Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )



Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Obama Immigration Speech At American Univ, Recasts Statue of Liberty's History
Bookmark and Share
Jillian 
Posted: 02-Jul-2010, 10:50 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Brittany
Posts: 703
Joined: 29-Jun-2008
ZodiacOak

Realm: Pennsylvania

female





QUOTE
EDITORIAL: At liberty with the truth
Obama recasts statue's history for the sake of amnesty
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
7:03 p.m., Friday, July 2, 2010


Give me your tired, your poor, your hackneyed cliches. That's what President Obama did when addressing immigration policy at the American University on Thursday.

Perched in the ivory tower for a few minutes, the president invented a whopper about the origins of the Statue of Liberty and the famous poem about it by Emma Lazarus. Mr. Obama took the story of a monument donated by France for that republic's own propagandistic purposes and a poem its own author didn't want to write and turned them into a morality tale on behalf of illegal aliens.

According to Obama mythology, Lazarus was a driving force behind Lady Liberty. "Years before the statue was built - years before it would be seen by throngs of immigrants craning their necks skyward at the end of a long and brutal voyage, years before it would come to symbolize everything that we cherish - she imagined what it could mean," he said. The truth, however, is that the statue was almost finished when she penned the poem, which she didn't do because she was "inspired" but because she was talked into it - after first refusing to write the verse - by a literary colleague named Constance Clay Harrison.

What's most shameless about the president's willful distortion of history is that it was used to justify the left's agenda to provide amnesty for illegal aliens, which undermines the real account of Ellis Island as a landing point where legal immigrants filled out paperwork in compliance with this nation's laws. Mr. Obama also twisted the facts about his administration's inaction on immigration and the state of Arizona's reasonable efforts to combat the alien influx.

In a fit of fear-mongering, Mr. Obama claimed Arizona's recent immigration law has "the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound." The fact is that Arizona's law explicitly forbids such profiling. Mr. Obama claimed to be holding employers accountable for hiring undocumented workers. In truth, his administration filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to throw out an Arizona law that held corporations to the same standards required of federal contractors.

Mr. Obama should stop pillaging American history for partisan speeches. The huddled masses prefer the truth.


What else can this bullsh$tter say that would make the deaf hear, the ignorant understand, and the blind see?

The master manipulator of our time...with no conscience to bear and a narcissistic edge that surpasses all boundaries.

Jillian


--------------------

"Disappointments are inevitable. Discouragement is a choice."
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 03-Jul-2010, 04:08 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male





An interesting editorial. I think the author is wrong that Obama was reporting on historical fact when he said "...she imagined what it could mean. She imagined the sight of a giant statue at the entry point of a great nation -– but unlike the great monuments of the past, this would not signal an empire. Instead, it would signal one’s arrival to a place of opportunity and refuge and freedom." I believe he was describing and interpreting the poem, which he then quoted a part of.

As far as the Arizona law is concerned he said "Into this breach, states like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands. Given the levels of frustration across the country, this is understandable. But it is also ill conceived. And it’s not just that the law Arizona passed is divisive -– although it has fanned the flames of an already contentious debate. Laws like Arizona’s put huge pressures on local law enforcement to enforce rules that ultimately are unenforceable. It puts pressure on already hard-strapped state and local budgets. It makes it difficult for people here illegally to report crimes -– driving a wedge between communities and law enforcement, making our streets more dangerous and the jobs of our police officers more difficult. And you don’t have to take my word for this. You can speak to the police chiefs and others from law enforcement here today who will tell you the same thing. These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound. And as other states and localities go their own ways, we face the prospect that different rules for immigration will apply in different parts of the country -– a patchwork of local immigration rules where we all know one clear national standard is needed. Our task then is to make our national laws actually work..."

The word potential is key here, and while the author of the editorial quotes it, h/she seems to ignore it. Also, quite obviously I would think, because something is stated in a law as being forbidden doesn't mean that it can't happen. But allso Obama was speaking of the broader context than just the Arizona law and was suggesting an understanding of why these states like Arizona feel compelled to do what they did, and that the federal government needs to "make laws actually work."

