Tag Archives: Illegal Immigrants

My discussion with a woman whose husband was killed by a drunk-driving illegal immigrant

Net annual cost of illegal immigration
Net annual cost of illegal immigration

Before we get to my conversation with my friend whose husband was killed in a car accident when an illegal immigrant with NO driver’s license, NO auto insurance, who was intoxicated from alcohol, I wanted to show you a news story that shows how things like this are not so unusual.

Here’s the story from the Daily Caller:

A multi-vehicle crash last week that claimed the life of the son of a Knoxville, Tennessee fire department captain was the result of a “chain reaction” begun by an illegal immigrant driving in the wrong lane, investigators said.

Pierce Kennedy Corcoran, 22, the son of Knoxville Fire Department spokesperson Captain D.J. Corcoran, was driving a Honda Civic south on Knoxville’s Chapman Highway the evening of December 29 when a Chevrolet pickup truck driven by Franco Cambrany Francisco-Eduardo reportedly veered into their lane and struck the vehicle.

[…]44-year-old Franco Cambrany Francisco-Eduardo, an illegal immigrant, was arrested and charged with criminally negligent homicide as well as having no driver’s license or proof of financial responsibility, according to the News Sentinel, and was jailed without bond pending ICE action.

Since Tennessee is NOT a sanctuary state, the criminal will not be released to re-enter the United States illegally, and then commit another crime, and another, and another. This is what would happen in sanctuary states where Democrats govern. Instead, Tennessee handed the killer over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

People like to say that most illegal immigrants don’t commit violent crimes, but the real conclusion to draw here is that if this illegal immigrant had NOT been in the country, then that 22-year-old son would still be alive for his parents. He shouldn’t have been here. We can’t control the violent crimes of people who are supposed to be here, but that doesn’t mean that we should make things WORSE by letting in people who should not be here.

You can read the statement from the victim’s mother here.

It happened to someone I know

A friend of the blog had her husband killed by an illegal immigrant who was driving drunk, without a driver’s license. I had a call with her on Wednesday night to find out what happened. The illegal immigrant was driving in the wrong direction in their lane at full speed. Her husband was killed, she went into a coma, and her young child was injured. The illegal immigrant was drunk. He had no driver’s license. He had no auto insurance. When they caught him, he was packing his bags to go back to Mexico. And after serving his sentence, he was released without any kind of civil suit against him.

She was not able to get any restitution from the ranch that illegally employed him. She was not able to get any restitution from the strip bar where he became intoxicated before the accident. She was not able to get any restitution from the car dealer who sold him a car without requiring a driver’s license and proof of insurance.

After his release, it would be easy for him to re-enter the country illegally, and commit another crime. This happens all the time, for example, in the case of the illegal immigrant who just murdered a legal immigrant policy officer in California. That criminal had been deported FIVE TIMES, but he just kept walking through our border again and again.

I think it is very important to focus on the stories of the law-abiding victims of illegal immigrants who commit crimes. Not all illegal immigrants commit crimes. But all the crimes committed by illegal immigrants could have been deterred by tougher border security.

Whenever I hear Democrat politicians talking about illegal immigration, they are always silent about the law-abiding taxpayers who are impacted by illegal immigration. But those same Democrat politicians who like to spend YOUR money and risk YOUR lives are not liable for restitution if their lax immigration policies cost you your money or your life.

The cost of unskilled immigrants to taxpayers

Even if illegal immigrants don’t commit violent crimes, there is still a cost to taxpayers.

The Washington Times reports on the latest numbers from the Census Bureau.

Excerpt:

The latest Census Bureau numbers find that more than seven of 10 households headed by immigrants in California, and nearly the same amount in Texas, are on the taxpayer dole.

[…]According to the latest numbers from 2014, fully 63 percent of non-citizens are living off at least one welfare program. That translates into 4.68 million households.

[…]What’s most troublesome about the Census findings is the fact that the 63 percent of non-citizens on welfare actually grows to 70 percent for those who stay in-country 10 years or longer — meaning the entitlement mind only solidifies.

