Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

Jon Fleischman

Hanretty: Close, But No Cigar…

Like me, Karen Hanretty (who appeared on once, not twice not three times, but FOUR times this week on the FOX News Channel – way to go!) read a piece in the Los Angeles Times, Governer says Borders are Vulnerable, and got her hopes up.  In the piece, the Governor says, "I think that all of this comes down to one thing: The federal government has failed the people of America in a terrible way, in a disastrous way, when it comes to this immigration situation."

Since the Governor has come out in support of a guest worker (read: amnesty) program to legitimize the residency of those who snuck/smuggled/crept/lied/broke the law to come into America, I am trying to figure out if the Governor thinks that the federal government has failed because all of these foreign nationals are here at all?  Or does he mean that they have failed because they all should have been allowed to walk into this country ligitimately? 

Where is the outrage and desire to deal with the lawbreakers?  How can we be a country of laws if we advocate that we excuse citizens of other countries squatting in America?  That is what ‘guest worker’ means – it means legalizing residency for lawbreakers.

Governor, I urge you to support cutting off all government services to people, no matter who they are, no matter what service it is, if they cannot affirmately prove legal residency.  Furthermore, employers who knowingly hire foreign nationals without a greencard should pay a heavy fine.

Well, this was supposed to me my chance to share KAREN’S thoughts, so here they are:

Close, But No Cigar…

Arnold, Arnold, Arnold.  Always so close to saying the right thing but never quite makes it all the way to the finish line.  Like an exhausted marathon runner, he runs and runs and runs then collapses just a few feet away from victory. 

Take for example his quote in Saturday’s Los Angeles Times when asked about widespread frustration over federal immigration policy.

“Marches in Los Angeles, Chicago and other cities, he said, ‘are an expression of frustration. People want to send a message to Washington that they’re not happy with certain bills….

“‘I think that all of this comes down to one thing: The federal government has failed the people of America in a terrible way, in a disastrous way, when it comes to this immigration situation.’”

I ask you, dear reader, who cares if foreign nationals, i.e., illegal immigrants, who have no say in U.S. policy are “not happy” or frustrated with U.S. immigration policy?  Did anyone bother to inform the governor that the hundreds of thousands of protestors were illegal immigrants who can’t
(legally) vote?  (Loretta Sanchez isn’t on the campaign payroll, is she?
One never knows these days.)

Yes, Arnold is absolutely correct that the federal government has failed the American people.  And yes, they have failed in a “disastrous way.” 

But c’mon, Arnold, don’t make it sound as though the people marching (and skipping work and skipping school) had any legitimate grounds for telling Washington how unhappy they are with “certain bills.” 

I had such high hopes when I read the headline of the LA Times article.
Alas, such dashed hopes on a beautiful Saturday morning.  I think I’ll read an archived Deb Saunders column for solace. 

___________________________________________________________________

OK, this is now Jon again.  Thought I would repost my thoughts on defining "amnesty":

GUEST WORKER PROGRAM = AMNESTY
What is "amnesty" when it comes to the national debate on illegal immigration?  I’ve had a few conversations with folks in the last couple of weeks, and there seems to be some subjectivity being used in defining this term.  So let me just throw out there my position….
 
First of all, Answers.com defines ‘amnesty’ as,  "A general pardon granted by a government, especially for political offenses."
 
Second of all, the offense that has been committed by every illegal resident of the United States is the same – criminal entry into this country without permission.
 
Therefore, the definition of amnesty is really straight forward — any proposal that grants to those who committed criminal entry into the United States a legal avenue for remaining here is amnesty.
 
Some have been saying that ‘amnesty’ means granting citizenship to those who came here illegally — and that would certainly be the most extreme type of amnesty.  But it is smoke and mirrors to say that you support a guest worker program but oppose amnesty – they are one and the same.
 
It is okay within this public policy debate to say that you support some form of amnesty for illegal residents — after all, people who have snuck into the United States in the past have historically been granted amnesty.  But please don’t make the debate even more complicated by obscuring positions by the mis-use of labels.