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

Another Illegal Alien Murderer

By Greg L | 21 December 2007 | Illegal Aliens, Crime, Prince William County | 56 Comments

According to the Potomac News, Christian Molina, an illegal alien from El Salvador plead guilty to the murder of Ronald Hollingsworth, explaining that the reason he strangled him to death was because he misunderstood the term “homo sapien” during a discussion about evolution, thinking Hollingsworth had called him a homosexual. BVBL readers in a discussion of this matter on another thread have identified numerous criminal cases for a person with this same name that suggests that we had an opportunity to catch this illegal alien while he was still a petty criminal, before he graduated to being a murderer. Had the police department’s pending policy been in place, perhaps this criminal illegal alien would have been deported, rather than allowed to remain and kill an American citizen.

Here’s the run-down on the cases that may be attributable to this individual:

While this individual was on his criminal rampage between February and October, and had multiple interactions with the police, he was set free despite his unlawful status. Thankfully the police department will be dealing with suspected illegal aliens very differently in the near future, and occurrences such as this will become infinitely rare.

Meanwhile, Governor Kaine seems to think that this isn’t a problem, and wants this type of problem to continue indefinitely. Are you not listening, Governor?

UPDATE: By request, here is the petition asking the Governor to enroll in the Section 287(g) Program.

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.


  1. CitizenofManassas said on 21 Dec 2007 at 10:39 pm:
    Flag comment

    This makes at least four killings in the County this year that can be attributed to illegals. Nova scout and Claire must be beaming with pride.

  2. redawn said on 21 Dec 2007 at 10:40 pm:
    Flag comment


    The article reports he was TWICE DEPORTED ALREADY ( I know your busy)

    “Molina, who has been deported twice before, initially gave police two false names. His true identity was discovered through fingerprinting, police said.”

  3. Greg L said on 21 Dec 2007 at 11:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    We should have caught and deported this guy (again) when he committed the first offense in February. At least then he might think that if he’s going to bother coming back again, he’ll go somewhere where he’s less likely to get caught again. The only reason he likely came back to our town in the first place was likely a perception that he wasn’t at risk of getting caught and deported.

    Although we here at the local level can’t prevent guys like this from sneaking back into the country, we can at least discourage them from sneaking back here. Let them go to a sanctuary jurisdiction instead, where perhaps they’ll learn the consequences of encouraging illegal aliens to reside there.

  4. Vigilant1 said on 21 Dec 2007 at 11:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    He should have been given prison time after it was found out he had been previously deported. Entering this country illegally after having been deported is a felony.

  5. NoVA Scout said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:15 am:
    Flag comment

    COM: I beg your pardon? Couldn’t follow you on the “beaming with pride” reference. Don’t recall saying anything here or anything else that would reflect a personal sense of accomplishment over homicides. Don’t recall Ms. Gastanega doing that, either.

    People who commit crimes should be locked up. People who kill other people should be locked up forever. You don’t need some half-baked local deportation program to do that. If this guy is illegal (even if he isn’t) and he murdered someone, I sure as hell don’t want him deported. I want him put away here.

  6. CitizenofManassas said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:21 am:
    Flag comment


    You support illegals. You did not say you only support some or many or a majority. We are left to believe based on your own words, the only thing we need to do in order to not have an illegal immigration issue is to grant amnesty to them.

    You have also said they are needed for our future labor pools. I do not recall you saying we need to weed out the criminals among the illegals.

  7. josh said on 22 Dec 2007 at 1:30 am:
    Flag comment

    My question is…why is he here in the first place?

    The way things work is that they fed’s should have nixed this guy at the get go. Failing that, a nice local policy could have done the same thing.

    It really sickens me that we probably have more idiot’s like him floating around the community.

  8. NoVA Scout said on 22 Dec 2007 at 9:37 am:
    Flag comment

    CoM: you might want to go back and read more slowly. I have never supported illegal immigration. I’ve never supported amnesty (although some folks use the word so loosely that the term has little meaning anymore). I have opposed stupid, mob-hyping local demagoguery by politicians riding this thing for votes, who have no understanding of or respect for either the federal system under the Constitution or fiscal obligations to the people. I have opposed misuse and diversion of local police powers into areas that seem likely to increase crime and cause declines in public order. And I have opposed the “ethnic cleansing” mentality (periodically disclaimed, but nonetheless palpably present in many comments) that regularly surfaces in places like these.

