Now that fingerprinting is used to identify and segregate illegal immigrants apprehended in the Tucson Sector, a great deal more is known about many of the illegal immigrants crossing the border.

“The Tucson Sector gets a lot of sex offenders and we average at least one or two a week throughout the sector.”  Gonzalez references a man wearing a blue t-shirt.  “He served 2 1/2 years in jail for sexual conduct with a minor.”

Agents knew that because they ran his fingerprints. “He could have told us whatever we wanted and that’s what we have to go on.  But with his fingerprints you can’t hide that,” said Gonzalez.

I have always said that the importance of an secure border and enforceable immigration laws is based upon the need to know who is coming into the country and whether or not we want them here. We have enough of our own sex offenders in the United States without importing them from other countries.

Here is yet another example of the “everything is equal” thought process, which makes discussing politics with some people totally useless.

To the Editor:

The political cartoon of Feb. 26 suggested some connection between the tragic Cottonwood bus accident and the fact that the person apparently at fault is an illegal immigrant. By precisely the same logic, we might suggest that, since the driver is female, we ought not to let women drive. She is 24, so maybe we need to ban everyone under 30 from driving. She had black hair, so …

The point, of course, is that accidents are caused by bad driving, not by immigration status or gender or age or hair color.

When I complained that the cartoon was racist, Mr. Anderson (R-E, March 1) replied that race has nothing to do with it. Perhaps he is right, but if racism isn’t the cause of such irrational thinking, what is?

So, there is a moral equivalent between being involved in illegal activity and being a female under 30?

The point you should be taking away is that if someone is driving a vehicle illegally, because they are in the country illegally, we really don’t know whether they are a bad driver or not. This accident was not caused SIMPLY by bad driving. It was caused by a bad driver, who had no no authority to operate a motor vehicle, primarily because she was not authorized to be in the country.

The cartoon is only racist to someone who believes that illegal immigration is an issue of race - that somehow people should be allowed to act outside the law because their race mandates we should expect less of them. In short, only a racist would apply such irrational thinking to something which is clearly not an issue of race.

So, Let me answer your question. The cause of such “irrational” thinking is simple:

Kids are dead because this particular lady had no respect for our laws.

Subtitle: Another MSM Misdirection

 NORTH COUNTY– The president of the MEChA club at Palomar College has been deported to Mexico, immigration officials said Wednesday.

Paola Oropeza, 22, was arrested Jan. 8 by a fugitive operations team with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said Lauren Mack, a spokeswoman for the department in San Diego.

So, we have an illegal alien working as an activist for not only illegal immigration, but the re-capture of the “lost territories of Mexico” (Southwestern United States), who is also a student in a college of the country he hates.

ICE deported him (drum roll, please) to Tijuana.  Which means he’ll be back in an hour or two.

And what does the “journalist” have to say about MeChA?

MEChA, or Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, is a Latino student group with chapters in high schools and colleges. It focuses on empowerment through education as well as political, cultural and social awareness.

Bunk - Aztlan refers to the territory the US “stole” from Mexico. MeChA is about revolution against the United States.

It goes like this:

All of a sudden, Assistant HR Managers around the US are in jeopardy of being charged with crimes for hiring illegal immigrants.

Sometime soon, perhaps by the end of this month, Christopher Lamb may plead guilty to harboring an illegal alien. Lamb, 37, was a human resources assistant manager at Swift & Co., among the largest beef and pork processors in the U.S. As immigration emerges as one of the most contentious issues of this election season, his case is emblematic of newly aggressive tactics against management by the U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agency, or ICE.

To these people, the government is at fault for enforcing existing laws. The exploitative hiring practices designed to do nothing more than increase profits are not the problem. A culture of lawbreaking by these companies is not the problem.

For years there has been an implicit understanding among businesses that need workers, illegal immigrants willing to do those jobs, communities that benefit from such commerce, and a government that rarely intervened. Now that understanding has been torn apart.

