Tag Archives: Immigration Reform

Illegal immigrant released by Obama administration sexually assaults 14-year-old girl

Should Keane Dean get amnesty?
Illegal immigrant Keane Dean

This story is in the radically leftist Los Angeles Times, of all places.

Excerpt:

A convicted sex offender charged last week with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl in Santa Clarita is in the country illegally and had recently been released on bail from immigration custody, according to federal authorities.

Keane Dean, 26, a citizen of the Philippines, was released in April on $10,000 bond so he could be free while he contested his immigration case. He had been targeted for deportation because of his criminal record.

The 14-year-old girl, who was found in Dean’s garage, told investigators that Dean befriended her at a grocery store the previous day, according to the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.

Dean has been charged with two counts of child sexual abuse and is being held in lieu of $110,000 bail.

This was not his first offence:

In March 2014, Dean was caught inappropriately touching himself inside a Macy’s department store and was banned from the Glendale Galleria for three years. He was sentenced to six months in state prison for indecent exposure and 16 months for burglary, to be served concurrently, a district attorney’s spokesman said.

Dean also has a 2008 conviction for lewd conduct in public.

There are interesting quotes in the articles from people who agree with giving detainees “bond hearings” where they can be released if they post bond.

[…]Dean was released April 29 after posting $10,000 bond.

A Democrat appointed judge named Kim Wardlaw said this about the bond hearings:

“This injunction will not flood our streets with fearsome criminals seeking to escape the force of American immigration law,” Judge Kim Wardlaw of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote in an April 2013 opinion affirming the need for the bond hearings.

This is Kim Wardlaw:

Justice Kim Wardlaw, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Justice Kim Wardlaw, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

Before she was appointed by Bill Clinton, she volunteered to help his presidential campaign in California in 1991-1992. She later served on the Clinton-Gore presidential transition team. A few years later she was appointed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which many regard as the most liberal appeals court in the United States. She is a Democrat.

Now let’s move to a second case.

Do you remember how Obama is always talking about his DREAMers? These are children of illegal immigrants who got a blanket amnesty from Obama.

Breitbart News reports on another case. This time, a 10-year-old boy was tortured and murdered by an illegal immigrant.

Excerpt:

At a Tuesday Senate hearing dedicated to the families who lost loved ones thanks to illegal aliens, Laura Wilkerson gave testimony on her youngest son Joshua’s horrific death while some in the silent audience wept.

[…]“This was our family’s 9/11 terrorist attack by a foreign invader,” she said at the most pivotal point in her testimony. “It is going to take another life lost by a Senator, a Congressman, the President, even another of today’s heroes, someone from Hollywood before someone in a position moves on this.”

“My son’s name was Joshua Wilkerson,” she began. “On November 16, 2010, he was beaten, strangled, tortured until he died. He was tied up, thrown in a field, and set on fire. His killer, Hermilo Moralez, was brought here illegally by his illegal parents when he was ten years old, so he fit the ‘DREAM’ kid description. He was sentenced to life in prison, which means it will be 30 years before he’s up for parole. He’ll be a 49-year-old man, who I don’t expect to be deported. And I just hope he doesn’t come to live in your city.”

[…]Wilkerson read aloud portions of the gut-wrenching autopsy: “‘This body is received in a grey body bag. There’s a tag on his toe that bears the name, Joshua Wilkerson. This is a white male weighing a hundred pounds. He is tied up with braided rope — 13 loops around his neck in a slipknot. It goes behind his back through his back belt loop. It goes to his hands and his feet, behind his body. He has multiple fractures in his face and nasal cavity. His throat and his voicebox are crushed.’”

Wilkerson took a deep breath and continued, looking at the senators before her with a steady gaze. “He was kicked so hard in the stomach that it sent his spleen into his spine, and sliced it in two… The medical examiner said it was torture.”

She went on to attack the sanctuary cities which are supported by Democrats, and in particular, by Hillary Clinton.