    I also am on record as saying that encouraging immigration (legal) and fast track to citizenship is a matter of highest priority for the national economic security of this country. This extends to all levels of economic activity, but is particularly an acute need in technical and scientific arenas. If the political zeitgeist gets to be foreigner-bashing, the United States will become a loser in the global competition to attract the best minds.

    So take some time (I would guess for you it would take a lot of time, but the Holidays are hard on us) to go back and read my comments before you mischaracterize them again.

  9. Bridget said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:17 am:
    Flag comment




    Gotta love the condescending tone NoVa Scout employs to distract from his cheap labor lobby talking points …


  10. CitizenofManassas said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:23 am:
    Flag comment

    NOVA Scout,

    What is fast track to Citizenship? Is that for legal immigrants or your beloved illegals? As I recall you were in favor of the Senate Bill this past summer that would have granted amnesty to illegals. I’m I wrong about that? And, if you were in favor of the bill, how does that not provide proof that you support illegals, and simply see their status as something that can be changed with a signature on a bill?

    I understand why you are bitter, because your support of the illegals is coming home to roost.

    Now, that the pressure is on, you have attempted to spin and dodge and weave. Well, it simply will not work.

  11. josh said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:36 am:
    Flag comment

    Not sure if anyone’s seen this but…this is what I’m talkin’ about!


  12. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:50 am:
    Flag comment

    The Chavez committee and its hidden agenda

    Potomac News
    Saturday, December 22, 2007


  13. Advocator said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:51 am:
    Flag comment

    I assume that the reason Molina came back to this area after deportation was because he was relatively assured he would find work and shelter. Those who gave him either are felons, albeit unindicted and unconvicted due to the federal government’s failure to enforce its own laws. I wonder if the PWC police or the CA’s office have communicated to ICE any information on where he has been housed. Dollars to the holes in your Crispy Cremes say they have not.

    I think another County resolution may be in order that requires the police to provide information on the addresses of illegal aliens to ICE (not that ICE would do much with the info). Such a policy may deter landlords who exploit illegals from renting to them.

  14. 999 said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:52 am:
    Flag comment

    NoVA Scout said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:15 am:
    If this guy is illegal (even if he isn’t) and he murdered someone, I sure as hell don’t want him deported. I want him put away here.

    You can be assured that if he is convicted, he will spend his time in jail and THEN be deported if he is an illegal as has been said.

  15. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:52 am:
    Flag comment

    Did you see this video I posted on another thread?


  16. monticup said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:57 am:
    Flag comment

    After wading through Nova’s verbiage, I have to conclude that he is indeed pro-illegal immigration and is in favor of amnesty. Why doesn’t he just step up and admit it?

  17. Jane D'oh! said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:58 am:
    Flag comment

    I wonder if the guy worked and if so, whether his employer used e-verify.

    A small part of me wishes employers could be held liable for the costs associated with the police investigation, trial and imprisonment of illegal aliens on their payrolls.

    It would be awfully nice to have the eager employers of illegal aliens pick up the full tab for their cheap labor.

    Those employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens are essentially an attractive nuisance. They lure illegal aliens into our communities which enables them to remain and commit crimes.

    We have enough home-grown problems to deal with. We don’t need El Salvador’s too.

  18. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    “Prosecutors recommended that he serve six years of a 10-year prison sentence.”

    He has already been deported TWICE and his is all they are recommending?

  19. Justbelegalfirst said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator, don’t worry, the new police general order and procedures will provide for turning over addresses of illegals to ICE when the local police have no charges on them. Don’t forget, the PWCPD cannot arrest an illegal for just the immigration violation alone - federal law and the VA Attorney General’s opinion concur with that fact - but the procedure dictates the names, address and other information gathered after an encounter with an illegal be turned over to ICE.

  20. 999 said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    josh said on 22 Dec 2007 at 11:36 am:
    Not sure if anyone’s seen this but…this is what I’m talkin’ about!

    Simply put, NO JOBS, NO MONEY, NO STAY! Why can’t the Federal Government (Congress) figure this out? They claim you can’t deport 12-20 million illegals. Take away the jobs and they will deport themselves at no cost to the taxpayer.