As far as the author's comments that "Mr. Obama claimed to be holding employers accountable for hiring undocumented workers. In truth, his administration filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to throw out an Arizona law that held corporations to the same standards required of federal contractors..."

I am guessing this refers to this case: United States Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria and according to the Petition for certiorari it is about the following:

1. Whether an Arizona statute that imposes sanctions
on employers who hire unauthorized aliens is
invalid under a federal statute that expressly "preempt[
s] any State or local law imposing civil or
criminal sanctions (other than through licensing and
similar laws) upon those who employ, or recruit or
refer for a fee for employment, unauthorized aliens."
8 U.S.C. § 1324a(h)(2).
2. Whether the Arizona statute, which requires all
employers to participate in a federal electronic employment
verification system, is preempted by a federal
law that specifically makes that system voluntary.
8 U.S.C. § 1324a note.
3. Whether the Arizona statute is impliedly preempted
because it undermines the "comprehensive
scheme" that Congress created to regulate the employment
of aliens. Hoffman Plastic Compounds, Inc.
v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137, 147 (2002).

It isn't as simple as the author of the editorial would suggest.

I do agree with the author on one point: "The huddled masses prefer the truth.


--------------------
Is beannaithe iad a shantaíonn an ceartas
(Blessed are those who desire justice)
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 03-Jul-2010, 07:19 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





QUOTE (Jillian @ 02-Jul-2010, 11:50 PM)
QUOTE
EDITORIAL: At liberty with the truth
Obama recasts statue's history for the sake of amnesty
By THE WASHINGTON TIMES
7:03 p.m., Friday, July 2, 2010


Give me your tired, your poor, your hackneyed cliches. That's what President Obama did when addressing immigration policy at the American University on Thursday.

Perched in the ivory tower for a few minutes, the president invented a whopper about the origins of the Statue of Liberty and the famous poem about it by Emma Lazarus. Mr. Obama took the story of a monument donated by France for that republic's own propagandistic purposes and a poem its own author didn't want to write and turned them into a morality tale on behalf of illegal aliens.

According to Obama mythology, Lazarus was a driving force behind Lady Liberty. "Years before the statue was built - years before it would be seen by throngs of immigrants craning their necks skyward at the end of a long and brutal voyage, years before it would come to symbolize everything that we cherish - she imagined what it could mean," he said. The truth, however, is that the statue was almost finished when she penned the poem, which she didn't do because she was "inspired" but because she was talked into it - after first refusing to write the verse - by a literary colleague named Constance Clay Harrison.

What's most shameless about the president's willful distortion of history is that it was used to justify the left's agenda to provide amnesty for illegal aliens, which undermines the real account of Ellis Island as a landing point where legal immigrants filled out paperwork in compliance with this nation's laws. Mr. Obama also twisted the facts about his administration's inaction on immigration and the state of Arizona's reasonable efforts to combat the alien influx.

In a fit of fear-mongering, Mr. Obama claimed Arizona's recent immigration law has "the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound." The fact is that Arizona's law explicitly forbids such profiling. Mr. Obama claimed to be holding employers accountable for hiring undocumented workers. In truth, his administration filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to throw out an Arizona law that held corporations to the same standards required of federal contractors.

Mr. Obama should stop pillaging American history for partisan speeches. The huddled masses prefer the truth.


What else can this bullsh$tter say that would make the deaf hear, the ignorant understand, and the blind see?

The master manipulator of our time...with no conscience to bear and a narcissistic edge that surpasses all boundaries.

Jillian

The points wdorholt makes all relate to guest workers who came here legally to work crops.

Federal law holds ALL employers to the same standards! That was the reason for E-verify.

Az law deals with ILLEGAL aliens! Much like comparing apples and onions

If obama believes there is a SC case in that, he does not have the intelligence I gave him credit for. Kagan will be of no assistance as she does not change the mix of the court and she is expected to polarize the present court. There is speculation that one justice may even move more right because of her.

If the administration had a comprehensive plan about illegals it was never addressed.

He is not addressing any of the concerns of his electorate, thus an other impeachable charge.

