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

Lingamfelter Shoots Back At The Senate

By Greg L | 18 February 2011 | 31st HOD District, Illegal Aliens, Crime, Virginia Senate | 24 Comments

Delegate Scott Lingamfelter responded to the deplorable actions by the Senate to stand in the way of any efforts to reduce the number of illegal aliens unlawfully present in the Commonwealth and reduce the incidence of violent crime committed by illegal aliens. When drug cartel violence has slaughtered 30-35,000 mexicans and drug cartels are deeply intertwined in human smuggling and illegal immigration, Lingamfelter’s point that we are courting disaster by relying solely on a federal government that doesn’t want to solve this problem is distressingly prescient.

Let’s hope the Senate of Virginia comes to it’s senses before more Virginians have to die.

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. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.


  1. Citizen12 said on 19 Feb 2011 at 1:51 am:
    Flag comment

    It would seem many of our elected representatives in VA share the delusional visions of many of our federal agency leaders.

    DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano is talking tough about border security issues in a speech she is scheduled to give today at the University of Texas at El Paso.

    She will send a clear message to Mexican drug cartels:”Don’t even think about bringing your violence…. across this border,” she is scheduled to say.


    HEY JANET! A little late?

    Mexican cartels plague Atlanta
    Updated 3/9/2009 10:59 AM

    Yet, of the 195 U.S. cities where Mexican drug-trafficking organizations are operating, federal law enforcement officials say Atlanta has emerged as the new gateway to the troubled Southwest border.

    Rival drug cartels, the same violent groups warring in Mexico for control of routes to lucrative U.S. markets, have established Atlanta as the principal distribution center for the entire eastern U.S., according to the Justice Department’s National Drug Intelligence Center.


  2. Anonymous said on 19 Feb 2011 at 2:07 pm:
    Flag comment

    MS-13 Gang Member Charged with Child Sex Trafficking in Virginia

    Last week, Alexander Rivas, 18, was arrested by Alexandria police, following an investigation that began in November, when the father of a 14-year-old runaway told police his daughter was living with Rivas. Court documents state that the girl was found in the gang member’s apartment and she was being used as a prostitute.

    According to prosecutors, Rivas ran a prostitution ring, operating in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, using underage runaways. The affidavit states that the business catered to “construction workers and illegal immigrants.”

    On a typical Friday or Saturday night, the operation would see about 100 customers paying for sex.

    Rivas typically charged $50 for sexual intercourse with the girls.

    Rivas is charged with sex trafficking of children by force, fraud or coercion.

    A17-year-old girl told detectives that Rivas carried a machete, he nicknamed “his wife,” when taking her to have sex with his clients. He reportedly used the machete to intimidate anyone who tried to avoid paying.

    Rivas admitted to once robbing a group of men of $1,200, and telling them: “What are you going to say? That you got robbed after having sex with a minor?”

    Rivas remains in custody at this time.

    Cases such as this one are becoming more commonplace due to a largely unprotected border, the lack of immigration enforcement and the consequential spread of gang crime.


  3. AmericaFirst said on 19 Feb 2011 at 2:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    Good work, Scott. Never let up.

  4. Anonymous said on 19 Feb 2011 at 2:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    Look on the bright side. Any child being pimped out in Virginia can count their blessings. Planned Parenthood offices will treat children for diseases and perform abortions for pimps!!!!/S

  5. Uncle Caveman said on 19 Feb 2011 at 4:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    Here’s an interesting thought: Perhaps Delegates like Scott might consider offering legislation that might actually pass both houses instead of continuing to bring forth bills that pander to the fringes but are destined to fail.

    Almost everyone, including just about every Democrat I know, believes whole-heartedly that we need to address this issue once and for all. But extremists on both sides who think ranting and raving in echo chambers like this one (and Moon Howlings) and pushing for unrealistic solutions that will never become law will solve this problem are completely delusional. The only way this gets solved is through compromise, much like every other major issue we face. And everyone who refuses to roll up their sleeves and work together on a practical solution is part of the problem.

  6. Greg L said on 19 Feb 2011 at 4:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Compromise? About people who break the law? About criminal illegal aliens who commit mass murder?

    What principle do you suggest we compromise on?