  21. josh said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:40 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m all for self-deportation. That saves us money, we’ll adjust to the job market. What about all those people on welfare and other public assistance that supposedly cannot find work? Give them a job picking fruit to earn their money and remove their public assistance.

    No one said fixing the problem was without it’s detractors, the bottom line is how much pain we are willing to put up with to ensure the problem is fixed. I want them gone, however I’m willing to put up with higher prices and a little inconvenience to have them leave. Once it all sorts out, it will be well worth it.

  22. es_la_ley said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    Monticup : After wading through Nova’s verbiage, I have to conclude that he is indeed pro-illegal immigration and is in favor of amnesty. Why doesn’t he just step up and admit it?

    On this blog? You have to be as brave/crazy as this cat. :-)


  23. Bridget said on 22 Dec 2007 at 12:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    What we have now is big business and big government conspiring to have the U.S. tax payer pick up the tab … literally and figuratively, economically and socially.





  24. IN WOODBRIDGE said on 22 Dec 2007 at 1:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    The murderer needs to be locked up for life.
    It will do no good to send him back,as he only return.

    I think he is the same one who had a charge before and got 6 mos. jail but was out in ONE month. Well this is really great.

    Lets demand more of our courts.

  25. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 1:49 pm:
    Flag comment


    I agree. I am thinking it has to do with this : Trilateral Commission

    Which I am now looking into ( I remember hearing about it )


    just google it

  26. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 1:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    LOOK at the members listed

  27. Leeroy Jenkins said on 22 Dec 2007 at 3:42 pm:
    Flag comment

    UH OH!

    Look what is working! Top story on CNN


  28. manassascityresident said on 22 Dec 2007 at 4:23 pm:
    Flag comment

    Leeroy Jenkins said on 22 Dec 2007 at 3:42 pm:

    Great article - and thank GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  29. Johnson said on 22 Dec 2007 at 4:28 pm:
    Flag comment

    Leeroy-the same is going on all over America. It only takes a bit of pressure to send them away. They won’t leave our country until every last sanctuary is closed off to them. Gov. Schwartzenegger would love to have them and their votes. What we advocate is working, but we all (Federal, State and local) have to work together to make it happen. Take away their reasons to be here (jobs, health care, education) and they will leave. Our economy will adjust. We can start by mowing our own lawns and cleaning our own houses. So, let me get this straight…he strangled a person to death (you gotta wanna kill somebody pretty badly to that. It’s not easy) because he misunderstood what “homo sapiens” means? This is absurd for so many reasons, but here are two:
    1. Inability to communicate in english led to a death
    2. The latino “machismo” attitude (culture) of being so insulted after he thought the victim called him a homosexual that he committed murder.
    Send them all back to Mexico. We don’t want their culture of violence.

  30. Anon said on 22 Dec 2007 at 4:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    Arizona has the right idea:

    PHOENIX, Arizona (AP) — Illegal immigrants in Arizona, frustrated with a flagging economy and tough new legislation cracking down on their employers, are returning to their home countries or trying their luck in other states.

    For months, immigrants have taken a wait-and-see attitude toward the state’s new employer-sanctions law, which takes effect January 1. The voter-approved legislation is an attempt to lessen the economic incentive for illegal immigrants in Arizona, the busiest crossing point along the U.S.-Mexico border.

    And by all appearances, it’s starting to work.

    “People are calling me telling me about their friend, their cousin, their neighbors — they’re moving back to Mexico,” said Magdalena Schwartz, an immigrant-rights activist and pastor at a Mesa church. “They don’t want to live in fear, in terror.”

    Martin Herrera, a 40-year-old illegal immigrant and masonry worker who lives in Camp Verde, 70 miles north of Phoenix, said he is planning to return to Mexico as soon as he ties up loose ends after living here for four years.

    “I don’t want to live here because of the new law and the oppressive environment,” he said. “I’ll be better in my country.”

    He called the employer-sanctions law “absurd.”

    “Everybody here, legally or illegally, we are part of a motor that makes this country run,” Herrera said. “Once we leave, the motor is going to start to slow down.”

    There’s no way to know how many illegal immigrants are leaving Arizona, especially now with many returning home for normal holiday visits. But economists, immigration lawyers and people who work in the immigrant community agree it’s happening.

    State Rep. Russell Pearce of Mesa, the author of the employer sanctions law, said his intent was to drive illegal immigrants out of Arizona.

