All of that being said, our current policies and attitudes towards undocumented residents, especially in the areas of health care and education, are going to do nothing but lead to further decay of our country.  We are shooting ourselves in the foot; cutting off our nose to spite our face; bringing about our own destruction.

As a nation we cannot continue to increase the number of tax takers. We need more tax payers.  Children born to mothers without prenatal care, children without adequate medical care, and children without enough education to get jobs to support themselves in the future are all children that are more likely to grow up to be tax takers, not tax payers.  We cannot afford to continue down this road.

It is easy to feel animosity toward those who come here with their hands out, only looking for what they can get from our country and not what they can give back.  But guess what?  We now have multiple generations of red-blooded Americans who feel the exact same way. Although it is currently popular to stereotype all who come to our country illegally as lazy, nothing could be further from the truth.  How many Americans, even now with our high unemployment rates, are standing in parks, on street corners, or Home Depot’s to take any job they can get?

Many of those who scream the loudest would do what they could to gain a better life for their children.  And like so many of the undocumented workers here, they would work their tails off to make that happen.

I cannot speak to people from other countries, but I can say that my experience with immigrants coming from traditional Mexican families is that they are a proud people who are not afraid of a hard day’s work but not so proud they will refuse a job because they believe it is beneath them.  They are not looking for a handout.  It is our government and our policies that put many of them in the position of being tax takers rather than tax payers.

If we are going to allow illegal aliens to stay in our country, it is in our best interest that they become productive residents.  That means they, too, need to be encouraged to pursue an adequate education.   Writing children off just because of where they were born may be an injustice to the children but it is a bigger injustice to our nation.  Failure of any American resident is not in this country’s best interest.

R

Top Republicans are increasingly convinced that President Barack Obama will be easily reelected if stronger GOP contenders do not emerge, and some are virtually begging Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels to add some excitement to the slow-starting nomination race.

It’s a sign of the GOP’s straits that the party is depending on the bland, wonkish Daniels for an adrenaline boost.

But interviews this week with longtime party activists and strategists made clear that many in the Republican establishment are unnerved by a field led by Mitt Romney, who could have trouble confronting Obama on health reform; Tim Pawlenty, who has yet to ignite excitement; Jon Huntsman, who may be too moderate to get the nomination; and Newt Gingrich, weighed down by personal baggage and a sense that he is a polarizing figure from the 1990s.

Despairing Republican lobbyists say their colleagues don’t ask, “Who do you like?” but instead, “Who do we back?”

“It’s not that they’re up in arms,” said a central player in the GOP money machine. “It’s just that they’re depressed.”

And a huge swath of operatives, donors and strategists remain uncommitted, in the hope that the field is not yet set.

So instead of solidifying against the overwhelming force being amassed by Obama’s reelection campaign, the GOP is indulging in an embarrassingly public — and probably futile — search for a more compelling standard-bearer.

House Speaker John Boehner, the nation’s highest-ranking Republican, confessed that he did not watch the first GOP debate of the cycle because he believes there is still time for more candidates to emerge. He said last week on NBC’s “Today” show: “I would expect that we haven’t seen all of the candidates.” He then proceeded to plug Daniels.

Veterans of President George W. Bush’s White House and other lions of the party have begun to accept that Jeb Bush is going to sit out this race, because he is convinced he will have a better shot in 2016.

With Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour’s decision not to run, the party’s elites are holding out a desperate hope to persuade Daniels, who is publicly reluctant, in part because of his wife’s concerns.

A highly unusual phone call from former first lady Laura Bush to Daniels’s wife, Cheri, was a sign that GOP insiders believe the governor is still on the bubble and that the party should pull out every stop to persuade him to jump in.

Charlie Black, a longtime consultant to GOP presidential races, has been talking up Daniels around Washington and said he sees a 50-50 chance the reluctant Hoosier will run.

“Now is the time, and he knows that,” Black said. “We have members of both the Bush and McCain teams who have been waiting to see who all’s going to get in. The makings of a campaign are there if he decides to run.”

