Three blind mice leading Georgia to ruin by peaching the endorsement of illegal behavior

August 12, 2009 12:57 pm

by Pete Randall · 38 comments

As Erick noted below we have yet again been treated to local “leaders” who insist that endorsing lawlessness is the way to maintain the law. Indeed, Rep. Hank Johnson, Atlanta Police Chief Richard Pennington and Atlanta Roman Catholic Archbishop Wilton Gregory have again called for immigration “reform” (i.e., reward illegal behavior) at a press conference held at The King Center yesterday.

Now, Hank Johnson is a fine man who I dealt with frequently before he was elected to Congress. That said, he is also a liberal loon. Archbishop Gregory is also a fine man who I have great respect for…up to the point where he and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops start sticking their heads into matters that deal with sovereignty. Pennington is just a dullard.

Let’s review the latest from these three Wizards of Smart:

“The lack of a coherent immigration policy is making it more difficult for law enforcement officers to build trusting relationships with immigrants in our communities,” the congressman said. Without it, many victims and witnesses of serious crimes are too afraid to report them for fear they will be taken away from their families because of their illegal status, he said.

What isn’t coherent about the current policy? If you are here illegally, you must leave. If you are thinking about coming here illegally, don’t…because you will be breaking the law.

Pretty simple, right? Evidently not for a Congressman from DeKalb and Rockdale Counties. Indeed, we are told because these illegals are breaking the law themselves, we need to fix their status so they can trust the police. Maybe, and I’m just spit balling here, they shouldn’t be here in the first place and if they were in their native lands applying for citizenship the proper way then the whole issue of forging relationships wouldn’t be such a big deal!

I also wonder if Congressman Johnson is worried about all the drug users and dealers who are unable to build a “trusting” relationship with the police in their community. Doesn’t he realize that someone sitting on a pound of cocaine in their apartment might not call the police if they witness a crime? How can we allow this horror to continue?!?

Ditto the man beating his wife who observes a burglary across the street. Because of his actions assaulting his spouse, his “trusting” relationship with the local constabulary is broken. The horror!

Friends, we have to fix this. Using the Johnson/Pennington/Gregory paradigm, the clear answer is that we should forgive drug possession, spousal abuse and other criminal offenses to ensure “trusting” relationships with the police. Much like we are lectured by “Those Who Are Wiser Then Us,” if we must reward illegal behavior from illegal aliens by granting citizenship to forge better community relationships, how can we do any less with actual citizens who are breaking so-called laws? Those laws were written by fat, white men long ago, remember.

Then, there is this from the simpering Chief of the Atlanta Police Department:

Pennington noted that the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, of which he is past president, adopted a resolution in July supporting immigration reform.

Well, if the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives thinks it’s a good idea, then we’ve got to act! I haven’t heard what the National Organization of White Law Enforcement Executives thinks. That’s probably because the existence of such an organization would be an affront to people everywhere and patently bigoted on its face. That Chief Pennington belongs to a similarly bigoted organization, though, is of no import as we are talking about the chief law enforcement officer for the City of Atlanta speaking out about forgiving an abundance of illegal behavior on the part of a goodly segment of the community. Real inspiring, Chief! Shouldn’t you be on vacation? I mean, it IS a day ending in ‘y’!

Finally, we reach Archbishop Gregory’s assessment of the situation:

“Those in the shadows now should be given legal status and integrated into American society,” Gregory said. “We can no longer accept a status quo that perpetuates a permanent underclass of persons and benefits from their labor without offering them legal protections.”

Again, Gregory and the other members of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops continue to miss the point. No one here in the United States is putting these people into the “shadows.” They put themselves there. They made the conscious decision to leave their native country and travel illegally to the United States. If they are an underclass, which I would beg to differ on as their illegality is evidently celebrated by members of Congress, law enforcement, and the Catholic Church, then their “suffering” is only their own fault.

