The Patriot Post Chronicle 4-3-2013

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Chronicle 4-3-2013
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Beware 'Comprehensive' Immigration Reform

April 3, 2013

The Foundation

"It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood." --James Madison, Federalist No. 62

Editorial Exegesis

"Regardless of their respective positions on immigration reform, legislators on both the dovish and hawkish sides of the debate should agree on one fundamental principle: The Nancy Pelosi approach to lawmaking -- pass the bill to find out what's in it -- is no way to go about repairing our defective immigration system. Supporters of so-called comprehensive immigration reform are positioned to rush through legislation in the Senate ... and have been critical of Alabama Republican Jeff Sessions and others who have called for a more thorough (and necessarily more time-consuming) examination of the issues in question. ... 'But we've been debating these issues for decades,' the argument goes. True enough. But we have not been debating the specific legislation under consideration for decades, years, weeks, days, hours, minutes, or milliseconds: As of this writing, the text of the bill has not even been finalized, much less made public, and still less been subject to rigorous debate. The distinction is important. Senator Sessions and others are not calling for delay for the sake of delay. They are asking for time to examine thoroughly the specifics of the legislation. ... A right-here-right-now legislative process is an invitation for Republicans to set themselves up for getting rolled by the Obama administration and its congressional enablers. ... Further, there is no reason to conclude that every aspect of immigration reform must be lumped into a single bill: Border security, to take the most obvious example, is worth doing on its own, regardless of independent issues such as the ongoing status of illegal immigrants. The mania for legislative gigantism leads to bad law. ... Congressional Republicans, and Americans at large, should be highly skeptical of the Democrats' attempt to rush through this legislation -- legislation that remains, at the moment, literally a sight unseen." --National Review1

Upright

"Last Friday, the so-called 'comprehensive immigration reform' effort received a boost when U.S. Chamber of Commerce head Tom Donohue and AFL-CIO president Richard Trumka reportedly came to an agreement regarding a guest-worker program. ... The deal creates a new 'W' visa category aimed at low-skill workers. It would allow immigrants to earn the same wages paid to Americans, or an industry's prevailing wages, whichever is higher. Since such wages can vary from city to city, the Labor Department would determine the prevailing wage. The proposal also includes the additional promises of border security, a crackdown on employers who hire illegals, and a 13-year pathway to citizenship for the millions of illegal aliens currently in the country. It's the oh-so-familiar promises that ought to infuriate Americans well aware that the exact same promises about border control and a crackdown on businesses were made when the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act was passed into law." --columnist Arnold Ahlert

"On Tuesday, the Associated Press announced that it is banishing the phrase 'illegal immigrant' from its famous stylebook. ... AP explains that it wants to stop labeling people. Hah. This is the same organization that employs journalists who have repeatedly shown naked bias against tea party members, gun owners and pro-life activists. ... I propose that we banish the term 'journalist' when referring to members of mainstream news organizations who pose as neutral news-gathers while carrying out a blatantly ideological agenda." --columnist Michelle Malkin

"Soft-minded and sloppy-thinking academics, lawyers and judges harbor the silly notion that but for the fact of discrimination, we'd be proportionately distributed by race across incomes, education, occupations and other outcomes. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere, at any time, that proportionality is the norm anywhere on earth; however, much of our thinking, many of our laws and much of our public policy are based upon proportionality's being the norm. Maybe this vision is held because people believe that equality in fact is necessary for equality before the law. But the only requirement for equality before the law is that one is a human being." --economist Walter E. Williams

"Most of the social liberalism comes with quite a price tag. The most reliable constituency for Big Government is single women, for whom the state is a girl's best friend, the sugar daddy whose checks never bounce. A society in which a majority of births are out of wedlock cannot be other than a Big Government welfare society. Ruining a nation's finances is one thing; debauching its human capital is far harder to fix." --columnist Mark Steyn

Essential Liberty

"I know that as a Patriot, you will do all within your power to ensure that our society will take back the reins from Big Government. I know that you believe in the enduring truth of our ideas of limited government, free enterprise, and individual freedom, and that they will eventually win the day. Freedom is man's natural state; whenever he's enslaved, all he thinks about is how to become free once again." --Ed Feulner, in a final note as president of Heritage Foundation

Insight

"It is the mark of an educated man to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." --Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC)

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone." --French economist Frederic Bastiat (1801-1850)

Demo-gogues

No, shame on Obama for standing on the caskets of children: "The notion that two months or three months after something as horrific as what happened in Newtown happens and we've moved on to other things, that's not who we are. ... Less than 100 days ago that happened, and the entire country was shocked. And the entire country pledged we would do something about it and that this time would be different. Shame on us if we've forgotten. I haven't forgotten those kids. Shame on us if we've forgotten." --Barack Obama

"Tears aren't enough. Expressions of sympathy aren't enough. Speeches aren't enough. We've cried enough. We've known enough heartbreak. What we're proposing is not radical. It's not taking away anybody's gun rights. It's something that, if we are serious, we will do." --Barack Obama

Just the beginning: "The Assault Weapons ban and the limitation on the size of magazines, let me say this as clearly as I can: This is just the beginning. We believe that weapons of war have no place on our streets. That's the message that the retired admirals and generals have spoken to us about. The comment one of them used was: 'If you want to learn how to use a semi-automatic weapon, join the United States military, but these are weapons of war.' And we believe there's no rational reason why someone would need a clip that can hold 15, 20, 30, 100 bullets, 100 rounds. We have to do more and we will do more." --Joe Biden

April Fools? "I call upon all Americans to observe this month with programs and activities to improve their understanding of financial principles and practices. My Administration is dedicated to helping people make sound decisions in the marketplace. My Administration continues to encourage responsibility at all levels of our financial system." --Barack Obama, in a declaration designating April "National Financial Capability Month" (Since taking office in 2009, Obama has increased the national debt by 60 percent, or $53,377 per household.)

The BIG Lie: "You have a responsibility to honor the Constitution. In fact, we take an oath to do just that, and that is the oath that President Obama is upholding. We weigh equities. Congress passes a bill. It's questionable in terms of constitutionality. There's no question about your oath to the Constitution of the United States.... I think we would all say we're honoring, as the president does, the Constitution." --House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)