Daniels has gone radio silent to many of his backers but said Tuesday he’s “not going to take much longer” to make a decision on whether he’ll run. But the Indiana governor said he doesn’t have a timetable for announcing that decision once it’s made.

Two of the nation’s best-known Republicans, in background interviews, predicted this week that Daniels would run, although wishful thinking seems to be at least part of the animating force behind the latest wave of pro-Daniels buzz.

One veteran of several Republican presidential campaigns said party strategists consider Obama beatable and are asking themselves, “How can we beat this guy?”

“People are worried we don’t have the right elements on the field,” the campaign veteran said.

So Republicans are conjuring up far-fetched — even fanciful — scenarios, including the possibility that Jeb Bush will change his mind in late fall if the field still looks weak.

George Will, the conservative columnist, and Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, have openly fantasized about an entry by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). Ryan’s advisers say he is focused instead on his role as a central player in the grand fiscal debate unfolding in Washington.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie continues to shrewdly position himself as a potential entrant this fall if the candidates continue to flail, and top Republicans tell POLITICO he would make a strong vice presidential prospect if their favorite, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, decides against joining the ticket.

To read the rest of the story, click here.

Summary:  The sinking ship known as the Southwest Riverside County Tea Party Citizens in Action Group spurs ignorance and causes further damage to Tea Party and GOP image.  July 30^th plans to protest the existing Temecula mosque shows SWRC Tea Party is spurred by hatred of Islam.  By bringing dogs to mosque grounds, singing in protest of belief that Muslim women are forbidden to sing, and with local pastor claiming that the mosque will increase presence of Muslim extremists, group proves to be out of touch with reality.

Heightened tension between Islam and self-proclaimed American Patriots are on the rise. With the Ground Zero mosque protests inciting nation-wide Islamophobia paired with accusations of Tea Party racism, it’s no wonder that one of the biggest battle grounds that brings these two heavyweight issues face to face is in our own backyard – Temecula, California.

The city of Temecula has a Muslim demographic. The Muslim demographic have long since had a place of worship.  However, they needed time to raise funds to convert a basic warehouse like structure into a proper mosque.

While that doesn’t necessarily mean minarets, it does mean having a center that allows Muslims to have a building with a layout that has functionality – just like any center, religious or not, would need in order to be an effective use of space.

Muslims from the Temecula mosque took the time and effort to raise the money and they have a right to convert their makeshift warehouse mosque into something that makes sense and is in keeping with local ordinances.  As far as I know, there are no zoning issues or other complications. There is no local history of association with fringe radical groups or suspicious individuals.

more at: http://qudosi.com

As for Joe Turner, the story and image were published in the local Alpenhorn newspaper in response to Derry’s hiring of Turner.  Just because time has passed by, and Turner has been muzzled, does not make Turner an okay guy.  I, for one, would never, ever, ever had my picture taken with a mob of racist, neo-nazi, skin-heads.  Lest we not forget, there are still those in the world who deny that the holocaust ever took place, and that Adolf Hitler loved children and he was just misunderstood.

John Valdivia’s comments were posted on an article appearing in the Sun newspaper last week regarding the questionable behavior of San Bernardino Councilman, Jason Desjardins.  No one seemed to care about his remarks then.  Now that the Valdivia comments were re-posted on ie.politics, Derry and Valdivia are crying foul.  As far as I can tell, those remarks could have only been made by the real John Valdivia.  I can see why Derry would be upset and rightfully so.  Valdivia got caught talking out of school and now must suffer the consequences of his ill spoken words.

Now, it seems to me that Derry and Senor Blogger want to change the narrative by attacking the messenger by making these unfair and unsubstantiated criticisms of Sam.  Just like Sam, Senor Blogger is also another pseudonym and anonymous writer.

God bless free speech and the First Amendment.

Joseph Turner mingles with a crowd of flag-waving skinheads at an anti-day laborer center rally that took place in Laguna Beach in July 2005. (photo courtesy of laindymedia.org)

S. E. Williams Staff Writer

“I consider accusations of bigotry and racism to be complimentary. And while I don’t thirst for confrontation, I dont [sic] fear it.” “Our enemies are bloodied and beaten. We cannot relent. Our boot is on their throat and we must have the willingness to crush their “throat” so that we can put our enemy down for good.” -Samples of previous postings by Joseph Turner from his Save Our State website.

