(Phyllis Schlafly) Posted on 12/21/2004 9:53:45 AM PST by libertylass
(Phyllis Schlafly)
An activist judge strikes again! David C. Bury of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the will of the people and enjoined enforcement of Arizona's Proposition 200, which would require Arizonans to provide proof of citizenship in order to register to vote and require valid identification when applying for state benefits.
It's clear that Prop 200 represents the people's demand that their government enforce laws against illegal immigrants. It passed with 56 percent of the vote even though it was opposed by public officials of both parties, the Chamber of Commerce, big labor and the Catholic bishops.
Even 47 percent of Arizona Hispanics voted in favor of Prop 200. Immigrants who had stood in long lines to come here legally see no reason to allow their tax dollars to go to the 4,000 immigrants who illegally cross Arizona's border every night.
Bury was appointed by President George W. Bush. That prompts the question: Has a Bush judge already turned into a supremacist judge who ignores the will of the people in favor of his own, or Bush's, policy preferences?
Bush's plan to give illegal immigrants guest-worker status, which forgoes punishment for their violations of immigration law and therefore meets the definition of amnesty, was shot down by Congress earlier this year. Yet on Nov. 2 Bush went to Santiago, Chile, and insulted many who voted for him by announcing he would expend the "political capital" earned in his re-election to grant guest-worker status to millions of illegal immigrants.
Two dozen congressmen wrote a letter to the president opposing his plan, primarily for national security reasons. Bush brushed them off with elitist disdain. "I get letters all the time from people who are trying to steer me one way or the other," he said; "I'm going to move forward."
Bush made his commitment during a half-hour meeting with Mexican President Vicente Fox. Bush said, "I made it very clear my position that we need to make sure that where there's a willing worker and a willing employer, that that job ought to be filled legally in cases where Americans will not fill that job."
With Bush's mantra, repeated ad nauseam, it's no wonder that former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik didn't think it important to reveal to the White House vetting process that he was a "willing employer" who employed a housekeeper/nanny who was an immigrant "willing worker" illegally living in the United States. Of course, he wasn't paying Social Security taxes for her. Kerik subsequently removed himself from consideration as the new head of the Homeland Security Department.
Maybe he expected the president's attitude to be: "No problem, Kerik. Since the nanny has a job, I'll just give her a guest-worker permit, and in three years she can get it renewed and then have permanent residency."
When Bush speaks of a "willing employer" and a "willing worker," he never talks about the wage the employer is willing to pay or the wage the worker is willing to accept. There are billions of non-Americans who are willing to work for Third World wages and, as the Bernard Kerik case proves. There are U.S. multimillionaires who would rather enjoy the cheap labor provided by illegal immigrants than pay the wages Americans expect.
The way Bush steamrollered the intelligence bill through Congress in December 2004, demanding that the House abandon its sensible provisions for border security, indicates that he might be willing to split the Republican Party in order to carry out his promise to Fox. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., R-Wis., emerged as a hero from the legislative battle because he fought to include strong border security and a prohibition against granting drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants, finally saying that the failure to include this "will keep Americans unnecessarily at risk."
It was dishonest of the media and the pro-open-borders senators to try to pit Sensenbrenner against the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations. In fact, the commission's final report came out strongly in favor of clamping down on border security and drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants.
The commission report said: "It is elemental to border security to know who is coming into the country. ... At many entry points to vulnerable facilities, including gates for boarding aircraft, sources of identification are the last opportunity to ensure that people are who they say they are and to check whether they are terrorists."
Even though the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers' drivers' licenses enabled them to travel freely throughout America like U.S. citizens with easy access to vehicles and buildings, all the time concealing their terrorist designs, the senators and the White House irrationally maintained that drivers' licenses should be available to illegal immigrants. Since Rep. Sensenbrenner's courageous stand forced these issues onto the national news, we hope Congress will deal with the problem of illegal immigrants in January 2005.
Take note, this is how the argument will be presented.
On the one hand the "moving forward" and "compassionate" President.
On the other hand the "natavist, racist, nationalist, xenophobe, vigilante, etc." crowd.
There was quite a bit of political hay made out of Bush's stance on immigration early in the election - yet most around here were willing to overlook it in the name of preventing sKerry from being elected. In fact, many folks got flamed for even bringing it up.
Now it's time for us to get to the bottom of GW's soft stance on immigration before the crap hits the fan.
Deficits have exploded under the Bush adminstration. Non-defense discrectionary spending increased at the fastest rate since the Lyndon Johnson administration. And, the impact of the socialist expansion of Medicare has yet to be felt. So, if the Bush adminstration and the Republicans can't nomination conservative judges, what good is voting for these clowns?
Expect those extra millions and severe million more that came out in droves to keep Bush in office to stay home in the next election if this type of thing continues.
I also voted for Bush with the same hopes that this could be worked out. I am fed up with the Eletist of both parties. Our Cnstitutional Repubic is being sold to the Highest Bidder on Social Values and the Lowest Bidder On Labor. In the middle of allod this is the American People who believe in our Constitutional Republic.
It is the whole idea of America that is under attack! Time to make a decesion. The election of 2006 is a good place to start by replacing the Eletist opposed to the Constitution. Dem or Rep they are selling us out!
The Dimms and the Republicans JUST WILL NOT HEAR the AMERICAN People, we have no place else to go for representation in Congress: Let's see, elections 2006,
Constitutional Party,
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
America First Party,
http://www.americafirstparty.org/
Independant American Party
http://www.usiap.org/
The American Party
http://www.theamericanparty.org/
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1305650/posts
Bump That
It's called "outsourcing." No, I mean, "in-sourcing." No, it's called the old "in/out-sourcing."
Hey, if you can't have more nannies that your peers why even have kids?
I am beginning to suspect that anyone dumb enough to run for public office, is too dumb to serve. Or else I am just too dumb to understand-one or the other.
someone has to pick heinz tomatoes
Unfortunately Bush only hears one person....Karl Rove. The Bush administration got your vote...that's all they wanted. Your desires for the Republicans and GWB to do something to reduce the tide of illegals crossing the borders will fall on deaf ears.
I stopped reading right there. David Bury is a judge of the U.S. District Court in Arizona. He is not a judge of any Circuit Court of Appeals, and certainly not the 3rd Circuit, whose jurisdiction covers New Jersey, Delaware and Pennsylvania.
Whew, I guess the fringe right thinks that people on FR are dumb.
Handpicked Bush Judge Crosses Line in Overturning Immigrant Proposition
Excuse me, the writer was Doug Bandow.
This judgew is definitely a W mistake and simply lacks common sense.
Then again, maybe it was an editorial mistake.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dougbandow/printdb20041221.shtml:
"Editors' note: This column was mistakenly attributed to Doug Bandow. Sorry for the inconvenience."
Elitist disdain indeed.
Our Mexico-first President is hell-bent to "solve" the border problems by removing said border.
I'll never vote Republican again unless they exhibit the unwavering patriotism of a Tom Tancredo. And I intend to tell them so soon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.