Lastly, wdorholt grossly misunderstands the situation when he refers to the huddled masses. That is not what the D's are dealing with now. We are an empowered grass roots patriotic movement.

obama acts like a desperate individual now. Has no apparent hold on the situation in America and Americans are fast realizing this as evidenced by our growing numbers.

All of his blunders are great for the Tea Party movement and the November elections.

Slàinte,   

 Patch    

PMEmail Poster               
Top
Jillian 
Posted: 03-Jul-2010, 09:04 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Brittany
Posts: 703
Joined: 29-Jun-2008
ZodiacOak

Realm: Pennsylvania

female





Let's face it...there will ALWAYS be some sort of profiling. Recently profiling has been made into something totally wrong that effects only illegal "Mexican" aliens (because all conversatives MUST be prejudice right?). My long-haired, leather-wearing, caucasian Harley riding friend gets pulled over all of the time...well...because...don't white Harely dudes naturally belong to the Pagans or deal drugs?!

Life is not always fair...but it should be just. My friend can joke about this and understands it. But AZ has focused on that to do the best they can to prevent it. The fact that the AZ law will put additional pressure on law enforcement is twisting things a bit...as if saying there is no pressure on them when they are not allowed to question one's nationhood, when in deed most Phoenix police I worked with complained about that very thing years ago stating, "our hands are tied".

No it may not be pleasant that a "good" illegal alien can't report crime, but it is a consequence of their choice. The left needs to understand that we don't relish the situation of hurting "nice" or "good" illegal aliens...those stories of good illegal families just trying to find a better life are heartbreaking, but we can't use a few heartbreak stories to generalize about the illegal element coming into this country now - and how the situation is dire along the border.

Dennis Miller pretty much sums up what I feel...allow a certain number of hard-working illigal aliens to stay and then enforce the borders, the laws, and extricate the criminal element.

But the point the author is making is that Obama is manipulating history for his agenda and attempting to insinuate that "give me your tired and your poor, your hackneyed..." meant we should be a swinging door for all. Anyone who believes this has no base in the reality of things. A nation simply cannot infinitely accept immigrants -- illegal or legal--or face having her need exceed her resources. That is why ALL countries have immigration policies...including Mexico.

Jillian
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 04-Jul-2010, 01:25 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male





QUOTE (Jillian @ 03-Jul-2010, 09:04 AM)
Let's face it...there will ALWAYS be some sort of profiling. Recently profiling has been made into something totally wrong that effects only illegal "Mexican" aliens (because all conversatives MUST be prejudice right?). My long-haired, leather-wearing, caucasian Harley riding friend gets pulled over all of the time...well...because...don't white Harely dudes naturally belong to the Pagans or deal drugs?!

Life is not always fair...but it should be just. My friend can joke about this and understands it. But AZ has focused on that to do the best they can to prevent it. The fact that the AZ law will put additional pressure on law enforcement is twisting things a bit...as if saying there is no pressure on them when they are not allowed to question one's nationhood, when in deed most Phoenix police I worked with complained about that very thing years ago stating, "our hands are tied".

No it may not be pleasant that a "good" illegal alien can't report crime, but it is a consequence of their choice. The left needs to understand that we don't relish the situation of hurting "nice" or "good" illegal aliens...those stories of good illegal families just trying to find a better life are heartbreaking, but we can't use a few heartbreak stories to generalize about the illegal element coming into this country now - and how the situation is dire along the border.

Dennis Miller pretty much sums up what I feel...allow a certain number of hard-working illigal aliens to stay and then enforce the borders, the laws, and extricate the criminal element.

But the point the author is making is that Obama is manipulating history for his agenda and attempting to insinuate that "give me your tired and your poor, your hackneyed..." meant we should be a swinging door for all. Anyone who believes this has no base in the reality of things. A nation simply cannot infinitely accept immigrants -- illegal or legal--or face having her need exceed her resources. That is why ALL countries have immigration policies...including Mexico.