    “I’m hoping they will self-deport,” Pearce said. “They broke the law. They’re criminals.”

    Under the employer sanctions law, businesses found to have knowingly hired illegal workers will be subject to sanctions from probation to a 10-day suspension of their business licenses. A second violation would bring permanent revocation of the license.

    Nancy-Jo Merritt, an immigration lawyer who primarily represents employers, said her clients already have started to fire workers who can’t prove they are in the country legally.
    Don’t Miss

    “Workers are being fired, of course,” she said. “Nobody wants to find out later on that they’ve got somebody working for them who’s not here legally.”

    When immigrants don’t have jobs, they don’t stick around, said Dawn McLaren, a research economist at Arizona State University who specializes in illegal immigration.

    She said the flagging economy, particularly in the construction industry, also is contributing to an immigrant exodus.

    “As the jobs dwindle and the environment becomes more unpleasant in more ways than one, you then decide what to do, and perhaps leaving looks like a good idea,” she said. “And certainly that creates a problem, because as people leave, they take the jobs they created with them.”

    Pearce disagreed that the Arizona economy will suffer after illegal immigrants leave, saying there will be less crime, lower taxes, less congestion, smaller classroom sizes and shorter lines in emergency rooms.

    “We have a free market. It’ll adjust,” he said. “Americans will be much better off.”

    He said he’s not surprised illegal immigrants are leaving the state and predicts that more will go once the employer-sanctions law takes effect next month.

    “It’s attrition by enforcement,” he said. “As you make this an unfriendly state for lawbreakers, I’m hoping they will pick up and leave.

  31. Jane D'oh! said on 22 Dec 2007 at 4:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    And more good news out of AZ:

    Judge doesn’t stop employer sanctions law

    The law makes it illegal to knowingly hire undocumented workers. Offenders could find all their state licenses to do business suspended or revoked.

    In his decision Friday, Wake said he had to decide who would be hurt more if he let the law take effect or kept it from being enforced. The judge said he easily concluded the greater harm would be to the state and, in particular, legal Arizona residents.

    “Those who suffer the most from unauthorized alien labor are those whom federal and Arizona law most explicitly protect,” Wake said.

    “They are the competing lawful workers, many unskilled, low-wage, sometimes near or under the margin of poverty, who strain in individual competition and in a wage economy depressed by the great and expanding number of people who will work for less,” the judge continued. “If the act is suspended, whether for a month or for years, the human cost for the least among us, measured by each person’s continued deprivation, multiplied by their number, will be a great quantum.”

    Full story at link!

  32. josh said on 22 Dec 2007 at 6:51 pm:
    Flag comment

    I’m from arizona…I’m planning on going back in a few years if crap keeps up in this county and the actions that AZ has taken keep shutting out the illegals.

  33. Old Soldier said on 22 Dec 2007 at 7:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    A little off-topic; however, look a peak (and perhaps a thread)


  34. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 7:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    That’s the thirds thread about Arizona….LOL,we are headed to C TOWN, sometime over the 4 day weekend, just decided :)…( Charles Town, ching, ching, wish us luck) Merry Christmas!

  35. redawn said on 22 Dec 2007 at 7:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    third mention about Arizona,same article all in the same thread :)

  36. Bridget said on 22 Dec 2007 at 7:59 pm:
    Flag comment


    Thanks for the link. A very interesting cast of characters indeed … check out:



    In truth, I am just a tad distracted at the moment… trying to get it all pulled together … hard to cook and type at the same time!!!


    May the season bring you all peace, happiness, comfort and joy, now as well as throughout the year to come.


  37. carlos m said on 23 Dec 2007 at 1:44 pm:
    Flag comment

    Justbelegalfirst,you are so 15 minutes late. Do a Google on Vasquez,Alvarez 10th circuit and you will find out that local police can arrest some one fore being in the country illegally

  38. MP Resident said on 23 Dec 2007 at 4:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    “This extends to all levels of economic activity, but is particularly an acute need in technical and scientific arenas.”

    I wonder what kind of technical or scientific job someone who doesn’t even know what “homo sapien” means would get?

  39. MP Resident said on 23 Dec 2007 at 4:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Come to think of it, Comcast sent the answer to that question to my house several times over the summer..