Meaning non-citizens on welfare don’t tend to get off welfare.

If we want to let in more people from other countries, then we should loosen up our process for admitting skilled immigrants who 1) have a job offer and are continuously employed and 2) pay taxes and 3) follow the law, 4) cannot collect one dime of welfare money, and 5) cannot bring in any relatives through chain migration. We should speed up the process for skilled immigrants to get their permanent residency. At the same time, we should build the wall, implement e-verify, prosecute businesses that hire illegal immigrants to the full extent of the law, and we should cut off all federal money for states that contain sanctuary cities.

Mainstream media defends Pope accused of covering up homosexual sexual assaults

Barack Obama shakes hands with Pope Francis
Barack Obama shakes hands with Pope Francis

During the past week, news stories reported that Pope Francis actually knew about the epidemic of sexual assaults and rapes by homosexual priests in the Catholic church. His response leaves a lot to be desired.

The National Catholic Register reported this earlier in the week:

In an extraordinary 11-page written testament, a former apostolic nuncio to the United States has accused several senior prelates of complicity in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s allegations of sexual abuse, and has claimed that Pope Francis knew about sanctions imposed on then-Cardinal McCarrick by Pope Benedict XVI but chose to repeal them.

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, 77, who served as apostolic nuncio in Washington D.C. from 2011 to 2016, said that in the late 2000s, Benedict had “imposed on Cardinal McCarrick sanctions similar to those now imposed on him by Pope Francis” and that Viganò personally told Pope Francis about those sanctions in 2013.

Archbishop Viganò said in his written statement, simultaneously released to the Register and other media, (see full text below) that Pope Francis “continued to cover” for McCarrick and not only did he “not take into account the sanctions that Pope Benedict had imposed on him” but also made McCarrick “his trusted counselor.” Viganò said that the former archbishop of Washington advised the Pope to appoint a number of bishops in the United States, including Cardinals Blase Cupich of Chicago and Joseph Tobin of Newark.

Archbishop Viganò, who said his “conscience dictates” that the truth be known as “the corruption has reached the very top of the Church’s hierarchy,” ended his testimony by calling on Pope Francis and all of those implicated in the cover up of Archbishop McCarrick’s abuse to resign.

Speaking as a Protestant, I thought that Benedict was the best Pope the Roman Catholic church ever had. I used to call him “The Protestant Pope”, because he had so few of the problems that Protestants like me dislike about Roman Catholic doctrines. It doesn’t surprise me that he did the right thing when the crisis was brought to his attention. But his successor has not done the right thing. He has different priorities.

The New York Times reported:

As he flew near Caribbean islands devastated by Hurricane Irma on his way back to the Vatican from Colombia on Sunday, Pope Francis said that political leaders and others who denied climate change reminded him of a passage from the psalms about man’s stubbornness.

[…]On the flight, the pope nevertheless appealed again to Mr. Trump, this time on his decision to end President Obama’s Deferred Action for Children Program, known as DACA.

[…]In contrast to his negative appraisal of Mr. Trump’s approach to immigration, the pope praised Italy’s efforts to welcome large numbers of migrants even as it sought to stem the tide of immigrants coming from Libya.

In fact, the defenders of the Pope made clear that his priorities are global warming and open borders, not following what the Bible says about sex outside of marriage.

Catholic journalist Emily Zanotti explains, in the Daily Wire:

In a bizarre interview with a Chicago NBC affiliate, Cardinal Blaise Cupich, head of the Archdiocese of Chicago, suggested recent claims made by a former apostolic nuncio — the Vatican’s envoy to the United States — that Pope Francis not only disregarded sexual abuse allegations against Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, but promoted McCarrick and sought his counsel, were going down a “rabbit hole.”

The Pope, Cupich told NBC, has more important things to attend to than sex abuse scandals, like climate change and immigration.

“The Pope has a bigger agenda,” Cardinal Cupich said. “He’s got to get on with other things, of talking about the environment and protecting migrants and carrying on the work of the church. We’re not going to go down a rabbit hole on this.”