Over the previous two weeks, The Alpenhorn News has reported in detail on Neil Derry’s questionable choices related to some individuals selected to fill key positions on his staff. The series began with an exclusive report on the criminal ebackground history of his Administrative Analyst Wanda Nowicki. Next, the paper examined the polarizing and controversial history of his ex Chief of Staff, Jim Erwin, that culminated with his 2009 arrest at Derry’s office on felony charges related to the $102 million Colonies Scandal.

Shortly after Erwin’s arrest, Derry’s judgment was once again called into question when he named Joseph Turner as his Special Projects Coordinator. This selection sparked an outcry that rippled across the county and reverberated around the nation. This time, the criticism was not in response to an arrest record (although Turner has been arrested on at least one misdemeanors related to his anti-immigration activity); nor did it result from Turner’s stance on immigration (for there are strong sentiments on both sides of the immigration issue). Instead, it resulted from allegations of racism that evolved from activities related to Turner’s widely publicized anti-immigration organization, Save our State (SOS). In addition to what critics claim are his confrontational and inflammatory statements that appear racist on their face, there is also his alleged refusal to distance himself from racist organizations attracted to his immigration agenda.

Four years ago, Turner described the mission of SOS as Saving California from becoming a Third World cesspool. Turner, identified by some as a nativist, has continuously denied charges of racism, but he allegedly posted the following statement on his SOS website in 2005, “I can make the argument that just because one believes in white separatism that does not make them a racist. I can make the argument that someone who proclaims to be a white nationalist isn’t necessarily a white supremacist. I don’t think that standing up for your kind or your race makes you a bad person.” Critics believe that evidence pointing to Turner’s racism was confirmed in November 2006 when he began work as the western region representative for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). FAIR founder, John Tanton, is nationally recognized for his anti-Latino, anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic attitudes.

Further evidence of FAIR’s extreme racist views includes reports that the organization is partly funded by the New York City-based hate group, Pioneer Fund (PF). Several reports detail how PF was allegedly set up by Nazi sympathizers to fund studies of eugenics—the science of selective breeding to produce a “better” race. The reports further state that PF has promoted and financed studies of race and intelligence; sponsored projects based on the notion that blacks are genetically less intelligent than whites; and fostered a strong anti-mmigration platform.

Turner’s Save Our State group and FAIR are both highlighted by the Anti Defamation League and designated as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center. It is reported that Turner left FAIR abruptly in 2006 after an article that exposed the organization’s racist passions received nation-wide publicity.

In an exclusive interview with The Alpenhorn News, Derry’s chief of staff, George Watson, stated that Turner was only with FAIR as a field representative for a little over seven months and that he left FAIR because he was running for local office (City Clerk) in San Bernardino and also because he was involved in political consulting. When asked what Turner knew about FAIR’s racist history, Watson replied, “I don’t know. I am unaware of what he knew at that time.” Although attempts were made to ask Turner these questions directly, Watson declined to accommodate this reporter’s request—it appears that even though Turner issues press releases for Derry, he is not allowed to speak directly with the press. However, Watson was quick to explain that Turner has not been involved in any immigration issues since that time.

Watson described Turner as, “A very valuable staffer and a considerate person.” He stressed how Turner is always looking at ways the county can improve service to its constituents and cited examples. However, like Erwin and Nowicki, Turner’s name continues to be associated with county controversy. Turner’s name appeared unfavorably in the widely circulated May, 2009 Hueston Report prepared by the Special Counsel to the Board of Supervisors.

This report looked at corruption in the County Assessor’s Office. In the report it is alleged that Turner received political assistance
during his failed bid for San Bernardino City Clerk that was provided by political operatives on the Assessor’s payroll on county time, at the taxpayers’ expense. At the time, both Erwin and Nowicki were employees at the Assessor’s Office.