  40. CitizenofManassas said on 23 Dec 2007 at 6:59 pm:
    Flag comment


    I sure hope you are not dodging my post. Is the heat a bit too much for you?

  41. Johnson said on 24 Dec 2007 at 12:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    Down here in Hampton Roads, they’re using their technical expertise to lay cable for Verizon wireless. Verizon is getting mad because our fine residents keep calling La Migra when they see these crews. It’ not like they stand out here, since we’re split pretty evenly between black and white.

  42. Justbelegalfirst said on 24 Dec 2007 at 2:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    Carlos M…check your own watch..that 10 circuit decision does not apply in the 4th circuit….its on appeal so it is not applied in other circuits.

    The fact is that our local PD cannot arrest simply because some one is in the country illegally. Crossing the border amounts to an ICE civil deportation order if caught, something that local police in Virginia (according to the Virginia Atty. General) cannot enforce.

    Fix your watch.

  43. NoVA Scout said on 26 Dec 2007 at 10:22 am:
    Flag comment

    CoM: There’s nothing to dodge. You’ll have to excuse me. I was celebrating a major religious holiday, which, in my circles, takes a somewhat higher priority than my general light amusements such as following comment threads in this blog.

    You’re quite right: I absolutely supported federal immigration reform legislation last summer. It was long overdue and this whole issue is very much a product of federal neglect. I can’t see that we’re at all better off not having acted this past year. The bill was no beauty contest winner, but it was a tremendous step forward over the existing situation. There were no amnesty provisions in the bill, but it was politically useful for opponents to call it “amnesty”, as that sort of Orwellian terminology made it easier to cow the already timorous bunch that had already ignored immigration reform for years. The bill imposed new penalties for illegal entry, ones that are significantly higher than those on the books. Before illegal immigrants could be granted visa for further stays, they had to pay these penalty amounts.

    So, to re-cap: I oppose illegal immigration. I oppose amnesty. I support effective entry control at the border and I support federal action to reform current immigration law. The current problems reflect inexcusable neglect and incompetence at the federal level. I consider immigrant attraction (legal, since you have to ask) to be critical to the national security of the United States and favor programs that make the U.S. (as it used to be) a desirable place for the best and brightest at all levels of economic activity to come here and become citizens. I support getting all these black market workers out of the darkness and out where they can be seen and regulated, whether it be mundane things like drivers’ licenses and tax witholding, or on crime reporting and enforcement. I’d like federal reform legislation to happen sooner, rather than later, and I’ll take less than perfect federal legislation as preferable to maintenance of the status quo. Got it?

    I oppose goofy local initiatives that are full of sound and fury, signifying little, if not nothing. I oppose radical leftist fiscal irresponsibility in throwing local governments into an issue whose costs are not understood and about which they have no competence. I oppose local tinpot politicians who either know better or are too ignorant to know better dumpster diving for votes with this issue instead of talking frankly and informatively with the citizens about the complexities of the issues. I oppose loose or fabricated facts about impacts of Illegal immigration that spread, rather than dispel ignorance on this subject. I oppose the ethnic hatred that permeates so many comments one sees on this issue. (I know none of you act from such motives, but, you gotta admit, the aroma is pretty strong around comment threads on sites like these). Got it?

  44. CitizenofManassas said on 26 Dec 2007 at 12:48 pm:
    Flag comment


    Do you think before posting? You write a bunch of stuff without really saying a thing. You simply swing in the wind, you have a position that changes from day to day, you have zero respect for your beliefs, since you clearly cannot give a simple defense of where you stand on the issue. You say you oppose amnesty, yet, you write this…. “I support getting all these black market workers out of the darkness and out where they can be seen and regulated, whether it be mundane things like drivers’ licenses and tax withholding, or on crime reporting and enforcement” How is that not amnesty? How is that not cheating the system and getting away with it? How is that not a slap in the face of every legal immigrant who played by the rules?

    Do you really believe every single illegal is a worker? How about those that do not work? What do you want to do with them?

    Did America stop accepting immigrants? If not, why do you talk as if we have?

    We have existing laws that would prevent everything you say you are in favor of or not in favor of. Exactly why we needed a new bill is beyond me. The only thing the new bill would have provided is amnesty(read how Blacks law book defines amnesty), which you support given that you did not want to deport illegals already here.

