Countering the Myths on Immigration Bill

Myths vs. Facts on Immigration

The White House posted an article on line entitled Myth/Fact: Ten Key Myths About the Border Security and Immigration Reform Agreement at this link. The Heritage Foundation countered that article with Facts that bust the White House points at this link. A Rasmussen poll shows tht only "26% of American voters favor passage of the legislation. See this link.

Following are some of the facts vs the myths.

1. MYTH: This is not amnesty. FACT: The bill takes an approach similar to that of the 1986 immigration law. President Reagan backed that law... and called it amnesty. So does Black's Law Dictionary, which says, 'the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act provided amnesty for undocumented aliens already in the country.'"

2. MYTH: This proposal does not repeat the mistakes of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act. FACT: This proposal exacerbates those mistakes… The 1986 law gave temporary resident status to most illegals who could show they'd lived here continuously for five years. [about 3 million] The new proposal would do this for anyone who" lived here for the last five months [about 12 million or more].

3. MYTH: The government will crack down on the hiring of illegal workers. FACT: You can't "crack down" on something that doesn't exist. And all but a handful of illegal workers will become magically legal within 24 hours of applying for the new Z-visa.

4. MYTH: This proposal would not cut in half the amount of fence built by the Secure Fence Act of 2006. FACT: The Secure Fence Act authorized 700 miles of new fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border. The proposal would implement the new temporary worker and Z visa programs once the feds have installed at least 370 miles of fencing.

5. MYTH: The trigger period will not cause a rush to the border. FACT:…. Since illegals can get a Z visa on the basis of only two easily-manufactured documents, fraudulent documentation will keep the stream of illegal immigrants flowing. All the trigger period does is create an incentive for today's illegals to claim they've been illegal since Jan. 1.

6. MYTH: By providing an opportunity for citizenship to illegal immigrants already here, the bill will not exponentially increase extended-family chain migration. FACT: In granting immediate amnesty to so many millions, the bill will dramatically accelerate family chain migration over the next six years. At that point, the proposal purports to replace family chain migration with skill-based immigration preferences. That change may or may not occur.

7. MYTH: The temporary worker program is good for American workers. FACT: By creating both the Z visa program and the Y visa program (for future temporary workers), the proposal sets the stage for millions of new workers to enter the labor market, potentially depressing wages.

8. MYTH: Illegal immigrants will not come onto the welfare rolls.
FACT: As soon as illegals get Z-visa status, they become eligible for free medical care under Medicaid and their children are immediately entitled to welfare. ,,

9. MYTH: Government agencies will be able to share information to pursue immigration violators. FACT: True and false. Unless a background check turns up something criminal about a Z visa applicant within 24 hours after the initial paperwork is submitted, enforcement agencies are blocked from pursuing deportation for a full year.

10. MYTH: Senators can cast an informed vote on the bill today.
FACT: Senators did not receive even a draft of the bill until 2 a.m. Saturday--leaving them less than three days to read and understand this complex and convoluted proposal before being forced to vote to bring it to the floor. …

Contact President Bush:
Comments: 202-456-1111
email for White House: comments@whitehouse.gov

Torture vs Freedom/Contemplaing the Gift of Freedom

EdNews.org columnist Nancy Salvato wrote an article by this title, "Contemplating the Gift of Freedom." Salvato used as the basis of her article the recently discovered drawings, which depicted methods Al-Qaeda uses to torture captives (pictures of things like blowtorch to the skin, eye removal, drilling hands, severing limbs etc.) These pictures can be seen at this link: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture1.html

Those pictures were a good reminder to me of why we are continuing our fight in Iraq and why we must continue to fight for the right of our military leaders to use the techniques, which in no way compare to any of these, to protect our soldiers from becoming captives.

But Salvato's article also reminded me of my own contemplation in the last few years. As I have tasted the bitterness of the fruit of intimidation, coercion, corruption, and the looming loss of freedom in our own country, I have often meditated on just how painful it would have been to live an entire lifetime, like millions have, in Cuba under the reign of Castro, in Russia under Stalin type dictatorship, under China's Mao, or Iraq's Saddam Hussein.

For me, I have at least escaped that type of torture for almost a lifetime! And I am deeply grateful, but still not nearly as grateful yet as I should be, for those who sacrificed and are still sacrificing for us so that we could have these blessings. For that I become more grateful every day; and as corrupt as our country is becoming, we still are far ahead of any country I know of in blessings and freedom. But I do greatly fear for the future generations!