Turner’s name surfaced again in the recently filed civil suit against the county, filed by ex County Chief Administrative Officer Mark Uffer. In the suit, it is alleged that Turner, at the direction of now disgraced ex-Assessor and previous First District Supervisor Bill Postmus, was directed to write hard hitting pieces for publication, designed to destroy Uffer’s reputation. Allegedly, this effort was in retaliation for Uffer not agreeing to known unlawful acts and omissions that may have been fostered by Erwin and Postmus.

In recent years, Turner lost his bid for San Bernardino City Clerk and his bid for a position on the San Bernardino County Board of Education.

In October 2006, the San Bernardino City Unified School District rescinded its endorsement of Turner due to his controversial reputation. And yet, he always seems to land on his feet. In early 2008, the San Bernardino Police Officers Association hired Turner as a political consultant in spite of the controversy surrounding him. And then in March 2009, Derry appointed Turner to his staff. A number of reports indicate that previous to his most recent appointment Turner was advised to tone down his anti-immigration rhetoric. However, an attempt to locate reports of similar counsel regarding his racist rhetoric and affiliations failed to produce any results. Source of opening quotes www.adl.org. (Emphasis Added)

Opponents to the measure, such as Congressman Joe Baca (D-Rialto), claim the measure violates the 14th Amendment, which was one of three Reconstruction Amendments passed after the Civil War to outlaw slavery and grant equal rights to all males including slaves and their descendants.  Miller disagrees with this contention.

Apparently, not only do we have a problem with those who come to our country to work, but there are actually vacation planners who help mothers about to give birth to arrange their vacations here in the United States so that they will give birth on US soil, thus giving their children a lifetime of benefits.  Mexico, Korea and Turkey are among the countries where “birth tourism” is popular.

Several other nations have already ended birthright citizenship including Ireland, Australia and India.

SHERIFF PAUL SCHRADER 2ND AMENDMENT SHERIFF

Candidates Ed Montgomery and Paul Schrader Host Public Information Session on Victim notification GPS

SHERIFF PAUL SCHRADER 2ND AMENDMENT SHERIFF

CAN YOU SAY SHERIFF SCHRADER 10 TIMES?

PLEASE VOTE FOR PAUL SCHRADER SHERIFF OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY.

CANDIDATE FOR SHERIFF PAUL SCHRADER/SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY IS THE ONLY PRO SECOND AMENDMENT CANDIDATE IN THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SHERIFF’S RACE.

“A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”– (2^ND Amendment)

“The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — (Thomas Jefferson)

“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to insure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable . . . The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference – they deserve a place of honor with all that is good” (George Washington)

California is a “May Issue” state; the decision to grant a CCW (Carry a Concealed Weapon) Permit being granted (or refused) at the discretion of the County Sheriff or Police Chief. Some sheriffs/chiefs issue on a reasonable basis, others can be next to impossible to persuade.

I will break down the walls to a CCW permit in San Bernardino County. If you meet the qualifications, you will not be denied a CCW. I will order an audit of this system and take politics out of receiving a CCW.—(Sheriff Paul Schrader)

I also support open carry.

I am a strong NRA supporter.

PAUL SCHRADER—–WWW.SHERIFFPAUL.NET

CAN YOU SAY SHERIFF SCHRADER 10 TIMES?

Remember Get on the ball and vote for Paul.

www.SheriffPaul.net

Tired of all the Tea Party talk, Annabel Park decided to throw a Coffee Party—and 200,000 people showed up.

When Annabel Park imagined what it would be like to head a new national political movement, here is what she had in mind: a coming together of engaged, intelligent citizens who had tired of the angry rhetoric and accusations of the Tea Partiers; Americans of all political persuasions joining in a spirit of equanimity to discuss the nation’s problems, and maybe even share a laugh. It was this beautiful vision that danced in Park’s head on a recent Saturday as she made her way to Busboys and Poets, a cafe in Washington, D.C., for one of nearly 500 Coffee Party meetings taking place nationwide that day. She knew the house would be full—word had spread quickly on the group’s swelling Facebook page. Park, a documentary filmmaker, was especially pleased that C-Span had arranged to broadcast the meeting.