    Stop attempting to sell yourself as a conservative. You do not support the rule of law, you think cheating the system and benefiting from it is a morally positive thing to do. Those qualities are not held by Conservatives, but by the left.

  45. BLUGRAZZ IN DELRAY said on 26 Dec 2007 at 4:02 pm:
    Flag comment


  46. NoVA Scout said on 27 Dec 2007 at 12:10 am:
    Flag comment

    CoM: right you are. I never think before commenting on this site about immigration issues. It would be a rudely jarring phenomenom that would be out of keeping with house rules around here. A thought requirement would wipe out 2/3 of the comments. Moreover, it would give me so profoundly an unfair advantage over so many commenters that common decency prohibits it.

    That having been said, my position has been a consistent campaign for legislative measures that address all of the common complaints about the impacts of illegal immigration. You are one of the very few who seems to think that the present federal system is hunky-dory. I consider it highly defective and very much in need of an overhaul. As a licensed conservative since the Goldwater campaign, I can tell you that laws that don’t work are the bane of conservative philosophy. This is especially true when laws do not reflect market forces. Laws out of synch with large movements in the market invite disregard and undermine respect for the law .

    The current federal immigration regime does not serve the national interests of the United States in concept or in application. It requires reform right now, if not last summer.

  47. CitizenofManassas said on 27 Dec 2007 at 9:41 pm:
    Flag comment


    Keep trying to spin. I asked very simple questions, and you can’t even answer them. Again, how is cheating the system and benefiting from it a conservative value? Are there current laws that do not allow illegals to work in America? Are there laws that currently allow for the deportation of illegals? If so, exactly why did we need to have “comprehensive” immigration reform? Again, the only thing the Senate Bill would have done is grant amnesty to law breakers, the very ones you support.

    What exactly would you do with the illegals currently in the Country? We have murders every day in this Country, should we ditch murder laws since it appears there is a market for them in this Country?

  48. Michael said on 27 Dec 2007 at 10:56 pm:
    Flag comment

    The u-tube video of “illegals” fleeing to Canada is going to be a big shock for Canadians as their culture, laws and general welfare gets eroded even faster than here in the US.

    I find it unbelievable that the Canadian government has created such a welfare state, and social services infrastructure (socialized medicine is just the tip of the iceberg), that any “illegal” family moving there “illegally” can live completely for free off the government.

    When the population rises to a 12% illegal-40% previously illegal but legalized in less than 5 years level as it has here, the cost to the Canadian government and average tax paying Canadian citizen will be outrageous. They too will be scrambling to enforce and create enforceable illegal immigrant laws.

    It will create even more poverty that Canada has to deal with using ever diminishing federal funds, by fewer and fewer taxpayers.

    I feel sorry for them and their own self-induced social engineering misery.

  49. NoVA Scout said on 29 Dec 2007 at 9:40 am:
    Flag comment

    Silly boy, CoM. I do have trouble making sense of some of your questions, but, except for that limitation, I never have trouble answering them.

    I didn’t say that Illegal Immigrants had “conservative values,” at least not in an American political sense. In fact, I suspect they don’t. There’s just no reason to believe that there is any predicate in their countries of origin to make them one thing or another politically.

    Where we differ starkly is that I tend to think existing local laws are adequate to deal with local immigration impacts (assault, murder, zoning, DUI, disturbing the peace, littering etc), while you think something else is necessary. By contrast, I tend to believe federal laws are inadequate and you seem to think they’re just hunky dory.

    Labor migrations like this (whether here or in Europe or anywhere else) are propelled by cross-border economic disparities. The more severe the disparity, the more the higher economic standard country will become a kind of labor vaccuum, sucking in workers from surrounding lower standard areas. The challenge for lawmakers is to manage this dynamic successfully, not to ignore it or stop it (the latter course will wreck the economies of all parties). My opinion is that the federal government has not only not managed this phenomenon successfully, but that several succeeding administrations have not even tried very hard. The current laws are not doing the job. One of the many negative fallouts of this inadequacy is the local impacts about which many here complain.

    As mentioned before (you may have missed it), last year’s Senate bill was not a study in elegance, but it had the benefit of marking the end of inaction on this issue. There were no amnesty elements in it, but it did impose increased penalties for uninspected entry and required payment of those penalties (and clean criminal records) as a condition for permission to stay. The “amnesty” myth was a political creation (very effective, in retrospect) in order to attach a charged label to any measures that did not involve mass deportation. If I get caught speeding and pay a penalty to avoid going to jail, that ain’t amnesty.