I think Emily Dickinson's poem speaks to my own feelings - as I taste the looming loss of freedom, I count the nectar of freedom even sweeter. And Dickinson expresses the feelings of hundreds of thousands of those who died in battle and didn't get to experience on this earth the victory for which they died.

Success Is Counted Sweetest
Poem lyrics of Success Is Counted Sweetest by Emily Dickinson.

Success is counted sweetest
By those who ne'er succeed.
To comprehend a nectar
Requires sorest need.

Not one of all the purple Host
Who took the Flag today
Can tell the definition
So clear of Victory

As he defeated-dying
On whose forbidden ear
The distant strains of triumph
Burst agonized and clear!

Immigration Bill Would Immediately Legalize Illegal Aliens, A Fact the Media Ignores

Following are key factors (being ignored by most of the media) about the complex immigration bill that a bipartisan group of Senate negotiators has agreed to and which is being debated in the US Senate at this time: For copy of this bill go to this link and click: a format that allows for easy browsing online. For a copy of this article on line and all documentation and footnotes, see this link .

*The bill "would immediately grant legal status to almost all illegal immigrants [about 12 million] currently in the United States." The day the bill is signed most illegal aliens will no longer be illegal and "could get a Z-visa just by coming forward and registering and could stay here forever." That is the part of the story that is downplayed by the media, even on Fox. The first section of the bill is very deceptive on this point. Unless this aspect of the bill is changed, there are no other changes that could possibly make the bill acceptable to me and about 70% of other citizens in the country. See survey on this in footnotes. 1

*All the legislation that cities and counties and states have worked to pass to alleviate some of the problems with the massive influx of illegal aliens will become basically moot as soon as the law is passed because there will be practically no illegal aliens, only legal ones.

*The media keep talking about how it will take 7 to 13 years to become citizens and the fine the illegal aliens will have to pay. What difference does citizenship make to the illegal aliens if they have a safe harbor here for the rest of their lives and can get all the welfare and social security benefits financed by the American taxpayers? The fine they have to pay will be a paltry sum in comparison to what they will take from the system.

*"This is not just amnesty," Rector pronounced, "it's an amnesty with a blank check on the American taxpayers. As soon as you get one of these 'Z-visas,' you're in the Social Security system. And once you get them in the system, they will get welfare and they will get Social Security. The net cost of a single illegal alien is going to be about a half-million dollars. This is not amnesty; it's a right to pillage the American taxpayers." 2

*There are at least 30,000 illegal aliens that belong to gangs which would be grand fathered in and could not be deported. These are violent, drug dealing illegal aliens. "Those 30,000 gang members would all be grand fathered in under a Z visa and according to an analysis that I got a few minutes ago and could not be deported," Newt Gingrich said on O'Reilly show May 21, 07. "This is as close to madness as anything I have seen in modern government."

*The bill will give 400,000 guest worker visas a year. Sen. Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, said "America's workers have enough downward pressure on their wages because of unfair trade deals and corporate outsourcing of millions of jobs every year. The last thing they need now is to have an inflow of millions of more immigrants competing for their jobs at substandard wages." 3

*White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Bush would keep up efforts to push the immigration bill through Congress. "It's no secret that the president's personally very committed to this issue," he said. "There's a long way to go and we hope we can get there." 4

*But Newt Gingrich, a leading Republican, had this to say about the bill:
"This is the most self destructive bill for Republicans to be sponsoring that I have seen maybe in my lifetime. You can imagine how bad this bill is going to be by the time people understand all the details and how foolish its sponsors are going to look, at least on the Republican side where there is some semblance of belief in the Rule of law and some semblance in the sense of fairness."

For rest of article and all documenttion, see this link http://www.wpaag.org/Immigration%20Bill%20-%20US%20facts%20ignored%20by%20media.htm

All Arkansas US legislators' contact information below.

Senator Blanche Lambert Lincoln (D- AR) Phone 202-224-4843 Fax :202-228-1371 Send email from her website: http://lincoln.senate.gov/html/webform.html

Senator Mark Pryor (D- AR) Phone: 202-224-2353 Fax: 202-228-0908 Send an email from his website. http://pryor.senate.gov/email_webform.htm

Representative Marion Berry (D - 01) 202-225-4076 FAX 202-225-5602
Send an email from his websitehttp://www.house.gov/berry/zipauth.shtml

Representative Vic Snyder (D - 02) Phone: 202-225-2506 Fax: 202-225-5903
Send an email from his website: http://www.house.gov/snyder/contact/email.htm

Representative John Boozman (R - 03) Phone: 202-225-4301 Fax: 202-225-5713
Send an email from his website: http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Representative Michael A. Ross (D - 04) Phone: 202-225-3772 Fax: 202-225-1314
Send an email from his website: http://www.house.gov/writerep/

Rebuttal to Senator Lincoln's Response to Hate Crime Bill by Women Action Group

Entire article and footnotes can be found at this link.