  7. AmericaFirst said on 19 Feb 2011 at 6:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    You are asking a criminal illegal alien coddler about principle?

    Why not ask Obama about the constitution.

  8. Uncle Caveman said on 19 Feb 2011 at 7:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    Look, Greg, I’m just as pissed off about the situation as everyone else. This is about finding workable policy compromises that don’t compromise principles like due process, privacy and common decency. Principles upon which this nation was founded. And yeah, yeah. I know the Constitution was written to protect American citizens only. And I have no problem with that. But you’d trample all over the rights of real Americans and legitimate immigrants in your zeal to find the illegals. Quite frankly, that isn’t particularly American or christian, two things you claim so frequently to be.

    And two things, AmericaFirst: 1) I have no interest in “coddling” illiegal immigrants and 2) I don’t pick and choose what principles of the Constitution to uphold or ignore based on what’s most expedient for me. There’s too much of that on both sides of the aisle.

  9. Greg L said on 19 Feb 2011 at 7:47 pm:
    Flag comment


    I’ve spent many hours trying to ensure policy proposals are constitutional, narrowly tailored, and don’t have negative impacts. Stuff I’ve worked on has been through the courts and NOT ONE proposal that I’ve worked on has ever been found to violate constitutional protections or civil rights laws. It’s not that unusual for me to find issues in proposals dealing with controlling illegal immigration, and in EVERY CASE I’ve done so attorneys subsequently validated my concerns.

    Given that, I don’t have much patience with people alleging that I’m reckless with my policy proposals, especially ones that have never been through the process of crafting proposals and working on getting them enacted as I have. You simply have no idea what you’re talking about.

  10. Uncle Caveman said on 19 Feb 2011 at 8:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    I never said any specific proposals you may have worked on, let alone suggested that they were “unconstitutional” in a legal sense. I suggested that, because many of the ones bing offered in legislatures ignore important principles that many Americans take very seriously, they’ll never get enough support to pass. Big distinction.

    I didn’t call you reckless. But I do think you’re tilting at windmills. If you really want to succeed at this, cool down on the vitriol and look for solutions that can realistically happen. Otherwise, this all just a bunch of noise.

  11. Maureen said on 19 Feb 2011 at 8:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    E-verify is constitutional yet every year they water it down so it doesn’t mean much of anything so caveman don’t tell me that they are just as upset and want to do something. I’ve been down there every year since 2006 and they have done NOTHING.

    They don’t want a compromise! They don’t want anything except to open their arms for illegals.

    I asked Saslaw when he was going to protect Virginians against illegal aliens. His answer….” I had the death penalty reinstated in Virginia.” He then literally ran out the front door of the GA.

    He was so chicken…. he couldn’t even have a conversation about his killing those bills.

  12. Maureen said on 19 Feb 2011 at 8:18 pm:
    Flag comment

    And Colgan can’t even return phone calls or meet with his constituents. He too will not address the illegal alien crime in his district.

  13. AmericaFirst said on 20 Feb 2011 at 9:46 am:
    Flag comment

    I am curious as to how the rights of American citizens could be abridged by arresting illegals and their employers.

    I just don’t see it.

    Even if there were a possibility of that - how is that different than American citizens being treated as criminals every time they board an aircraft? Or apply for a concealed carry permit. Or apply for a passport?

    In every case, legitimate American citizens are forced to prove their worthiness for the appropriate piece of paper - or to fly on a commercial aircraft.

    Where are the cries from the howlers on the left over these unspeakable burdens?

    We, and our representatives, need to tune out the white noise and start demanding the law be enforced.

    While we still have a country called the United States of America.

  14. madmom said on 20 Feb 2011 at 10:48 am:
    Flag comment

    @ Uncle Caveman,

    You are part of the problem. Sounds like you’ve drank too much of the diversity/multicultural cool-aid. You don’t compromise with lawbreakers. You don’t compromise with the Constitution. You don’t compromise with the safety of those that you are elected to PROTECT. Now go back into your cave, you’ve come out way too late.

  15. madmom said on 20 Feb 2011 at 10:51 am:
    Flag comment

    And I am so proud of Del. Lingamfelter. You speak for so many of us that noone will listen to anymore. Made my day.