But from the moment folks in the crowd stood up to speak their minds, Park knew these people had not come to sip cappuccinos and set an example of civility for an overheated nation. They were angry. They hated the Tea Party, and the Republican Party. They wanted to get even. One audience member said America was under the thumb of oligarchs and denounced “moneyed interests.” A few people hissed when Sarah Palin’s name was mentioned. Also on hand were the usual suspects drawn to the C-Span bat signal. A man representing Code Pink, the left-wing protest group, said that “racism was the basis for everything that’s going on right now.” He also seemed to have a real problem with “fear-based rhetoric” and Northrop Grumman.

Park, a 42-year-old Korean-American with a smile that can only be described as “kind,” regularly tried to steer the talk back to the group’s more centrist principles. But when someone asked how many people in the room were Republicans, all 80 hands remained down. “I like the civility idea, but I hate the Tea Party people,” said attendee Karen Anderson. By the end of the event, some in the crowd had decided the movement, barely two months old at the time, needed a new leader. China Dickerson, a 26-year-old community organizer, said the Coffee Party wouldn’t last “unless we get someone a little more powerful to head it.” She wanted a rabble-rouser, “not someone that says we can all work together.” Park seemed a little rattled after the meeting. “If they want to fire me, this may not be the group for them,” she said later. “We don’t want conflict and confrontation.”

The question is whether Park or anyone else can hope to lead a successful movement based on civility instead of combat. There’s a reason why pundits keep using the cliché that we’re a deeply divided nation: there are intensely partisan minorities on the far right and the far left. Park admits she’s an amateur in this overcharged arena, and she has made mistakes. Picking “Coffee Party” as the name for her movement may have been the first. Nor did her choice of venue for her Saturday gathering signal a bipartisan tone. Busboys and Poets is a hip lefty D.C. restaurant and bookstore, the kind that prominently displays books like Rules for Radicals, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and Obamistan! Land Without Racism. A picture of Gandhi is on the menu.

To read the rest of this article, click here.

Fox News has reported Commercial Real Estate at an all time low, with 40% across the nation in Bankruptcy or buildings for sale.  Does that mean, people who were Self-employed occupied those offices.  Absolutely! 

Fourteen years ago, when President Clinton signed the Trade Agreements, little did the populace understand the ramifications and job loss this would bring to the United States.  More than 770,000 businesses, holding millions of jobs across the country, has felt its’ effect.  The Economic Infrastructure is in collapse, and proof can be found in the Foreclosure list.  How many have not renewed their Business Licenses?  How many have signed up for Social Services? 

With a $400 Billion Budget for Illegal Immigration, the American Citizen can only wonder why prejudice and irritation has caused the Tea Parties to rise in disgust, when the average family who were Self-employed, are losing their homes to Foreclosure.  One Contractor, can effect 20 businesses; from Plumbers to Electricians, as they no longer make their way to Home Depot or Lowes and private companies selling parts or privately marketed goods.

The people who benefit from a paricular service are not exactly the same people who pay the corresponding taxes, for instance as Social Monies being paid for an anchor baby.  Once they are here, they become our problem.  There seems no alternative, but to accept the results which have emerged from the policital arena.

Can we hold steadfast to the idea that our Constituents are responsible for Human Trafficking, as more than 30 million Nationals from 13 countries feed in to the United States.  We have people coming in from Third World Countries wanting to change our Policies, Laws and Procedures, when they don’t have enough potable water to flush a toilet.  Many of our Constituents come from the “spectre of the power-hungry bureaucrat, eager to expand his empire in accordance with Parkinson’s Law.”  They regard public services as free goods and fail to realize that they must be covered by taxes.  After all, “high spending”, usually benefits a certain group.