Why Gregory is always so swift to condemn the United States for failing to accept everyone coming over the border at any time for any reason and never speaks out about the political, economic and societal imbalances in the countries of origin for these people mystifies me. Eager is the Archbishop to talk about the changes we need to make in the United States, but his zeal is unable to be located when it comes to addressing concerns to the government of Mexico and other Latin American nations about the lack of freedoms in their own lands. While with a kind heart and gentle spirit, Gregory again seems to convey the message that it is preferable to have the United States overburdened and ultimately destroyed under the weight of an influx of people it can ill afford rather than striving to help realize the freedoms we enjoy in other corners of the world so people can remain in the lands of their birth rather than come here.

Alas, that is the state (and misguided beliefs) of our “leaders” here in Georgia.

{ 38 comments }

rugby August 12, 2009 at 1:03 pm

“Why Gregory is always so swift to condemn the United States for failing to accept everyone coming over the border at any time for any reason and never speaks out about the political, economic and societal imbalances in the countries of origin for these people mystifies me.”

This is so stupid it was worthy of quoting.

Perhaps because he is an Archbishop in guess this…America…and you know what else…like every other Bishop he too is opposed to economic inequality everywhere.

Another worthwhile, well informed post from Rogue!

tinsandwich August 12, 2009 at 1:19 pm

Can I have some cheese with my whine!

Somebody should look up the meaning of the word “reform”.

Goldwater Conservative August 12, 2009 at 2:40 pm

Dare we talk economics on this?

I will. Undocumented immigrants are good for the economy. Atleast to consumers.

Just last week I needed some old furniture thrown away. I would have donated it, but there was some rot from it spending too much time in my basement and no charity I spoke with dealt in re-upholstering the furniture.

I received quotes from 3 local junk removal services. $100, $120 (after telling them the previous guy offered $100), and $80. It was 10 minutes of work, 10 minutes of driving, and a $10 dumping fee at the public landfill.

The end of the story goes as follows: I hired two fellows that looked “illegal” and rented a uhaul. It cost me $40 and a $5 sandwich from Subway (I got a free one thanks to a coupon).

All in all, it was a good deal and I didn’t need to hire 2 white guys born in the country to do it.

The moral of the story is, just because you are born in the political geographic bounds of the US doesn’t make you special. Crossing an imaginary line shouldn’t be unlawful.

The immigration deal is old and worn out. Why is it not as easy to work in the US as it is to get a library card? Most of the money these people make here is spent here…unless, maybe, if they work and live within 20 miles of the border. Even then, neither of the guys I hired were Mexican. They were from Ecuador.

Oh well, another round of racist immigration debate will put the Democrats back on top by far. The people just need to be reminded that the GOP hates all non-American whites.

Game Fan August 12, 2009 at 4:24 pm

“Undocumented immigrants are good for the economy. Atleast to consumers.”

(not exactly the big picture of the economy)

“All in all, it was a good deal and I didn’t need to hire 2 white guys born in the country to do it.”

(This is race baiting. And we actually have Americans of all different races here, not just white folks.)

“The moral of the story is, just because you are born in the political geographic bounds of the US doesn’t make you special.”

(Yes it does.)

Game Fan August 12, 2009 at 4:29 pm

“Oh well, another round of racist immigration debate will put the Democrats back on top by far.”

Actually, many think this is a conservative “ace in the hole” by protecting the wage scale for Americans, and without more laws. Also, this is a great way to be “pro- (American) worker, without the same old “anti-Union” song and dance.

Goldwater Conservative August 12, 2009 at 2:41 pm

Dare we talk economics on this?

I will. Undocumented immigrants are good for the economy. Atleast to consumers.

Just last week I needed some old furniture thrown away. I would have donated it, but there was some rot from it spending too much time in my basement and no charity I spoke with dealt in re-upholstering the furniture.

I received quotes from 3 local junk removal services. $100, $120 (after telling them the previous guy offered $100), and $80. It was 10 minutes of work, 10 minutes of driving, and a $10 dumping fee at the public landfill.

The end of the story goes as follows: I hired two fellows that looked “illegal” and rented a uhaul. It cost me $40 and a $5 sandwich from Subway (I got a free one thanks to a coupon).