I think the part in bold is interesting – about how nothing will change until someone famous and powerful is a victim of an illegal immigrant.

One of my favorite authors, British psychiatrist Theodore Dalrymple, makes the point often that the effects of “compassionate” laws made by rich leftists are never felt by the rich leftists themselves. The leftists are insulated from the effects of their own laws. They live in gated communities where they don’t have to worry about being the victims of crime. The rich leftists pass these laws to feel generous without actually having to give away anything of their own. But the people who do feel the effects of these laws are the people in the lower classes. The poor people, who have to live with the laws and policies passed by rich leftists seeking to feel superior. And so, because the rich leftists need to feel compassionate and superior, we get victims like that 14-year-old girl, and like that 10-year-old boy.

UPDATE: The Obama administration on victims of crime committed by illegal immigrants:

The White House vowed Thursday to veto a bill to punish sanctuary cities, instead calling on Congress to legalize illegal immigrants as the way to solve the problem of criminals who shouldn’t be on the streets.

The threat came just hours before the House was expected to pass a bill that would withhold money from states or localities that don’t abide by a federal law that requires them to cooperate when federal immigration authorities request help identifying illegal immigrants.

It’s no problem. As long as it’s your kids, and not their kids. Because the important thing is that they feel good, and get the votes from their special interest groups.

National Review and Weekly Standard agree: kill the immigration bill

Bill Kristol (Weekly Standard) and Rich Lowry (National Review) write about immigration reform in National Review.

Excerpt:

We are conservatives who have differed in the past on immigration reform, with Kristol favorably disposed toward it and Lowry skeptical. But the Gang of Eight has brought us into full agreement: Their bill, passed out of the Senate, is a comprehensive mistake. House Republicans should kill it without reservation.

[…]The bill’s first fatal deficiency is that it doesn’t solve the illegal-immigration problem. The enforcement provisions are riddled with exceptions, loopholes, and waivers. Every indication is that they are for show and will be disregarded, just as prior notional requirements to build a fence or an entry/exit visa system have been – and just as President Obama has recently announced he’s ignoring aspects of Obamacare that are inconvenient to enforce on schedule. Why won’t he waive a requirement for the use of E-Verify just as he’s unilaterally delayed the employer mandate? The fact that the legalization of illegal immigrants comes first makes it all the more likely that enforcement provisions will be ignored the same way they were after passage of the 1986 amnesty.

Marco Rubio says he doesn’t want to have to come back ten years from now and deal with the same illegal-immigration problem. But that’s exactly what the CBO says will happen under his own bill. According to the CBO analysis of the bill, it will reduce illegal immigration by as little as a third or by half at most. By one estimate, this means there will be about 7.5 million illegal immigrants here in ten years. And this is under the implausible assumption that the Obama administration would administer the law as written.

The bill’s changes in legal immigration are just as ill considered. Everyone professes to agree that our system should be tilted toward high-skilled immigration, but the Gang of Eight bill unleashes a flood of additional low-skilled immigration. The last thing low-skilled native and immigrant workers already here should have to deal with is wage-depressing competition from newly arriving workers. Nor is the new immigration under the bill a panacea for the long-term fiscal ills of entitlements, as often argued, because those programs are redistributive and most of the immigrants will be low-income workers.

Finally, there is the sheer size of the bill and the hasty manner in which it was amended and passed. Conservatives have eloquently and convincingly made the case against bills like this during the Obama years. Such bills reflect a mistaken belief in central planning and in practice become a stew of deals, payoffs, waivers, and special-interest breaks. Why would House Republicans now sign off on this kind of lawmaking? If you think Obamacare and Dodd-Frank are going swimmingly, you’ll love the Gang of Eight bill. It’s the opposite of conservative reform, which simplifies and limits government, strengthens the rule of law, and empowers citizens.