This country used to esteem to excellence, but to simultaneously raise expenditures, ultimately calls for taxes to be raised, as well.  There seems to be a cliche’ from the American Economy, that “big business”, “bid Labor” and a dispporportionately “big government” have now reached an alarming expenditure of quantitative question, as this administration sells their ideas through the euphemism of “health care”.  It is a wiener, wrapped in Belgian Lace.  In actually, it is a complicated overlapping network of  taxation.  

Ultimately, there is a limit to what the “traffic” will bear.  To be a true maket for competative goods and services for the United States, our GNP must be include the incentive for Planning and Efficiency.   A place where business can flourish and people can once again sustain the economic infrustructure.  We cannot allow or permit the widespread -unchecked exercise of a monoply in power from a government gone wild with meddlesome intervention.  We must insist on the standards that made America the great country we once knew.  How do we change this???  VOTE, VOTE, Vote.

That’s like saying because you agreed to one date, you have to get married. The whole point of dating is to get to know the other person. The whole point of having a debate is to flesh out the details, and if we don’t like the details of the plan, we the people have not only the right, but the moral obligation to raise our objections to OUR REPRESENTATIVES, and the Congress must hold a vote. If they proceed and cram this down our throats, this could be the spark to ignite the political revolution that has been smoldering.

Republicans lose races when we nominate flawed candidates.

In 1998, we nominated Dan Lungren for Governor. The NRA and those supporting the Second Amendment so disliked him, they supported Gray Davis–and Lungren lost by 20 points.

In the 2006 GOP primary, Senator Abel Maldonado was the favorite to win the nomination for State Controller. But, due to his support of tax increases, big government, weak votes on the “life” issue, he lost. His legislative record, even then, was so poor that Assemblyman Tony Strickland was able to easily defeat him.

Federal laws say that no individual should protect or assist illegal aliens. Yet, the GOP in a solid GOP district, the Bill Emmerson Assembly seat, 63rd AD, will lose in November if Don Kurth is the nominee.

In 2003 the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, MALDEF, demanded that the city of Rancho Cucamonga, using local, state and Federal funds, create a Day Labor Center–a euphemism for helping illegal aliens find day jobs.

City Councilman Don Kurth made the motion and voted to “direct staff to develop a Job Center”. Then on November 19, 2003 Kurth voted to use Federal Community Development Block Grant funds to pay for the job center for illegal aliens. Looks to me that Kurth really wanted the center and was willing to use tax dollars meant to make Rancho Cucamonga a better community for the assistance of illegal aliens instead.

Conservative Republicans will revolt when they hear that Don Kurth, candidate for the GOP nomination for Assembly has been a strong supporter of illegal aliens. Worse, Kurth used tax dollars to advance and support illegal aliens. In November, Kurth will lose a close race, if nominated, because principled Republicans do not want their tax dollars used to help illegal aliens in any way.

Previously I wrote an editorial about a GOP candidate for Congress that was proud he HIRED illegal aliens for his business in the past. He is now out of money for his campaign.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

January 31, 2010

I am suspicious of the motives of the individuals or organizations that have been or now are against a reasonable Voter ID initiative, such as Senator George Runner’s proposed ballot initiative known as VoteSAFE. Nearly 100 countries in the world have some type of Voter ID policy in place including Mexico.

Here’s what: In Mexico, to cast a ballot, the voter – all of the voters – must prove citizenship and eligibility by presenting the federally issued Mexican voter ID card – which not only bears the photo of the potential voter, but a fingerprint, a barcode and a holographic image to deter tampering. Oh my. No photo voter ID card – no voting. Si?  After having voted, the voter’s finger is dipped in ink to prevent repeat – or three-peat – voting. To no one’s surprise, nobody in Mexico gets very far with the argument that this is somehow unfair, excludes the poor or discriminates against English-speaking voters.

The VoteSAFE iniative is much less onerous than Mexico’s requirement.  As the Latino population is becoming more politically astute as many assert, then we indeed should look to Mexico as a role model in implementing a secure Voter ID policy.