Senator Lincoln, you said in your email that you support the hate crime bill.1 Are you aware that under the proposed hate crime bill an offender could be punished more severely for violent speech against a homosexual with the NAMBLA group (a group that actually encourages molesting children) than for violating an innocent child.2

According to FBI reports, there were only 6 murders related to hate crimes in 2005, but there are 2,000 children under 18 murdered every year.3 (You didn't mention, Senator Lincoln, that you co-sponsored the hate crime bill in 2001, are co-sponsor of the hate crime bill this year, voted to add sexual orientation to the definition of hate crimes in 2000 and 2002, and voted against the federal marriage amendment in 2006.)4

Another 101,000 cases of child sexual abuse and 192,000 cases of child physical abuse are substantiated each year. The approximate number of juvenile crime victims known to police each year is 849,000.5 In fact, the homicide rate for children in the United States is five times higher than that for children in the other 25 industrialized countries combined.6

According to the FBI, the number of hate crime offenses classified as crimes against persons in 2005 were 5,190, and 48% of those were speech (threats, not actions.) That 5,190 figure pales in comparison to the 849,000 crimes (real child crimes - not just speech) against children each year.7 Yet, you support a bill that will federalize prosecution of about 5,190 hate crimes and give more protection to some individuals that are perpetrating those crimes against children than you do to our own children who are victimized at a rate of 849,000 a year!!! (I am sure you are aware that you received only a 16% rating on your voting record on family and children by the Christian Coalition.)8

Are you aware that the Democrats killed an amendment to the hate crime bill "to clarify that the printing, distribution, or public reading of the Bible is not prohibited by any of the provisions of the bill. How could you possibly support a bill that could punish a person for reading from the Bible? The amendment was by Rep. Weldon, Dave (FL) and was made in an attempt to protect religious freedom.)9

Just recently the US Ninth Circuit Court in California ruled that "traditional values" and "family values" could be considered hate speech and could be censored. And also, just recently, hundreds of students in California were suspended from school for wearing Bible verses on their shirts.10

Are you aware that Congressman Mike Pence from Indiana offered this important amendment on Freedom of Religion. “Nothing in this section limits the religious freedom of any person or group under the constitution.” And the Democrats would not accept that amendment either. Twenty-five amendments were offered in the Judiciary committee by Republicans, and ALL were rejected.11

I am sure you are aware that only one of our four Arkansas US Representatives voted for the hate crime bill in the House on May 3, 07, even though three of them are Democrats? Only Vic Snyder voted for it. Wouldn't that make you reconsider the issue to see if you are missing something?12

Are you aware that the state hate crime bill has been rejected by the Arkansas legislature nine times.13 Doesn't that tell you where people in Arkansas stand on this issue? Shouldn't you represent the views of your constituents that have been so loudly proclaimed? Ted Kennedy, the sponsor of the bill in the Senate, has sponsored a hate crime bill six times, but Ted Kennedy represents the Democrats in Massachusetts not the Democrats in Arkansas.

According to FBI reports on hate crimes, "In about half of hate crimes, the victim was threatened verbally or assaulted without either a weapon or an injury being involved," In other words, the crimes were speech.14 Yet in your email you actually say, the hate crime bill "would amend the federal criminal code to allow for harsher penalties for violent crimes committed as an act of hate or prejudice against another person. This proposal pertains only to violent acts, not speech." Why would you attempt to deceive your constituents like that?

Read more at this link or click on Wednesday below.

Ignore social issues, Republican Chair Candidate Says

All 17 footnotes and documentation can be read at this link where this article can be read online: http://www.wpaag.org/Republicans%20-%20RunningAwayFromSocialIssuesIllogical.htm The article on line has more points than the one below.

The philosophy that running away from social issues will help the Republican Party, expressed by Dennis Miligan (the only candidate who has expressed interest in taking Gilbert Baker's place as Chair of the Republican Party) is totally illogical. 1 First, that philosophy runs counter to actual facts enumerated below. Second, anyone stating that philosophy has not counted the costs of such a move. In fact, that philosophy is just as absurd and dangerous as is Democrat Harry Reid's public statement that we've already lost the war in Iraq. Taking that stand will do nothing but guarantee defeat. (See link above for Dennis Miligan's quotes or the end of this post.)

