Of course this is just my opinion, but once upon a time, businesses that were into hiring illegals were more quiet and hiding how they loved hiring illegal aliens. People they can pay a lower rate, give them less benefits and possibly even duck taxes if they play it slick enough. Now, although they’re not coming out and crying WE LOVE HIRING ILLEGAL ALIENS PLEASE DON’T MAKE US HAVE TO HIRE AMERICANS, they’re doing much in action to show it.

The people of Gwinnett County, GA (where I used to live and is being overrun by illegal aliens in ways some of you can’t imagine) have had legislators enforce the rule of law. To prevent the hiring of illegal aliens for jobs AMERICANS WILL DO AND WERE DOING FOR AGES. But now the Georgia Utility Contractors Association, Inc. and The Associated General Contractors of America are upset the businesses they represent might be held to the rule of law. They know the federal government is too strapped to enforce immigration laws effectively. They hope they can prevent local governments from covering for the slack. Not to mention many in the federal government who don’t desire to enforce the rule of law regarding immigration in the first place!

America is a nation that allows in many, many, many immigrants legally and there must be controls, or an unmanageable flood will make America what illegal aliens just ran from. The rule of law should be respected.

I would say that I hope the courts don’t side with the contractors, but that article link above has been updated since earlier today and this is what it says currently:

Basically, this all sets the stage for Gwinnett County to lose. So the feds won’t or don’t have the resources to effectively enforce immigration law when it comes to companies that hire illegals and local governments are having their hands tied when they try to do something to fill in the gap. Making the law of no effect, because there is little or no enforcement. This nation will be overrun due to its own lack of interests in order and love of cheap labor.

Hat tip misaligned_user.

And don’t come back till you have done it legally. A shame those “churches” that helped you break the law did not instead have you respect the law and help you return legally. But you wanted to play the role of a media showpiece and so did they.

Notice, the LA Times headline fails to note that she was an ILLEGAL.

One gone, only 3,099,999 to go!

…
Other anti-illegal immigration activists have said that Arellano could remain with her child simply by taking him with her to Mexico.

Might have helped her kid learn to respect US laws too. A child born by somebody who illegally entered is not honestly a citizen, no more than money given to a child from a bank heist can be kept by the child. That’s how I see it.

Arellano entered the United States in 1997. On her first try, she was caught at the border and deported, said Walter Coleman, the pastor at Adalberto United Methodist Church, where Arellano had sought sanctuary in Chicago.

She reentered a few days later and in 2002 was arrested — and later convicted — of using a false Social Security number at her job cleaning airplanes at O’Hare International Airport.

Last summer, an immigration judge ordered Arellano to present herself for deportation.

Instead, she sought refuge in the Chicago church.
…

Notice, she was an identity thief! And working at the airport. Big time security risk. Good she’s gone.

…
Dyrness said 12 congregations in Los Angeles County — churches and synagogues — have in the last year declared themselves sanctuaries for undocumented immigrants at risk of being deported.
…

Interesting. How many times do you think those churches went to those synagogues to minister to them that Jesus Christ is the Messiah mentioned in Hebrew scripture? I’m going to go out on a limb and say, NEVER. Oh, but churches will go to the synagogues to team up in breaking US laws. Amazing.

Related post: Eric Zorn is Right to Say Elvira Arellano Should be Hauled Out of That Church and Deported. She is Not Rosa Parks!

Given a Black woman (Joycelyn Gardiner) has now been killed by a drunk illegal alien? Not the first and certainly won’t be the last to die at the hands of someone in our country illegally. If helping Blacks who are here following the law matters to the Civil Rights Industry, will they now speak up against illegal immigration? Don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

This case has been the talk all across the middle Tennessee region since it was announced. Those who have been against illegal immigration note every person killed around here by illegals regardless of race, the number is high and crosses all professions and backgrounds. It is often I turn on the radio hearing about such an occurrence and it has happened yet again.

