Tuesday, April 19, 2011

More Obama Fail - Immigration Reform

President Obama discussing immigration reform in June 2009, Official White House Photo by Pete Souza.

In a clear signal that Obama will demagogue any issue to help his re-election chances, we read this from the U-T.

President Barack Obama told about 70 national leaders in a private meeting Tuesday that immigration reform is still one of his priorities despite the failure of the DREAM ACT and the absence of movement on other immigration reform.

The meeting focused on how to engage Americans in a discussion around immigration reform and Obama asked the leaders to use their influence to shape the public conversation.

That would be code for, "accuse the Republicans of being racists so this issue can kept alive as a wedge for the next election cycle." The article goes on to quote Frank Sharry, executive director of America's Voice Education fund, as saying the President is willing to spend his political capital on this cause. Bunk. First, as if he has any. Second, if that was true, the President would have already spent the capital to pass the poorly named DREAM act in the first place. Third, if the President were serious, he would enforce the border.

So what can we do to fill the vacuum left by Obama's leadership on the issue. I think comprehensive immigration reform is too important to let the Democrats take control of the issue. But the American people want the rule of law enforced, so the down payment has to be a real commitment to enforce the border. But the GOP should make this promise, once the border is secured, we will work to establish a guest-worker program of sufficient magnitude to meet the real labor demand in this country. We will provide a path, not to citizenship, but normalcy for those here illegally who are willing to return to their country of origin and enter the country legally. Further, we will be open up the H-1B to millions more workers as part of an effort at reform.

Such an effort would be good for the country and good for the Republican party. Many of these legal guest workers will be Hispanics and Asians, giving the lie to the slander that Republicans are racist. Further, the country needs younger workers to help solve the structural deficit, as I have outlined before.

Note the U.S. baby boomer bulge moving into retirement causing strain on the economy. India, by contrast has a large, young population, facing no such challenge.

Skilled immigrants, like those that come to this country under the H-1B, can help the country compete globally, as discussed here. By advancing a comprehensive agenda that will include respect for the rule of law, but at the same time help solve some of our countries most pressing issues, the GOP will help the country and itself.


  1. I am still trying to figure out what law you are referring to when you mention "rule of law". You state this as if it is fact with no sources tothe laws you are talking about. Do you mean the commercial statutory regulation or Common Law?

    Common Law is the only law that can even possibly apply to full liability men and women by virtue of self-evident logic and reason.

    Commercial Statutory Regulation or 'Code' is only applicable to Limited Liability entities that have contracted with the State for access to limited liability which results in a legal fiction aka artificial person aka corporation being subject to Statutory code only by virtue of the voluntary act of seeking a limited liability entity. This produces the corporate veil and thus enables Statutory regulation to be applied to this new creature of the State. The State gets access to lawfully apply this regulation because the State is the Creator. Remember that Organic Law state's that rights are endowed by their creator. Man is always fully liable for their actions because their liberty is on the line there can be no separation or limiting of liability because Man's creator Nature's God did not endow this right upon us. We don't have access to limited liability this is why there exists the concept of Capacity. Man can enter the Capacity of the Corporate Veil and is thus subject to regulation AT THAT TIME. The time can be easily identified as being yours or the corporations by virtue of whether or not you are being paid for that instance of time.

    Since government responsibility is to secure the right endowed by your creator to you how can the government arbitrarily bust someone for being 'illegal'. To even 'check their papers lawfully' would mean that that man or woman is required to be in some form of contract. Forcing someone into contract is extortion. Forcing someone to stay under contract is slavery. All of this reinforced with the 6th and 9th amendment of the US Constitution. The 6th amendment requires any court to state the nature and cause of any criminal action against someone which successful conviction by a jury is the only action that can lawfully restrict someone's rights. The Cause of Action requires ALL 4 valid elements simoultaneously demonstrated: Duty of care, Breach of Duty, Causation, and ACTUAL DAMAGE!!!

    Since the 1970's Federal policy is now reduced to a concept of Injury-In-Fact which while lowered the bar still requires ACTUAL or IMMINENT INJURY!

    So if you truly respect other people and the rule of law how can you possibly justify requiring people to be in a contract with someone else. Didn't we get rid of slavery???

    I really want to know everyone's justification for this because I have been looking everywhere for this and I only find that when people know these facts and where they come from in history of law THEY WIN IN COURT EVERYTIME!!! I do...

  2. Couple of refinements here just clarify my points above:

    Forcing someone to stay under contract is slavery.

    More properly stated:
    Forcing someone to stay under a contracted that was unlawfully forced upon them is slavery.

    More properly stated:
    So if you truly respect other people and the rule of law how can you possibly justify requiring any entity to enter into contract with another entity. Whether the entity be an Artificial or Natural Person no contract can ever be lawfully forcedupon another entity.

  3. Anonymous,
    I am sure you are aware of the process for passing laws in the United States under the constitution. You advocate an open border which is unrealistic.

  4. Please show me where the Constitution gives the power of the Government to pass laws to regulate people. If you refer to Naturalization this doesn't fly because Naturalization has to do with people who want to be Citizens so that they can participate in Government which goes back to voluntary will of the man or woman whowants to become a citizen. The Constitution gave congress the power to regulate commerce not people. Regulation of People is the job of every individual through the criminal and civil accusation with the courts ruling on the facts of each individual case.

    So instead of just throwing out conjecture with no facts enumerated to back it up please release my issues with the feel good attitude attitude of I know what's best. I am only advocating that we actually lived by the rule of the law as it stands. I thinkthe feel good I know whats best for you attitude is equivalent to the NAZI philosophy and aims for a few to control the many. Besides I look at these issues as if I were in a court room. If I present the body of facts and you present only conjecture I win.

    Also lets be clear. People cannot be regulated at the border but corporate activity can. The difference is clear and defined.

  5. Anon, achieving Godwin's Law by the 3rd comment. Nice work.

  6. Wow, thats the only law you can site to back up your claims?

    You still have not demonstrated your position in law and historical fact. It seems to me more of the same from TEA party 'ideologist'. Feel good attitudes about how America should be with no basis in law or history. Maybe you should consider humbling yourself before the knowledge of the universe. Once one has humbled themselves to the fact of their ignorance of the world they live in they can free themseelves from the chains of ego and begin their path towards truth.

    Clearly ideology with no basis in fact or law spins our wheels to more divide and conquer and degrades our system of laws to the lowest common denominator; law by opinion of ignorant minds.

    Hopefully you never end up being a decider of law and fact. Maybe you should consider learning the roots of the logic of our law so that you can actual provide ideology worthy of someone's consideration. Or maybe you just lack the ability to fully comprehend what is comprised of true leadership. Without fruitful discussions of analyzing the origins and reasoning that founded our law. I am confident that once anyone realizes their lawful position in law and true justice thentheir remedy will be in the courts in front of the Jury with the outcome being nullification of unlawful extortion by the Corporate State and true justice carried that shocks the entire system as it stands into a revolutionary paradigm shift. The facts I speak of are based in a science that you clearly know nothing about. Warning to those accept this ideology blindly without the facts of law and history carefully and thoroughly demonstrating; Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. You must find the truth to know it not just base truth on your own fantastic opinions about what might lie in imagination land. You have nullified your relevance to fruitful discussions about solutions to our country's many problems.

  7. Dean,
    Didn't know about Godwin's Law, thanks for getting me to look it up.