of being “enriched” BTW. (Although Denmark’s indigenous people have started to rebel against the “enrichment” and voted against more massive immigration from the Third World — a move which has been denounced as “racist” by Denmark’s neighbors.)

    So far Iceland hasn’t been “enriched” but I’m sure it’s day is coming too.

    I suspect the Nordic Countries will no longer be at the top of the world quality of life indices in a few more years. Look at how far the greatly “enriched” Great Britain has fallen in ITs OECD ratings.

    If most of the “enrichers” were capable of creating a First World society comparable to what Sweden or Denmark or Great Britain used to have, they would have already done so in their own countries.

  122. Mary said on 5 Aug 2007 at 1:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    The blockading of the South during the Civl War seems to illustrate your point about borders. re: That kind of border kills economies and kills the adaptive power of the country behind the wall.

    Sorry, but this is a particularly doltish comment. The Anaconda Plan was a war strategy. Enforcing our nation’s sovereign will and reclaiming our right of self-determination, seriously damaged by the open borders policies of Bush and by the mendacious meddling of the Mexican government in our political affiars, bears no relation to this example whatsoever.

  123. Mary said on 5 Aug 2007 at 1:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    Well let me tell you..living in MP is sure exciting. You’ve got the RnR scandal, the $33 million elementary school, they hd a problem with an overflowing sewage pump last year, the mini-motels on the west side of the city, etc.

    But none of this is really what I’d consider “good” exciting. It’s exciting the same way a disaster is.

    Just keep repeating, diversity is our strength!

    Just forget that diversity and unity are too opposing concepts — it helps all the brainwashing go down a bit better.

  124. Mary said on 5 Aug 2007 at 1:37 pm:
    Flag comment

    sorry that should be “TWO opposing concepts. . .”

  125. Dolph said on 5 Aug 2007 at 6:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Mary, Mary, quite contrary, how does your ego grow?

    You might have some valid points to make but your delivery system is insufferable and your tone so condescending that I seriously doubt if anyone listens.

    You appear to want to shove your point of view down everyone’s throat rather than sell us on your ideas.

    “Sorry, but this is a particularly doltish comment. The Anaconda Plan was a war strategy.” Doh! You think? And what was the end result?

    Is there no one left in California to fight with? I am not here to fight or debate, so don’t attempt to engage again. It will be pointless for you.

Comments are closed.


Views: 2892