]]> http://iepolitics.net/2010/02/02/ken-miller-votesafe/feed/ 2 http://iepolitics.net/2010/01/31/president-ronald-reagan-religion-and-politics/ http://iepolitics.net/2010/01/31/president-ronald-reagan-religion-and-politics/#comments Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:49:54 +0000 Administrator http://iepolitics.com/?p=445

Theodore Roosevelt’s ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person’s becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American . . . There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag . . . We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.  And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

—Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Mike Morrell is a businessman from Southern California.  He has been married to Joanie for 31 years and together they have three children.  He is an alternate on the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee.  He is a candidate for the 63rd Assembly District.  His website can be found at:   www.morrellforassembly.com

We hear today that the United States houses between fifteen and twenty-five million illegal immigrants.  An estimated 32 percent of these individuals live in California, as our state offers assistance up to $11.2 billion annually.  In light of the staggering fiscal and social problems inherent in these figures, what position should we Republicans take?

Certainly, we recall that ours is a nation of immigrants.  From the Eastern seaboard Lady Liberty calls, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”  Truly, America is unlike any other nation, with neither racial nor ancestral borders to define us.  Yet our founders determined a set of immovable principles, both political and moral, and these became the “ties that bind.”  These principles found clear expression in our early writings.

The Declaration of Independence describes a process of ideological (rather than genealogical) nation-making.  For Americans, the first principle was “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.”  The second principle was government by consent, which exists to ensure the safe exercise of these rights.   To the modern world, the American experiment of equality and consent presented a novel method for making citizens.

The Founders believed that a people’s’ ability to become citizens would not depend upon their race, gender, or national origin, but rather upon their belief in human equality and their commitment to principles of American government.   Do not come, they thought, if you deny the God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That word “happiness” signified the good life, or living virtuously.  A man could not understand happiness after living too long under despotism, or becoming accustomed to vices of fraud, deceit or crime.      Content under tyranny externally, or dominated by the “tyranny of the passions” internally, some strangers lacked the humane self-assertion and noble self-restraint needed to maintain liberty and government by consent.  Our founding generation could not overlook the absence of such virtues—are you and I willing to risk falling short?

Today, we speak highly of “respect” to promote a free and decent society.  The founders envisioned the same goals, but reserved their respect for those who exhibited honesty, truth, gratitude, industriousness, assertion and love of fellow men and women.  This attitude built on the centuries-old ideas of Plato’s Statesman, which asserted that the proper virtues must be woven into the souls of all citizens if they hoped to achieve a free and just society.  Similarly, with vastly different backgrounds, but fortified with common virtues and shared purpose, people from a multitude of countries could be bound together as citizens in every era of our history.  As Lincoln, in studying this condition of strangers on our shores, noted:

If they look back through this history to trace their connection with those days by blood, they find they have none, they cannot carry themselves back into that glorious epoch and make themselves feel that they are part of us, but when they look through that old Declaration of Independence, they find that those old men say that “ We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,” and then they feel that that moral sentiment taught in that day evidences their relation to those men, that it is the father of all moral principle in them, and that they have a right to claim it as though they were blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh, of the men who wrote that Declaration—and so they are.  That is the electric cord in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together, that will link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of freedom exists in the minds of men throughout the world.

To this sentiment should we return as we continue the debate over immigration.

Americans on both sides of the aisle believe in equality.  Today, then, how do we answer those on the Left who argue for open border policies?  First, we must examine the motives of those who push for a “quick” pathway to citizenship.  Recent polling and statistics from American Spectator and other publications suggest that the majority of children (born to American citizens between 1981 and 2000) grew up with conservative homes and religious backgrounds.  Over the next decade, this will represent a Republican voter base five million stronger than that of the Democrats.  Are we surprised when our opponents champion the right to vote for those here illegally?   After years of legislation for Planned Parenthood and similar agendas, the liberals have finally run up against what are to them disconcerting demographic trends.

Second, as Americans, we cannot afford to stoop to these political games as the integrity of our national character hangs in the balance.  Instead, let our first objective be to restore our commitment to the political principles of the American Founding, and to return to the notion that a loyalty to those principles is an essential part of making new citizens.  Only then can we uphold uniform rules of naturalization, and secure our nation for ourselves and for future generations.