Clearly, this is the focus of Catholic church leadership. Global warming and open borders both help to destroy free market capitalism, and increase the size of the secular government.  (Global warming alarmism allows the government to tax and regulate energy production and consumption, and open borders brings in a lot of low-skilled immigrants who tend to vote for higher taxes and more welfare spending). That’s the Pope’s priority. And since it’s also the mainstream media’s priority, they are defending him from his critics.

Ben Shapiro, writing in the far-left Newsweek, explains:

So, did the press leap to investigate Vigano’s claims? Did they demand answers from Pope Francis? Did we see the same type of courageous, comprehensive coverage of Francis’ activities that we saw from the Globe team circa 2003? Of course not.

Instead, mainstream media outlets went out of their way to portray Vigano as a disgruntled conservative angry at Pope Francis’ progressive interpretation of Catholic doctrine. The New York Times headlined, “Vatican Power Struggle Bursts Into Open as Conservatives Pounce.” Their print headline was even worse: “Francis Takes High Road As Conservatives Pounce, Taking Criticisms Public.”

Yes, according to the Times, the story wasn’t the sitting Pope being credibly accused of a sexual abuse cover-up—it was conservatives attacking him for it. The problem of child molestation and sexual abuse of clergy took a back seat to Francis’ leftist politics, as the Times piece made clear in its first paragraph: “Since the start of his papacy, Francis has infuriated Catholic traditionalists as he tries to nurture a more welcoming church and shift it away from culture war issues, whether abortion or homosexuality. ‘Who am I to judge?’ the pope famously said, when asked about gay priests. Just how angry his political and doctrinal enemies are became clear this weekend…”

It wasn’t just the Times. On Wednesday, Reuters headlined, “Defenders rally around pope, fear conservatives escalating war.” On Thursday, Reuters doubled down with this headline: “Conservative media move to front line of battle to undermine Pope Francis.” The Telegraph (U.K.) reported, “Vatican analysts say the attack appears to be part of a concerted effort by conservatives to oust Pope Francis, who they dislike for his relatively liberal views…

[…]The media’s disgraceful attempts to cover for Francis because of their love for his politics merely exposes the actual malign motivations of many in the media: they were happy to expose misconduct and evil inside the Catholic Church when the pope was a conservative; they’re happy to facilitate a cover-up when the pope is a liberal.

As an evangelical conservative Christian, the Bible means more to me than the opinions of any man. The Bible is God speaking to his creatures about what their priorities ought to be. So, as a Bible-believing Christian, I’m primarily concerned about chastity, fidelity, protecting the unborn and promoting natural marriage. I wish we could all agree that these things should be our priorities. People should not be having sex outside of marriage, or cheating on their spouses. Unborn children should not be killed. Young children should grow up in stable homes with their biological mother and father present.

And I also believe in small government and low taxes, because parents need to keep the money they earn, in order to run their families properly. Parents should not be taxed to pay for high energy costs (global warming alarmism causes higher energy costs, for example Germany and Canada) and unskilled immigrants (higher police, education and health care costs, as seen in places like France and the UK). I want strong families where children grow up loved and protected. And I think Catholics should agree with me on this.

Are Democrats seeking to register criminals and illegal aliens to vote?

Article from the Washington Times.

Excerpt:

Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and Rep. Barney Frank, Massachusetts Democrat, have plans to ram through legislation that will produce universal voter registration. No matter what they claim, the rule changes will make it possible for illegal aliens to register to vote and for others to register multiple times.

The proposal is to register everyone on every welfare list, everyone getting unemployment insurance, everyone with a driver’s license, everyone who has had run-ins with the legal system, everyone owning any property – basically everyone on every list the government keeps. People will be registered to vote whether or not they want to be registered. If individuals are on any public record, they will be automatically registered.

Obviously a lot of illegal aliens have driver’s licenses, and many get other government benefits. Quite a few have rap sheets. People’s names and other identification information are frequently recorded differently across these different lists, which means that one could be registered a separate time for every slight variation in how their personal information is kept on file.

