When you travel from one community to another or one state to another, or one country to another, you ALWAYS come under the legal jurisdiction of that community, state, or country.

Who said laws were universally fair, unless they come under universal jurisdictions, then they are “fair”. The problem happens when federal entities, fail to take action they should take on a federal level and the victums of that inaction are the citizens of the sate and local communities affected by that inaction.

That’s why we have an “illegal” immigration problem and Webb is correctly pointing out how it will be solved best at the community and state level if the federal government refuses to enforce its own laws, the citizens will. Self-deportation as a result of local citizen action will be cheaper and more effective anyway than anything the federal government will do, because you are bypassing the MASSIVE governent payroll and overhead cost. Local communities have always been able to do far more, far quicker than any federal program.

The practical solution is somewhere between the extremes.

That’s my thought as well.

This whole “sanctuary” nonsense would last about two minutes if some community decided that it was going to be a haven for people who decided they weren’t going to pay state or federal taxes any longer.

I’m also interested in how Sen. Webb voted on the lack-of-fence funding amendment since he campaigned on border security and as being tougher on illegal immigration than Sen. Allen.

“Jim Webb supports fully securing the border. Without border security as our first priority, Jim believes all other immigration reforms will fail.”

I believe the amendment passed by voice vote. Did his vote reflect his campaign rhetoric?

Damn it. Just when I pegged you as nothing but a flaming liberal, you have to go and post soemthing rational.

http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=VA&VIPID=1211

CRUDE DISCLAIMER: Flatulence is a medical term not slang.

Let’s put this to a test.

If a local government can declare a sanctuary from Federal Law, let’s have local governments declare themselves as a tax sanctuary where federal taxes do not need to be paid. How long would it take for Webb to demand enforcement of federal law? He says he wants border enforcement. Does anyone know how he voted on the reduction of border fence funding in the continuing budget resolution?

Webb was responding to a question about whether state and local governments should respond to illegal immigration. The statement above was made to demonstrate that there are those who think a community should be able to declare itself a sanctuary city but don’t think a community has a similar right to pass an ordinance like the “Rule of Law” resolution in PWC. Again, he was pointing out that there are groups who have no problem advocating a position that local will should win the day when deciding about whether to create a “sanctuary city” but are adamant that the same local will should be superseded by the federal government when that local will calls for cracking down. In other words, Webb was DEFENDING the rights of localities to pass ordinances much like the one you helped draft in PWC.

When you read the rest of the article, Webb also said, “In a situation of how government services are provided to people who are illegal, I think it is appropriate that local government work that out.”

And later is quoted as saying, “Here is the problem. There’s two different strains here. One side is not going to be emotionally satisfied unless everyone here is legalized and the other side is not going to be emotionally satisfied unless every single illegal is gone. Between these two emotional extremes is the question of whether you really want a practical solution or not. That’s where I was trying to go during the debate.”

I don’t for an instant believe Webb was advocating a balkanization of illegal immigration policy. I’d love to see the full transcript of the interview and not just the Times’ cherry-picked quotes.

This just goes to show, we are never more than one little Macaca away from stupidity.

Not only is he advocating ignoring the laws that he and his predecessors have passed, he’s ignoring the oath to uphold the Constitution that he’s taken ever since his admission to the Naval Academy.

So you have a sitting Senator embracing the fact that these localities reserve some de facto authority to ignore the very laws that he, his colleagues and their predecessors have passed? If so, what is he getting paid for?

FYI, Senator Webb, there is not and should not be a right to create sanctuaries from laws at the federal level per a locality’s whim. If you believe a locality shouldn’t be forced to observe some portion of federal law, amend or repeal it.

And which committee, political party, or PAC will you put in charge of this?

Couldn’t agree with you more.