If Republicans lose this war on social issues, then we will have one of two choices: give up our Christian values or be persecuted and go to jail for them. If that statement seems too strong, just consider that on a 9 to 4 vote the Democrats on the US Rules committee just defeated a proposed amendment exempting the reading of the Bible from hate crime prosecution. The words of that amendment read, "to clarify that the printing, distribution, or public reading of the Bible is not prohibited by any of the provisions of the [hate crime] bill," If that is not scary, what is? 2 And hundreds of students in California were suspended for wearing Bible verses on their shirts in California just recently. 3

There are numerous facts and events that prove the big loss for Republicans came from other sources rather than from a conservative stand on social issues. In fact, Republicans lost way more votes from caving on social issues than by supporting them. President Bush and other Republican leaders lost support of hundreds of thousands of voters by their leniency on illegal immigration. The same can be said about several other issues.

I. If social issues like traditional marriage vs same sex marriage are now winning issues for the the Republican Party,

A. Then just why have 27 states passed constitutional amendments to protect traditional marriage by margins as high as 8-1? In only one state where an attempt was made to pass such an amendment did it fail. In the Nov. 7 election, voters in Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin all adopted such amendments. 4

B. And why did Governor Mike Beebe, Lt. Governor Bill Halter and other Democratic candidates all feign allegiance to traditional marriage and oppose homosexual adoption of children until AFTER being elected? During the campaign even Jason Willett, chairman of the state Democratic Party, said he "had a problem with the adoption of children by gay parents." 5
II. If social issues like gun control are hurting Republican candidates,

A. Then why have the Democrats been running away from gun control issues since 2000? "We've gone backwards in a lot of areas," says Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. 6

B. And why did Governor Mike Beebe run advertisements for months and months about hunting and about his support of gun ownership?.

IV. If social issues like Illegal Immigration are hurting the Republican Party,

A. Why did only 7% of the members of Tom Tancredo's Immigrating Reform Caucus lose their seats in the election in November 06 when among all Republican seats in Congress, the rate of loss was 12%, almost twice as high? (Most of you have not seen these statistics anywhere) 7

B. Why is Ted Kennedy talking about supporting border patrol and sending O'Reilly emails about his new stand? Ted Kennedy recently voted (2006) for an amendment to H.R. 5631, to provide for $1.8 billion for the construction of 370 miles of border fencing. He had tried to kill this bill and voted against it six times in the past. 8

F. And why did the bill that failed by only 2 votes to allow illegal alien students to get in-state tuition and scholarships a couple years ago not get anywhere this last session?

IV. Why did we defeat the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in Arkansas and the nation and vote down the hate crime bill nine times in Arkansas if the citizens and Republicans are not on the right side of these issues?

IV. If social issues like abortion are not winning issues for Republican candidates,

A. Then why did a Gallop poll show in 2004 that the attitude of Pro-life rose from 33% to 43% and Pro-choice declined from 56% to 48%? 12 Why has Republican President Candidate Mitt Romney switched his position on abortion to Pro-Life?

B. Why did the US Supreme Court recently uphold a national ban on partial birth abortions and rule that the government has “a legitimate and substantial interest in preserving and promoting fetal life.”? The 5-4 decision marks the first time the court has upheld a ban on an abortion procedure. 13

The answer to that last question is basically the correct answer to all the questions above. The ban was upheld because Republicans kept social issues in the forefront, and a Republican President was finally able to get two conservative judges on the Court that upheld such a ban. Many Democrats, Christians, and other political party adherents worked on the issues, but this Supreme Court decision allowing ban on partial birth abortion was accomplished through the Republican party. As most of you know, I have many, many complaints with the Republican Party and have expressed them publicly many times, but I have to give credit where credit is due. I also have respect for many Arkansas Democrats who have fought hard on the right side for many of these issues, but their Party as a whole has not.

The same can be said about all the other issues in the questions presented above. In all those issues - traditional marriage, homosexual adoption, illegal immigration, 2nd Amendment rights and gun control, ERA, and many other issues- the Republican party as a whole has represented the "silent majority" and has been a mighty tool to preserve our traditional culture.