  16. madmom said on 20 Feb 2011 at 10:54 am:
    Flag comment

    One more thing - you seriously thought De. Lingamfelter was “ranting and raving”?

  17. R said on 20 Feb 2011 at 3:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    Nothwithstanding individual elements of his argument and how he addressed them, perhaps Uncle Caveman may have been suggesting nothing more than a piece of the pie is better than no pie.

    As a matter of strategy, if you can’t get legislation you ideally want then go for legislation that at least moves the ball in the direction you want. Get something now; get more later. Move the ball forward incrementally as best you can. Holding out on principle can result in less progress than an incremental approach.

    Even if a proposal is constitutional (and I have no doubt that GL wants a constitutional approach lest it be overturned by the courts and prove ineffective), the votes are not (yet) there for more. Those standing in the way of bills even moving forward will likely continue doing so even if they are convinced of the bills’ constitutionality. That is because they apparently oppose changes in these laws as a matter of policy, politics or both.

    One can wait until they are out of office or move the ball forward merely as far as it can move forward given the current political composition of the legislature. Of course, I can appreciate that compromise on these issues, even temporary compromise, is unnacceptable to many. And maybe those who stand in the way of these bills are themselves unwilling to compromise, I don’t really know.

    What do you think?

  18. Uncle Caveman said on 20 Feb 2011 at 5:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Exactly, R.

    If the history of our country teaches anything, it’s that Americans do not tolerate, much less follow, extremism. The center moves the ball forward. Always has, always will, which is of course exactly how the Founders wanted it. We are a centrist nation that gets things done through compromise and working together toward practical solutions (I always chuckle a bit when people describe us as “center right” or “center left” because it completely misses the logical point of the description in the first place).

  19. R said on 20 Feb 2011 at 6:11 pm:
    Flag comment


    I appreciate your response. The point I was making was not really focused on whether Americans tolerate extremism or what the Founders intended. My point was focused more on practical politics. I view incremental moves successes if more than incremental moves cannot be accomplished. But on the issue we’ve been discussing, some believe it is to soon to give up on major gains and “settle” for incremental gains. And they may be correct, I don’t know. I merely personally believe that incremental gains are a good idea assuming that more cannot be accomplished for the time being.

  20. Maureen said on 20 Feb 2011 at 7:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    R & Caveman-

    How can you compromise when the deems are closed minded to any illegal immigration bills? A compromise has been made two years in a row on E-Verify. The democrats don’t want any other legislation at all to pass.

    Saslaw’s aide is very rude when you mention (nicely) anything about illegal immigration. They care nothing about protecting Virginians from the effects of illegal immigration.

    I don’t get it. They come here illegally. They work here illegally. And we are supposed to turn a blind eye to this?

    Would a blind eye be turned to me if I stole to feed my family? If I robbed a bank or store because I couldn’t afford to keep a roof over my family? I think not. I would go to jail no matter how sad my story

    We are basically asking our elected officials to have our laws enforced and since the Feds won’t do it we go to our State and Local government for help.

  21. R said on 20 Feb 2011 at 9:04 pm:
    Flag comment

    That’s true, Maureen, they may well be unwilling to compromise, in which event any compromise would be off the table for even incremental improvement. Others would have a far better sense that I whether compromise for incremental gain is even remotely possile.

  22. madmom said on 20 Feb 2011 at 9:11 pm:
    Flag comment

    It seems to me that our Delagates ARE asking for baby-steps when they introduce a bill. They hit the brick wall in the Senate, where there is NO compromise.

  23. Anonymous said on 21 Feb 2011 at 4:25 pm:
    Flag comment

    Just look at all the no votes and see where they get there money from. Big developers who want to profitier off the land with the protection of the Dillon rule, unlimited family members in a household and the ability to hire illegal subcontractors by the hour in construction with no one checking.

    Cucineelie is woried about obama care? Who is currently paying for the ancore babies being born to illegals? Let him sue the fed for that one.

  24. zuzu said on 21 Feb 2011 at 11:36 pm:
    Flag comment

    Wow, I never realized how “extreme” it was to enforce our laws, nor did I realize how open to “compromise” they were! This is good news, should I decide to knock over a liquor store…but only for “good” reasons….

Leave a Reply

Views: 1841