Jillian

Jillian,

As I have indicated in a previous post, I mostly agree with your take on what should be done for immigration reform. I also think that the congress does also, or at least some of the leading attempts to draft something includes these ideas. Obama's speech includes some of them. I just don't see where Obama is advocating "a swinging door" or "infinitely accepting immigrants" in his speech.

"For example, there are those in the immigrants’ rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws. And often this argument is framed in moral terms: Why should we punish people who are just trying to earn a living?

I recognize the sense of compassion that drives this argument, but I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally.

Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable."

Patch,

As far as your statement that my points were about legal workers only, I wasn't making any points about either types. The author said that the Obama administration filed a brief, and I merely reported what it was about, making the point that it was more complicated than what the author suggested.

As far as my comment about huddled masses, I agreed with what the author said, implying that he should tell the truth also.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 04-Jul-2010, 01:40 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





Points 1,2 and 3 apply to legal workers only as does the CC suit.

We are opposed to illegals which obama seems to confuse with legal workers.

I really do believe he has lost control of his administration and himself and is falling apart before our eyes. He was in over his head the day he took the oath of office. I wish I could take credit for that statement but it is something I am hearing a lot lately, and from D's also.

Illegal aliens are criminals who broke our law. Try sneaking into mexico and see how far you get. I say we should treat them as they treat illegals in mexico.

Slàinte,   

 Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Jillian 
Posted: 04-Jul-2010, 08:08 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Brittany
Posts: 703
Joined: 29-Jun-2008
ZodiacOak

Realm: Pennsylvania

female





Wdorholt -

I hear you....and well said!

Jillian
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 06-Jul-2010, 04:14 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male





QUOTE (Patch @ 04-Jul-2010, 01:40 AM)
Points 1,2 and 3 apply to legal workers only as does the CC suit.

We are opposed to illegals which obama seems to confuse with legal workers.

Slàinte,   

 Patch    

Patch,

The first part of the case is this:

" Whether an Arizona statute that imposes sanctions
on employers who hire unauthorized aliens is
invalid under a federal statute that expressly "preempt[
s] any State or local law imposing civil or
criminal sanctions (other than through licensing and
similar laws) upon those who employ, or recruit or
refer for a fee for employment, unauthorized aliens."
8 U.S.C. § 1324a(h)(2).

While legal aliens could be unauthorized aliens when it comes to being employed I suppose, would not "unauthorized" include illegal aliens also?

The definition that is used is in the Immigration and Control Act and is: (3) DEFINITION OF UNAUTHORIZED ALIEN. -- As used in this section, the term 'unauthorized alien' means, with respect to the employment of an alien at a particular time, that the alien is not at that time either (a) an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, or (cool.gif(I have no idea how this emoticon got here but it won't leave) authorized to be so employed by this Act or by the Attorney General.

Perhaps what is confusing is that the Arizona statute in question is called "Legal Arizona Workers Act."
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 06-Jul-2010, 09:27 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





Apples and onions! The employer sanctions case was settled and Az. won. They have won in upholding ALL of their illegal alien legislation efforts.

States and communities are considering similar laws and many more are already in place.

Obama took an oath and quickly has failed to uphold it, just another in a substantial list of impeachable offenses.

The fed govt is charged with enforcing Illegal employment laws involving corrupt employers which is why we have E-verify. Since the govt now appears to be even more corrupt, we do not just forget it, the states and municipalities must take over.

This is a sad sight watching a presidency crumble.

Slàinte,    

Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
wdorholt 
Posted: 08-Jul-2010, 05:01 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 380
Joined: 21-Sep-2008
ZodiacIvy

Realm: Perham, Minnesota

male





QUOTE (Patch @ 06-Jul-2010, 09:27 AM)
Apples and onions!  The employer sanctions  case was settled and Az. won.  They have won in upholding ALL of their illegal alien legislation efforts.

The fed govt is charged with enforcing Illegal employment laws involving corrupt employers which is why we have E-verify.
Slàinte,    

Patch    

I'm not sure what you mean here. My post was in response to you saying that the AZ law was only about legal aliens. I was showing you that it is not.