It’s nice to know that some seem to care if I would die at the hands of an illegal alien, but it’s certainly not members of the Civil Rights Industry.

Here we have a Black woman college athlete, on her way to law school, who is now dead, but the Civil Rights Industry finds no profit in speaking on her behalf, because she died at the hands of an illegal. I hope Black people see where the true allegiance of the Civil Rights Industry lies!

Who is going to pick the lettuce, clean the office buildings and SHOW UP IN YOUR KID’S BEDROOM?

This story is out of Franklin, TN.

No to the Bush amnesty plan!

If you could speak directly with members of Congress today about an issue, what exactly would you talk with them about? Honestly, even people I know who are OK with amnesty would not use the opportunity to talk about amnesty, because they would prefer that other issues aside from border issues be addressed first. It’s a given that I am against amnesty and Bush’s efforts, I’ve made enough posts already to make that clear. But what is interesting is that our (as in this nation’s) President is going to speak with Congress today taking a side of an issue that Conservatives are against and to use an angle that while some Liberals agree with Bush, even many of them would not make it their own focus if they had a moment with Congress.

Bush to push immigration bill at Capitol

WASHINGTON –President Bush, wading deeper into an issue that bitterly divides his party, hopes a personal appeal to fellow Republicans at lunch Tuesday can save his immigration bill.

Let’s not waste time with claims of those who say it’s not amnesty versus we who know it is. We all have our view of this and I’m not trying to convince anyone of otherwise in this post, given I’ve already made that effort in prior posts. My point with this post is to expose how our President is prioritizing his time, even when we might disagree with him. Because the Americans who have no problem with allowing illegal aliens to remain in the USA are not focusing most of their time on the issue. Those who do harp in favor of this amnesty effort are the true fringe group. We who stand against Bush’s efforts and this amnesty plot are great in number and sound in our resolve. Our sentiments are why people like John McCain ranks low in polls regarding his Presidential bid. Our sentiments are why when given a vote in a statewide ballot, efforts to curb illegal immigration and deny illegals benefits available to citizens usually succeeded. We are not the fringe, we are very much the majority and this represents one of few issues most Americans agree on. We want to be assured the borders are closed FIRST and only then would a debate over amnesty be appropriate, although I would be in opposition to amnesty then as well.

So we basically have a President who has devoted his time to an effort that most oppose and many who support don’t even put at the top of their own agenda. But look at the arrogance of President Bush.

“I’ll see you at the bill signing,” Bush predicted Monday.

You might have another issue that you consider to be #1, but for Bush, amnesty is #1. He knows even past efforts have resulted in there still not being any secured border yet. He knows this bill he’s pushing will result in the same, plus amnesty, plus inspiring more illegal immigration by those who never care to work by the rules.

What did the amnesty of 1986 result in? The idea then was that the borders would be secured and they were not. The idea then was that there would be less future illegal immigration and that has not been the case. The idea then was that more people would do things like encourage use of the English language, but we see more people in America than ever before that do not speak English.

Also from the article:

Senate Democratic leaders have written Bush saying it is up to him to lean on Republicans to back the measure.

Who is driving Bush? His core base? No, his supposed political opposition is driving him.

It’s unclear, though, how much influence Bush has among Republicans on immigration, given that it has sparked a backlash among some of the party’s core supporters, who see it as amnesty for people who sneaked into the country.

And let’s not even mention those who are waiting their turn and look at this figuring they probably should have entered this nation illegally too. Bush’s efforts give the impression that skirting the law has more benefits than following the rules. And disrespect all who follow the rules. Many of us might better accept something that advanced people who are waiting in line legally, than to grant amnesty to the biggest violators of our borders. This smacks the face of the Border Patrol, that puts their lives on the line in the name of border security.

Some claim that Bush’s efforts are better than the current status quo. However, before Bush’s efforts, people considering entering the USA illegally never felt their illegal activity would be rewarded. What would be better than the status quo is a proper ordering of priorities.

(This was posted by me earlier today at GuardtheBorders.)