The above statement is nothing more than a lie. The communities are made of the same people who are tired of the burden of illegal immigration. The government is made of people elected by those in the community. The implicit understanding is only between the illegal immigrants and the businesses that need workers well below the cost of a citizen.

If a business cannot compete with others in their industry without breaking the law, maybe they don’t belong in business.

Hillary is having a tough time with a policy decision regarding giving driver licenses to illegal immigrants. It seems, she is not quite sure what her policy should be:

First, Hillary is for the measure, if Governors are for it. Maybe.

October 16, Hillary supports Spitzer’s actions to spark action at the federal level to bring illegal immigrants out of the dark.

October 30, Hillary states Spitzer is proposing the illegal immigrant driver’s license because President Bush has not signed any bills into law bringing about immigration reform - omitting that her party, which controls both houses, has been unable to present such a bill to the president. Then she retracts her support of the measure in the same debate. then she supports it again.

October 31 - she Supports the measure

November 2 - she supports it generally, but doesn’t know all the details

November 4 - She’s not for or against it, but she supports Governor Spitzer’s efforts because it is President Bush’s fault.

November 13 - She supports it depending on what state it’s in.

November 14 - “As President, I will not support drivers’ licenses for undocumented people and will press for comprehensive immigration reform that deals with all of the issues around illegal immigration including border security and fixing our broken system.”

What is most interesting to me is she acknowledges in the November 13 interview that there are a great number of people in her home state who are not there legally. If she knows they are breaking the law, why does she not call for the law to be enforced? Isn’t one of the first rules of life in our society that if you don’t like a law, you change it - not break it? Is that not her first duty to the constituents of her state?

The DREAM Act would ensure children who were brought into the United States before they were 16 by their illegal immigrant parents had a path to citizenship. The path being that the children “planned” to attend college or “planned” to join the military.

First, I can understand why it was called the DREAM Act. Whoever proposed this insidious piece of legislation must have been dreaming to think it would get enough votes to pass. But you can’t ignore the insidious nature of this proposal. The lack of any manageable criteria on the part of the child makes this proposal untenable. How do you enforce someone’s plans to go to college or the military? What if they do nto qualify for either, do we allow them to take that path to citizenship because they had good intentions? Additionally, this proposal creates an entire new class of anchor babies. A measure such as this would actually increase illegal immigration to the United States, as it provides an incentive with no cost.

What proponents of this measure hope to achieve is break down the arguments against amnesty, one demographic group at a time. If you are born here, you are a citizen. Next, if you are brought here you can become a citizen. After that it will be, if you brought someone you can be a citizen. The goal of these guys is to create generations of people completely dependent on government for their very lives. This is how they intend to stay in power.

Another wonder I have about this legislation - Democrats are always lamenting about the possible plight of anchor babies in the US. Why would they propose to create more?

Secure the border first. After that we can discuss what to do about those illegal immigrants already here - I’m open to all kinds of ideas, maybe even some form of amnesty. To the Lefties, you can keep DREAMing, but we are not buying what you have to sell.

First and foremost, it is important to differentiate between the topic of Legal Immigration and the popular discussion point of Illegal Immigration.

Most Americans have no problem with those people from other countries coming to our borders in the legal fashion and following the law. That is how we became a great country. By doing this, we can ensure that the people that come here are not infected with highly contagious diseases, don’t have criminal back grounds and will add to the common good.

Where we seem to have a bottle neck is how we handle the problem of those potential immigrants that by-pass the legal method of gaining entrance, and crawl, swim or climb over our borders.

It is these people that cause harm to our country. They bring disease like TB into our population…cover our land with trash and waste…and put such a massive drain on our infrastructure that we wind up losing things like our trauma centers.

The laws are in place to deal with this problem, but no one seems to be willing to enforce them. We don’t need to pass new laws to deal with this issue, we just need to enforce the ones that are currently on the books.

Thoughts?