    What do we do with the illegals in the country? The options aren’t very attractive, but when you weigh out all the pros and cons, mass deportation is a non-starter and the worst of all possibilities. It won’t happen and if it does, the United States is finished as an economic or moral force in the world. I favor something along the lines of last year’s legislation: those with clean records pay penalties and given temporary papers that enable them to work and stay until their status is resolved (either new visa categories of temporary worker status). Anyone that doesn’t step up to be processed within a set period (say six months) misses the boat. Clearly, none of this works unless the country gets a grip on the cross-border traffic, but part of that solution is not just a Great Wall of Arizona, but also procedures and methods at the border that take away the incentive to avoid inspection on entry.

    RE your claim that the country is experiencing a great outbreak of market-driven murders, that’s news to me. Generally speaking, however, unless you’re aware of something that my normally voracious reading habits have missed, I would think state homicide laws would be adequate to control this except at the margins where the “hit” prices are extremely high. But I really don’t know much about these market murders and, unless they are confined to immigrant communities, don’t understand their link to the matter at hand.

  50. CitizenofManassas said on 29 Dec 2007 at 11:42 am:
    Flag comment


    Do we have a border? Do we have laws? How hard is that to follow? I suppose you would be fine with 5.5 billion people immigrating to the Country?

    As a sovereign Nation, something you liberals do not like, America has the right to set immigration law as Congress sees fit. As I said, which I just do not understand why your brain cannot handle, is the current laws allow for deportation of illegals, not undocumented, not “uninspected”, but illegal, does that make us not a moral Nation? I thought the fact that millions of folks want to come here, must make America stand out from other Nations. The rule of law, social order etc, are just two of the reasons why people want to come here.

    You believe by breaking law, and benefiting from it, is a conservative value.

    Why do think existing Federal law is not adequate, yet, you think new laws that would provide amnesty, again it is amnesty, is a good thing. I pointed out the current laws, and what the Senate Bill would do. The only difference is the Senate Bill would grant amnesty to your beloved illegals. Why do you ignore those points?

    So, you are trusting of people who broke the law, came here illegally, purchased documents on the black market, or stole them from innocent victims, worked here illegally, drove without licenses or insurance, and expect them to now act like boy scouts and provide their true identity in order to become a non criminal in our society?

    Though I suppose the contradiction you posted about how we would not be a moral Nation by enforcing immigration law, and then saying you are in favor of the Senate Bill last year that you claim would be tougher on illegals is something I should over look.

    But I do like the fact you think deportation is a good thing, of course that is if you really mean you want to just deport the “criminal” illegals and not those that just broke a few laws.

    People murder every day in this Country, so we should just allow that to happen since there seems to be such a demand. Which is exactly like you saying we have a market for illegals so we should not have laws to prevent illegal immigration. And, since you are in favor of getting rid of those laws, you should also be in favor of getting rid of laws against murder, since there is a market for that, and why should people be burden with following those laws?

  51. NoVA Scout said on 29 Dec 2007 at 5:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    CoM, if I ever met a person with worse reading and reasoning skills than you, I sure can’t remember who it might be.

    In the US, as in most other countries that I know of, current law permits deportation, but does not require it. Although there are certainly individual cases where deportation is the best option, and it’s an option that I’d never advocate repudiating, I’m against mass deportation and think it would harm the United States grievously. I’m even against deportation of more serious criminals, unless we are assured that they will be incarcerated in as strict and secure an environment in their home country as would be the case here. Your advocacy of using deportation to address crimes committed here leaves me a little unsettled.

    Calling me a “liberal” or any other vile name doesn’t help your cause very much. As a conservative with better than adequate creds dating to 1964 from my own government service and political activity, you’ll just have to take my word for it that this issue doesn’t cut liberal/conservative very neatly. If you want to see some good conservative thinking on this, you might want to visit the Becker/Posner blog, although I fear your circuits would overheat if you tried to keep up there.