All in all, it was a good deal and I didn’t need to hire 2 white guys born in the country to do it.

The moral of the story is, just because you are born in the political geographic bounds of the US doesn’t make you special. Crossing an imaginary line shouldn’t be unlawful.

The immigration deal is old and worn out. Why is it not as easy to work in the US as it is to get a library card? Most of the money these people make here is spent here…unless, maybe, if they work and live within 20 miles of the border. Even then, neither of the guys I hired were Mexican. They were from Ecuador.

Oh well, another round of racist immigration debate will put the Democrats back on top by far. The people just need to be reminded that the GOP hates all non-American non-whites.

ChuckEaton August 12, 2009 at 3:01 pm

Why even have sovereign nations. Let’s just make one worldwide utopia.

Jason Pye August 12, 2009 at 3:40 pm

I didn’t support the immigration reform bill, I’m all for erasing limitations and restrictions on immigration.

As long as you pose me no threat, you’re welcome here.

seenbetrdayz August 12, 2009 at 4:34 pm

I have similar sentiments, but I think it was Milton Freedman who once said that you cannot simultaneously have open immigration and a welfare state.

We have both, and it will become unsustainable.

We have to get back to basics in order for there to be open immigration. For those who come here to seek the freedoms we have taken for granted many times, I will gladly share it and welcome their support to help me defend it.

We cannot provide them with much other than freedom, but fortunately, that’s really all that matters.

Jason Pye August 12, 2009 at 5:25 pm

I agree with you.

benevolus August 13, 2009 at 5:21 pm

I don’t think it’s freedom they come here for. It’s a paycheck. I don’t think open immigration is on the table unless or until our economies become relatively equivalent. It would be in our best interest to help the Mexican economy create jobs. There would then be little or no reason for them to come here illegally.

As far as I can tell, Mexico is a lot less centrally organized than the U.S. is. Heck, large parts of the south are controlled by radical separatists.

OK, maybe not so much different than us.

Jason Shepherd August 12, 2009 at 4:03 pm

I have very strong opinions on this issue. As those here on PP who know me personally know, my wife is a German immigrant. We met when she was here on a J-1 Work/Study visa.

We tried to follow the rules and do everything by the book. A week after we got married, she was deported. It took us 54 weeks to get her back in the country.

Our current system is broken and long overdue for reform. I also do believe borders mean something. More than that, being a nation means something. Nothing defines a nation more than its boundaries and the ability to protect them against all invasions, whether they are peaceful or hostile.

I also believe we are a nation of immigrants and must continue to be so. That’s why I do not like hyphenated Americanism. The idea of America is we understand the heritage from which we came, regardless if it is from Europe, Africa, Asia or long before the previous three, but we come here to form a new nationality made up of the best of the former ones.

I don’t believe our nation should have a quota system or a lottery system. For those who want to come here to work, but don’t want to give up their nationality in the process, we should have temporary work visas. For those who still want to skirt the laws and come here illegally, we need to make the penalties harsher than they already are.

As Jason Pye said, I want to make sure that the person crossing the border is not going to pose a threat to me. Otherwise, it makes no sense for the freest nation on earth to have some of the most restrictive, confusing and draconian laws to prevent hardworking, law-abiding peoples from all over the world from coming here.

seenbetrdayz August 12, 2009 at 4:38 pm

Agreed.

Jason Pye August 12, 2009 at 5:26 pm

Well said….err, written.

Donna Locke August 12, 2009 at 10:20 pm

Jason, I have strong opinions on this issue as well. For one thing, one of my children was almost killed in 1999 by an illegal-alien driver in Atlanta.

Steve Perkins August 13, 2009 at 4:41 am

Wow… sorry for your ordeal, but it’s also too bad that you cannot see the difference between Shepherd’s story and yours. Jason’s saying that he and his marriage have been personally affected by our unwieldy government bureaucracy. You’re saying that someone in a group wronged you, and so you now you hate everyone in that group regardless. Sad story, but perhaps not for the reason you intended.