The other issue is about e-verify. The federal statutes make it a voluntary program. AZ makes it mandatory. That is also why the government filed the brief. All of this started as a response to this statement at the beginning of the thread by The Washington Times: " Mr. Obama claimed to be holding employers accountable for hiring undocumented workers. In truth, his administration filed a brief asking the Supreme Court to throw out an Arizona law that held corporations to the same standards required of federal contractors."

It wasn't the same standards and prempted the federal law. That is why the brief was filed. This has little to do with whether the idea behind the law was a good thing or not. This has to do with doing coming up with legal remedies.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Dogshirt 
Posted: 08-Jul-2010, 09:35 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Lord of the Northern Plains
Group Icon

Group: Founder
Posts: 2,400
Joined: 12-Oct-2003
ZodiacElder

Realm: Washington THE State

male





Something I have heard numerous times regarding DRUG laws and the "Medical " marijuana laws is this;

'A STATE law may be TOUGHER than FEDERAL law, but may NOT be less than said Federal law.' (not a direct quote from anyone in particular, just the gist of the argument)

It seems to me that the Feds want it BOTH ways. But if a State may impose tougher laws than the Federal in one instance, then it should hold across the board.
Make up our minds DC, what's it going to be?


beer_mug.gif


--------------------
Hoka Hey!
The more Liberals I meet, the more I like my dogs!
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
Patch 
Posted: 08-Jul-2010, 09:37 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 7,710
Joined: 22-Dec-2002
ZodiacIvy

Realm: America, Mid West

male





The e-verify has also been remedied in the courts and that will not be revisited for certain. The SC had already refused to hear it. The administration used the shotgun approach here and is VERY likely to loose 5/4. It is but a political ploy and with that base now furious and fed up with empty words. That too is about 80/20 likely to fail

I thought it was tough for conservatives when we had bush. I thank God every day that "I" do not have to defend this one! I am hard pressed to find something that he has not failed in. Health care was a legislative success and a political loss. The cost to failed state pensions and insurance coverage alone will be horrendous. At least one state is trying to turn their failed state retirement program over to SS, a failed federal program. That means all of us will pay the cost and that states employees will loose double! That is coming to a state near you or your own. There used to be some solvent state systems but today the best are at the brink.

All law enforcement is required to enforce federal law when they note an infraction! Most arrests other than in the high profile investigations are made by other than federal officers. It has been done for generations. That too was upheld some years ago by an actual SC ruling.

The claim that they do not have funds to enforce it falls on deaf ears as it is DHS and the justice department must work this into their budgets. Congress passed the mandate and funded the departments. Are they unable to manage their budgets?

Slàinte,    

Patch    
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Jillian 
Posted: 08-Jul-2010, 04:46 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Brittany
Posts: 703
Joined: 29-Jun-2008
ZodiacOak

Realm: Pennsylvania

female





QUOTE
Something I have heard numerous times regarding DRUG laws and the "Medical " marijuana laws is this;

'A STATE law may be TOUGHER than FEDERAL law, but may NOT be less than said Federal law.' (not a direct quote from anyone in particular, just the gist of the argument)

It seems to me that the Feds want it BOTH ways. But if a State may impose tougher laws than the Federal in one instance, then it should hold across the board.
Make up our minds DC, what's it going to be?
---Dogshirt


good point.

Jillian
PMEmail PosterMy Photo Album               
Top
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

 








Celtic RadioTM broadcasts through Live365.com and StreamLicensing.com which are officially licensed under SoundExchange, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC and SOCAN.
©2014 Celtic Radio Network, Highlander Radio, Celtic Moon, Celtic Dance, Ye O' Celtic Pub and Celt-Rock-Radio.
All rights and trademarks reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.
Celtic Graphics ©2014, Cari Buziak


Link to CelticRadio.net!
Link to CelticRadio.net
View Broadcast Status and Statistics!

Best Viewed With IE 8.0 (1680 x 1050 Resolution), Javascript & Cookies Enabled.


[Home] [Top]

Celtic Hearts Gallery | Celtic Mates Dating | My Celtic Friends | Celtic Music Radio | Family Heraldry | Medival Kingdom | Top Celtic Sites | Web Celt Blog | Video Celt