    You keep referring to my “beloved illegals.” I only know one illegal immigrant and our relations are absolutely platonic, I assure you. (Mrs. Scout would have me skinned if it were otherwise). This lady was sent here as an 8 year old from a Muslim country in Asia to live with an aunt who was married to a US citizen. She went to public schools in Virginia, did well, worked her way through college and cannot even speak her native language. She attends Christian church and could no more survive in her homeland than Salman Rushdie could stroll through the casbah in Mecca. She’s as American as the proverbial apple pie. At some point, her guardian failed to renew her student visa and now she lives pretty much underground, with absolutely no options but to self-deport. What a waste. She can’t even use her degree and has to work menial jobs. This situation is not the typical illegal immigrant situation, but it is one that law and policy should be flexible enough to deal with. And it’s not. Legislation that would have addressed this (kids who came legally but whose status lapsed) was proposed this year, and your crowd shouted it down.

    So, my views aren’t based on any love interest that I have with illegals. I’m sure most of them and I would have little in common. I form these views based on my sense of why labor moves cross-border, what my best sense of the economic consequences are of that sort of movement, the future needs of the United States in a world economy, my constitutional views about the role of the federal government in a constitution-based Republic, and my general perception that the current system is woefully inadequate to current needs and conditions.

    My guess is that murder in the United States is not generally a function of market forces, but likely reflects acts of rage, stupidity, and personal violence independent of market forces. There are no doubt murders that have economic motivations, but my hunch is that they are statistically not signficant. So I’m not buying into your murder/immigration analogy.

  52. CitizenofManassas said on 29 Dec 2007 at 7:30 pm:
    Flag comment


    You crack me up. You must be an awesome dancer, because you sure are doing some stepping around the questions I ask.

    I said I was in favor of deportation, that does not mean I am not also in favor of having illegals serve jail time first.

    Illegals make up less than 5% of the work population, I hardly think America would go in the drain without them. In fact, we would most likely do better. It would make companies pay Americans livable wages and benefits without having to legislate it, since the market would dictate the wages, and not the Government. Though, I’m sure you feel Americans do not want to do certain jobs. But then again, I suppose If I, like you, were a liberal elitist, I might think the same.

    Oh, I am sure you are not in love with any illegals, but you sure do have a thing for them. So, lets face it, you are in favor of amnesty, in favor of breaking the law and benefiting from it, and the down fall of America.

    I don’t care how long you think you have been a conservative, your opinions and posts speak loudly of just the type of person you really are.

    I really do not care much for your sob story, you like the COMPOST just ignore reality. She and only she should be responsible for her visa, or are you telling me if she committed a crime you might be held responsible for it?

  53. NoVA Scout said on 30 Dec 2007 at 12:37 am:
    Flag comment


  54. CitizenofManassas said on 30 Dec 2007 at 10:08 am:
    Flag comment

    You defenders of criminals are alike. Once backed into the corner with your silly arguments, you bob and wave. Face it, you area morally bankrupt liberal who supports criminals, albeit, only the politically correct ones. I sometimes think you are Gary Jacobson from the MJM, nothing but a liberal hack.

    I suppose I will explain it again in hope that your liberal brain will get the second time around.

    You said the illegal you know, was put into her current criminal status due to the actions, or inaction by someone else. I said, I suppose that would make you responsible for the criminal action of someone else. I realize you liberals do not know about personal responsibility, but you seem to want us to believe this illegal is illegal not of her own choosing. So, that is why I asked if you would be responsible if she committed a crime.

  55. NoVA Scout said on 30 Dec 2007 at 1:12 pm:
    Flag comment

    I still don’t follow you. But, just to fill in the details, she was a minor child when her status was allowed to lapse. She didn’t discover this until after she turned 18. By the way, she’s not a criminal, in any event. Several of us have explained here and elsewhere that you don’t become a criminal by uninspected entry or being out of status any more than you, CoM, became a criminal when you last went 75 in a 65 mph zone.

  56. CitizenofManassas said on 30 Dec 2007 at 10:58 pm:
    Flag comment


    Again, you are saying she is not responsible for her criminal status. Would you be responsible for it? Would you be willing to serve her sentence? Of course not, which means only she is responsible for her actions. Also, if she is working, that is another crime. If she holds a Driver license here in VA, that is another crime. Tell me again how she is not a criminal?

    Face it NOVA, you support criminals and amnesty, no matter what type of spin you attempt to use.

Comments are closed.

Views: 3804