And don't forget the US hate crime bill mentioned in the first paragraph and who is standing for the right on that issue. All the Republicans on the Judiciary committee voted against the hate crime bill, and all the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee voted for the hate crime bill. In the full House, 166 Republicans voted against it and 212 Democrats voted for it. Only 25 Republicans voted for it. And nine Democrats on the Rules committee voted to reject the amendment, "to clarify that the printing, distribution, or public reading of the Bible is not prohibited by any of the provisions of the bill." Four Republicans voted for the amendment. 14

Can Republican afford to bail out on social issues? If we do so, we will lose ALL, even our very freedom and probably most elections.

For rest of article click Wednesday below

Bible Quotes Not Exempt from Hate Crime Bill

Amendment To Exempt Bible Verses from Hate Crime Bill Rejected and Students Suspended for Wearing Bible Verses on Shirts

The US “hate crime bill” bill, H.R. 1592, passed the House of Representatives recently 237-180. 212 Democrats and 25 Republicans voted for it, and 14 Democrats and 166 Republicans voted against it. It has not passed the Senate yet.

Conservatives have been warning Christians they need to get involved to fight this bill because it would take away Christians' freedom to use the Bible verses dealing with homosexuality, even for pastors in the pulpit. If there were any doubts that this could be one of the main purposes of the bill, then consider this amendment to the hate crime bill that the Democrats killed in the Rules Committee. An amendment was offered "to clarify that the printing, distribution, or public reading of the Bible is not prohibited by any of the provisions of the bill." The amendment failed by vote of 9 to 4. 1

Discussion on the hate crime bill in the Judiciary Committee confirms the Bible will not be exempt from hate crime law. The Traditional Values Coalition monitored all meetings. It is reported that Congressman Gohmert, in trying to get an amendment added that would protect constitutional speech, asked the committee, “If a minister was giving a sermon, a Bible study or any kind of written or spoken message saying that homosexuality was a serious sin and a person in the congregation went out and committed a crime against a homosexual, would the minister be charged with the crime of incitement?” After trying to evade that question and still being pinned to the wall by Gohmert, finally Democrat Congressman Artur Davis from Alabama spoke up and said, “Yes.” 2

A Swedish pastor, name Ake Green, was put in jail for a month for preaching that homosexuality is a sin under the Swedish hate crimes law and Canadian and French legislators have been fined for publicly criticizing homosexuality. 3

In an article, "Pastors: Act now or prepare for jail," the author says if the pastor read from Romans 1, I Corinthians 6, Genesis 19, or Leviticus 18 or 20, and a person who "attended your church, read your materials or heard your broadcast commits a crime – such as pushing away a cross-dresser's unwelcome advances" the pastor would be "punishable as a principal." The pastor could considered as ," as someone who "counsels" and "induces" the now-illegal belief that homosexual behavior is a sin under the hate crime bill. http://www.wnd.com:80/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55348

Students with Bible Verses on Their Shirts Suspended

And it won't be only pastors that will be punished under the hate crime law. Just recently, May 3, 07 an article entitled "Christian students with Bible messages on shirts booted" reported the following: 4

"At least another 75 students have been suspended from school in California for wearing shirts that expressed their biblically-based, and the district that, as WND reported, has been imposing the punishments, says those quotations aren't necessarily acceptable because they are from God's Word. The suspensions were begun on April 18 when the homosexual lobby-supported "Day of Silence" was observed in public schools in California – and across the nation.

"The issues initially arose at Inderkum, Rio Linda and San Juan high schools during the event promoted by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network organization, which advocates for the homosexual lifestyle and promotes educating children in that choice.

"During that event, students go around school during the day without speaking, and they hand out cards stating they are protesting the "discrimination" against the homosexual lifestyle

"An unknown number of students but at least dozens and perhaps hundreds of students were suspended for that day when they arrived wearing T-shirts proclaiming the Bible's condemnation of homosexuality… But the school also allows T-shirts promoting homosexuality, too, with messages such as "I'm gay," he noted.

Other articles report the following:

"And recently, a British couple told how they were denied the chance to adopt because it was determined that their Christian faith might 'prejudice' them against a homosexual child put in their care," LaBarbera added. 5

"Already in the United States, Catholic Charities of Boston halted all adoption operations in the state after being told under Massachusetts' pro-'gay' nondiscrimination law, only agencies that placed children in homosexual-led households would get licensed by the state. 6

If you want to know how you can help,contact numbers for all US legislators from Arkansas, and how to contact President Bush, see the link below:

(See documentation in Footnotes and read this article on line at http://www.wpaag.org/Hate%20crime%20-%20Bible%20verses%20not%20exempt.htm