Donna Locke August 13, 2009 at 5:23 pm

I’m pretty perceptive, Steve.

I was involved in immigration control for many years before my child was injured, and in fact, just before my child was injured, I was about to give up on trying to get information from our side into the newspapers, to lend some balance to what we were being fed by a slanted news media. We were repeatedly ignored and rejected, and I was about to throw in the towel on that avenue when my child was injured in Atlanta and MALDEF entered our lives. MALDEF threatened us and tried to get money from us for a situation totally caused by an illegal-alien driver, not by my child, according to the police report and numerous witnesses! Par for the course, the alien driver at fault skipped and never showed up in court and remains untraceable and on the loose in this country, as far as we know.

MALDEF magically appeared on behalf of a Latino bystander injured by the wreck — this man was drunk and in or near the road, and my daughter’s car was shoved into him by the other driver’s car. My daughter had head injuries but remained more concerned about the injured bystander than about herself. She lost a year of her life in some ways.

Well, this situation and something else, almost kind of spiritual, that happened to me spurred me to continue (and I went on to learn a great deal about MALDEF!), and finally we broke into the newspapers in metro Atlanta.

My involvement in immigration enforcement and reduction grew out of my Sixties and Seventies environmental and population-numbers concerns, but came to encompass more concerns as I saw that immigration numbers are a factor in so many problems we are having today and will have in the future.

I am independent, a fiscal conservative and pretty much social “liberal,” but it is no secret I help a number of Republicans, because they have been willing to step up and take corrective action on this issue. But I have supported some Democrats as well, when they have seen the light on this. Coming from a working-class background, I know that, if they wanted to, the Democrats could make hay on this issue and truly protect the workers they claim to represent instead of throwing in and choosing to represent foreign nationals and employers of illegal labor.

What do Service Workers International Union (SEIU) and Associated Builders and Contractors have in common? Both support amnesty for illegal aliens. And SEIU has many illegal-alien members.

If he were alive, my father, a construction worker and a union man, would truly be outraged by it all.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 9:20 am

Steve,

I think you are missing the point. Shepherd’s story is one that encountered government bureaucracy and still obeyed the law.
Donna did not say she hated anyone. She encountered those who decided not to obey the law and that is the biggest difference between the two stories.

Steve Perkins August 13, 2009 at 6:24 pm

We tried to follow the rules and do everything by the book. A week after we got married, she was deported. It took us 54 weeks to get her back in the country.

Our current system is broken and long overdue for reform.

Uhh, yeah, GOPGeorgia… clearly I misconstrued this ringing endorsement of the nation’s immigration system.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 6:49 pm

Steve, it actually was. Jason and Manuela are very good friends of mine, but I don’t claim Jason in public too often. He went to New York in 2004 for the RNC convention. He met is wife at Niagara Falls on the Canadian side because she was still barred from entry at that point. If Jason and his wife decided to heck with the laws that we have, I think he could have brought her across the border illegally.

They may not be the biggest fans of the system, but they respect the law.

Steve Perkins August 13, 2009 at 6:57 pm

Dude, I just posted a verbatim quote about our system being “broken and long overdue for reform”… and you’re saying that the post is about the exact opposite thing. What is that word you sometimes use for Poythress?….

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 7:51 pm

Reform is fine if it’s fine tuning the process of proving citizenship. Jason was married and it should not have been too hard to figure out that his wife should have been able to stay. Yes, that part needs fixing. Citizenship for illegals that didn’t respect the system is not. That doesn’t mean we open up the borders for anyone who wants to come here either.

Jason Shepherd August 17, 2009 at 7:15 pm

Doug, Perkins and I are friends in the real world too. I first met him when he came up to me for our first class at John Marshall back in Fall of 2006. Perkins has sense transferred to GSU law school. He has met Manuela.