My position on immigration is simple. Build the fence first. Implement e-verify for employers and harsh penalties for hiring anyone without a work permit. Automatic green cards for skilled workers who prove they can work here, pay taxes, obey the law, and not collect federal benefits of any kind, for a period of six years (cumulative). A robust program to allow temporary low-skilled workers to work here temporarily, with no path to permanent residency or citizenship. No permanent residency for illegal immigrants. No path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

New study finds that immigration costs Canada up to $23 billion a year

Map of Canada
Map of Canada

Story in the National Post. (H/T Andrew)

Excerpt:

Newcomers to the country generally make less money and chip in less in taxes than the national average.And allowing 250,000 immigrants into the country annually is costing us all billions of dollars each and every year, according to a study by the Fraser Institute.

The study, dubbed Immigration and the Canadian Welfare State, sharply criticizes Canada’s current immigration system, using earnings and other figures from the 2005-06 fiscal year reported by 844,476 people in the 2006 Census.

It claims the group as a whole earned on average about $10,000 more and paid about $2,500 more in income taxes annually than those within the sampling who had settled in Canada in the previous 18 years.

The study also found immigrants typically pay a little over $6,000 less in property and sales taxes than the national average.

That means the approximately 3.9 million immigrants who settled in Canada between 1987 and 2004 are shortchanging federal government coffers by between $16.3 billion and $23.6 billion annually, depending on how many of those newcomers have moved back home, emigrated elsewhere or died, the study said.

[…]The study also takes on the notion that immigrants are helping the country by taking menial jobs that most Canadians don’t want.”Immigrants do fill jobs that Canadians don’t want and thus benefit the economy but, in the absence of immigration, these jobs would pay higher wages and would be filled by Canadians or eliminated by the application of labour-saving technology,” the study states.

“Under these conditions, poverty in Canada would be reduced substantially.”

As for changes, the study suggests annual immigration numbers should be increased or decreased, depending largely on “market forces.”

The study also recommends Canada be more selective, allowing only newcomers who have employment lined up, offering them citizenship only if they hang onto their job for a set number of years and deporting those who lose their jobs.

Canada has a welfare state with single-payer health care, public housing, welfare payment and free public schools. So, people who cannot pull their own weight can rely on all of these goodies provided by the working Canadians. Because of these generous benefits, Canada has a lot of people who would like to move there from poor countries. And they can’t possibly take them all in because it is costing the working Canadians billions of dollars. But there is a way for them to allow more immigration – they just have to stop all of their government handouts. If there were no handouts then everyone could come to Canada freely, because they would go home again unless they held on to their job and pulled their own weight. They could even bring their families once they had worked hard enough to support them – but those family members would not be eligible to get money from the government.

So what do we as Americans learn from this? Well, we need to make sure that the people who come here are selected on the basis of their skills, their education, their ability to pay their own way. We need to have a big fence to keep illegal immigrants out, and we need to have a huge gate to allow skilled legal immigrants in. And they can even bring their families with them – as long as they don’t get a dime of taxpayer money in cash or through social programs – they should have to pay for everything they use, including schools and health care. And they should not be eligible for a dime of government money until they get their green cards after years of demonstrated hard work and clean living.

Coakley talks about illegal immigration in radio interview

Video from Verum Serum. (H/T Breitbart TV)

Her answer to a question about immigration reform:

I think we need it. And I think we have for too long looked the other way. I think we’ve had a federal policy that doesn’t make sense. I firmly believe that we need a good pathway to citizenship. And I know serving as district attorney we always paid attention to the person and not their status.

Her own words.

Coakley on Curt Schilling’s endorsement of Scott Brown

From Ace: (H/T ECM)

She claims that Curt Schilling is a New York Yankees fan. A New York Yankees fan. A New York Yankees fan.

He helped the Boston Red Sox win the world series in 2004 for the first time since 1918!

Doug Flutie endorses Scott Brown

Doug Flutie? What has he every done for Boston except throw one lousy Hail Mary pass?

Polls

Related posts