The legislation is also expected to give felons the right to vote.

This may be their way of insulating themselves from the wrath of law-abiding voters. We’re not out of the woods yet.

House health care bill provides health care for illegal immigrants with taxpayer money

Robert Rector does the analysis here at the Heritage Foundation. (H/T National Review via ECM)

Here’s the abstract:

H.R. 3962 would deliberately permit illegal aliens to participate in the government health insurance exchange and in the public option insurance program. It would nominally bar them from receiving health care “affordability credits” and most regular Medicaid benefits, but verification procedures are weak and subject to fraud. Moreover, any limitations on benefits provided to illegal immigrants under the House bill are deceptive. The Presi­dent and the congressional leadership clearly intend that these limits will be only temporary, to be overturned by amnesty or “comprehensive immigration reform” legisla­tion that will be introduced next spring.

And here are the main points:

The health care bill recently passed by the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 3962) clearly and directly contradicts the President’s declarations and promises. Under H.R. 3962:

  • Illegal immigrants are clearly permitted to purchase health insurance under the government health insurance exchange created by the bill.
  • Illegal immigrants are permitted to receive cover age under the “public health insurance option” created in the bill.
  • Illegal immigrants are ostensibly barred from receiving taxpayer-funded “affordability credits” to subsidize their health care, but the verification procedures used to determine the legal status of those who receive credits are weak and subject to fraud.
  • The bill expands the Medicaid program. Illegal immigrants are nominally barred from receiving most Medicaid services, but the verification procedures used to determine the legal status of those who receive credits are also weak and sub ject to fraud.
  • All illegal immigrant women who do not have private health insurance and who give birth inside the United States will have the full cost of childbirth paid by the U.S. taxpayers. There will be no effort to have the mother repay any of the cost. Given the fact that nearly 400,000 children are born inside the U.S. each year to illegal immigrant women, these costs could be quite large.
  • The bill will provide tax credits to small businesses to subsidize the purchase of health insurance for illegal immigrant employees. Under H.R. 3962, small businesses will be given tax credits to encourage them to purchase health coverage for employees; because firms are not required to verify the legal status of subsidized employees, both legal and illegal employees will receive taxpayer support.
  • Illegal immigrants will continue to receive so-called emergency medical services under the Medicaid program.

The full research paper, with references, is here.

BONUS: The Senate bill includes a monthly abortion premium for all enrollees in the government-run health plan.

How to prove that Obamacare covers illegal aliens and funds abortions

Let’s get to the bottom of Obama’s health care plan.

Obamacare will allow public funds to be used for abortions

Here is the proof from FactCheck.org.

Excerpt:

The truth is that bills now before Congress don’t require federal money to be used for supporting abortion coverage. So the president is right to that limited extent. But it’s equally true that House and Senate legislation would allow a new “public” insurance plan to cover abortions, despite language added to the House bill that technically forbids using public funds to pay for them. Obama has said in the past that “reproductive services” would be covered by his public plan, so it’s likely that any new federal insurance plan would cover abortion unless Congress expressly prohibits that. Low- and moderate-income persons who would choose the “public plan” would qualify for federal subsidies to purchase it. Private plans that cover abortion also could be purchased with the help of federal subsidies. Therefore, we judge that the president goes too far when he calls the statements that government would be funding abortions “fabrications.”

Democrats are pro-abortion.

Here’s a video with Megyn Kelly who reads what the bill actually says. (H/T Nice Deb)

Case closed.

Obamacare will cover illegal aliens

Here is the proof from the Congressional Research Service. (H/T Hot Air)

Excerpt:

“Under H.R. 3200, a ‘Health Insurance Exchange’ would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.”

Democrats are pro-illegal-immigration.

Check out this video of an Obama speech where he is called out by a GOP congressman. (H/T Hot Air)

Instead of giving flowery speeches, Obama should be doing formal debates with his opponents. That way, the truth would come out.