Donna Locke August 12, 2009 at 10:16 pm
jkga August 13, 2009 at 8:37 am

I think the issue here that Hank Johnson and others are trying to address hinges on the distinction between enforcing laws concerning non-violent criminal acts (like immigration violations, tax evasion, marijuana possession, prostitution) and predatory violence. It would be against the interests of public safety if every victim or witness of a violent crime were afraid to report that crime for fear that they would be scrutinized for violations having nothing to do with that incident – given a drug test after reporting a home invasion, audited by the IRS after reporting a mugging, etc. There should be channels for illegal immigrants, prostitutes, drug addicts and the like to be protected by the police and in turn help them catch the really bad guys; it’s a tough challenge to create these channels without eroding respect for the laws that these people are breaking themselves.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 9:41 am

jkga,

I am not so sure you can easily throw all crimes into a violent or non violent status. Two of the crimes you cite could lead to violent actions, but for different reasons. Most marijuana users are not violent by nature. However, it does lead to stronger drugs and sometimes theft and violence follow those. Prostitution is often described as a victimless crime. However, there have been documented sex slaves in Georgia. That’s the definition of predatory violence. Kidnapping, drug addiction, and violence can be associated with prostitution, but not in every case.

As far as illegal immigration being a nonviolent crime, well, the first act in coming to the US is to break a law. It sets that standard that you can get away with a crime. I can’t cite statistics because there aren’t any that are accurate. I could cite how many people who are caught doing another type of crime are illegal immigrants, but not the ones who are not caught. Just my two cents.

Jason Shepherd August 13, 2009 at 10:26 am

Almost every day in court I see defendants who are in as being unlicensed drivers (many with fake licenses, mostly from North Carolina), no insurance, unregistered vehicles and equipment violations (broker brake, tail-lights, bald tires, etc).

To add to Donna’s point, those who come here illegally then violate other laws in order to avoid detection. While it maybe a non-violent act to drive without a license, who pays when that driver hits someone else?

Who is responsible when that accident causes serious injury or death?

How do you find someone without license and in an unregistered vehicle once they flee the scene of the accident?

As I have said, guest worker programs worked in this country in the past. If you need to open more jobs because of the economy, then we know where the workers are and can decide not to renew their permits. If someone purposefully violates the law by coming here and illegally working after the system is in place, then they face harsh, harsh penalties.

Anyone who is here illegally right now can get in the back of the line and apply for a permit. If they don’t make the cut-off, then they can only blame themselves for disobeying the law. If they continue to stay, then see the paragraph above.

Also, if you are here on a permit and have a child and neither parent is an U.S. citizen, then the child is not born a U.S. citizen.

The solution is simple, it honors our national heritage, and it send the message that your first action in the United States will not be a criminal act.

jkga August 13, 2009 at 12:48 pm

I’m not trying to say that illegal immigration isn’t a problem, or that I know what the solution is. The point of my comment was that there is a lot more nuance to the situation than Pete Randall’s original post indicates. My point is that in the interest of public safety, justice, and common decency, there should be policies in place so that people are not afraid of reporting violent crimes because they’ll be caught out for unrelated infractions. Implementing those policies is not tantamount to endorsing the unrelated infractions.

The entanglement of prostitution and sex slavery raised by GOPGeorgia is a good example of why – if prostitutes (or illegal immigrants for that matter) have no way to report kidnapping or assault without being thrown in jail or deported themselves, it is very unlikely that those more serious crimes could ever be prosecuted.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 1:09 pm

The difference is that sex slavery is just that, slavery. Illegal immigrants choose to come here, breaking the law. No one is forcing them to do this.

If a bank robber’s partner shoots him after the crime is over, should he get forgiven for robbing the bank when he reports that he has been shot? Not unless he was forced to do so at gunpoint, had a family member held hostage, or so on. Even then, he might get charged and have to defend himself in court.

Lets look at a white collar criminal situation. Hypothetically, Bernie Madoff is carjacked and hit in the head. Should he be forgiven from stealing from thousands, just because he was a non violent offender and was the victim of a violent crime?

jkga August 13, 2009 at 2:24 pm

GOPGeorgia-

Regarding Bernie Madoff: that’s is my point exactly. Bernie Madoff shouldn’t be granted automatic immunity from everything if he’s the victim of a crime. However, if he had gotten mugged a few years back, he would not – and *should not* – have had to worry about reporting it to the police for fear of being investigated by their white-collar crimes division. As abhorrent as his crimes were, they were a completely separate issue from this hypothetical mugging.

In my prostitution example, I had in mind someone who was a prostitute by choice, but who was then victimized. Committing prostitution is breaking the law in this state, yet I would maintain that in the interests of justice and public safety a prostitute should be able to report a violent crime to the police without automatically being prosecuted.

All I’m saying here is that the crime associated with illegal immigration, prostitution, and drug addiction comes in part from the fact that the people involved are themselves easy targets for more serious criminals – precisely because they have reason to fear reporting crime to the police. It makes sense to consider ways to mitigate this fear that will help law enforcement and ultimately keep all of us safer.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 6:03 pm

I think you are missing my point. Illegal immigrates, prostitutes, and drug addicts usually start their paths by choice. It would be 100% of the time in the case of illegal immigrants. If they find themselves the victim of a violent crime because that are easy prey, then perhaps they shouldn’t have chosen that lifestyle. A criminal who doesn’t admit he or she is a criminal can go to the police as long as it can’t be proven that they are engaged in criminal activity.

If you are looking for someone to make a criminal’s life easier, I’m not the guy you want to talk to.

jkga August 17, 2009 at 12:36 pm

GOPGeorgia –

I guess I’m beginning to understand you, and I think you have a screwed-up sense of values if you are more interested in punishing non-violent law-breakers than in preventing and helping the police to investigate and prosecute murders and rapes.

GOPGeorgia August 19, 2009 at 11:53 am

JKGA,

I will give you an outline of my sense of values as it relates to law enforcement, crime, and punishment.
If you can’t afford the time, don’t do the crime. If I drive with no seatbelt on, I am prepared to pay the $15 fine (or whatever it maybe). If I decide to rob a bank, I should be prepared to spend whatever the sentencing guidelines are behind bars. I also accept that in that type of crime, I could be shot and killed by law enforcement, especially if I have a weapon.

I am for using the justice system to determine if a crime has been committed and if so, then giving that lawbreaker an appropriate punishment. I don’t draw a line and say I am for only putting away violent criminals. Habitual thieves need to learn that stealing is not acceptable by society. Drug sellers, users, illegal immigrants, and prostitutes need to learn that their actions will not be accepted as well.

I am a fan of law enforcement. Other than increased police presence in questionable neighborhoods, there is not a lot that I think the police can do to decrease the number of murders or rapes. In most cases, those acts are committed by people the victim knows. I think tough sentencing is more of a deterrent when the sentence is actually served. In some case, the death penalty should be used as an option.

benevolus August 13, 2009 at 9:50 am

Prosecute the employers who give these people jobs and they will stop coming.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 10:52 am

I agree with prosecuting the employers who KNOWINGLY give these people jobs. There are many cases of illegal immigrants using identity theft to provide a SS card for employment. The alien works for the employer for 6 months and then quits to find another job. It takes that long for the Government to find out they have been provided a bad SS card.

Donna Locke August 13, 2009 at 6:21 pm

E-Verify is fairly quick and should be mandated in all states. It won’t catch all fraud, but it is a great tool and easy to use. Those legislators who want to splice in loopholes for employers of illegal labor talk out of both sides of their mouths and their bills. So you have to scrutinize bills for the built-in loopholes, such as no oversight, no enforcement, no real punishment for the employers even if E-Verify is mandated in a state.

GOPGeorgia August 13, 2009 at 6:38 pm

It sounds good as a concept, but not loopholes though.

benevolus August 13, 2009 at 1:07 pm

I don’t think there is any case (within reason) where an employer can be deceived about this unless they just don’t want to know. The most rudimentary credit/DMV check would reveal name or address discrepancies that should alert employers to fraudulent identification.

Comments on this entry are closed.