October 9, 2013 By  


On Saturday, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed the Trust Act. It prohibits illegal aliens from being turned over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) authorities for possible deportation unless they have been charged with or convicted of a serious offense. ”While Washington waffles on immigration, California’s forging ahead,” Brown said. ”I’m not waiting.”

California is indeed forging ahead. Last Thursday, Brown signed a bill allowing illegal aliens to obtain drivers’ licenses. ”Millions of immigrant families have been looking forward to this day,” said Democratic Assemblyman Luis Alejo, who sponsored the bill. “It will allow them to go to work, go to school, take their kids to a doctor’s appointment without fear that they are going to have their car taken away from them, or worse, be put into immigration proceedings.”

Not “immigrant families.” Illegal immigrant families.

Brown was even busier on Saturday. In addition to the Trust Act, he signed another seven bills aimed at blurring, if not eradicating the distinction between law-abiding legal immigrants and their illegal counterparts. The measures included imposing restrictions on those who charge fees to help illegals gain legal status–and the ability to criminally charge employers who threaten to report an individual’s immigration status, if that threat is used to “induce fear.” Given that it is against the law to hire illegals, Brown and his fellow Democrats have essentially given illegals the power to threaten their employers.

Even more remarkably, Brown also signed a bill that permits the California Supreme Court to grant law licenses to illegal aliens.

Illegal-alien rights activists were ecstatic. “Today marks the dawn of a new era in California’s immigrant communities,” said Reshma Shamasunder, director of the California Immigrant Policy Center. Her organization declared 2013 the “year of the immigrant” in California.

Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) who sponsored the Trust Act, rationalized its passage in a September press release. “Federal officials have held people whose worst alleged violation was selling tamales without a permit or having a barking dog,” he explained. “Even crime victims have been deported. We need to end that to bring back trust between our communities and the local law enforcement agencies supposed to protect them.”

That press release was a window into the mindset of the activist American left, for whom the rule of law its little more than an inconvenient impediment that can be ignored in pursuit of “nobler” ambitions. It further noted that the Trust Act was crafted to defy a federal immigration program known as Secure Communities, or S-Comm. The release bemoaned the fact that more the 50,000 “contributing Californians” had been deported “though they had not been convicted of any crime, or only minor crimes.” In other words, being in the country illegally is completely irrelevant.


Views: 1677

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am with you! I wrote in though= Ron Paul Could not vote in Mitt due to Health Care he did the same to his State but I did read he balanced the Budget first unlike 0. Alabama did vote  Mitt though over 1 mill votes an 800k for 0 a State of 4 mill we only have 2 mill registered? I hear all the time our vote don't matter the party's are the same they all are crooks etc. But I was re-energized by Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Rand Paul an Sen Jeff Sessions an Sen Richard Shelby have voted against Amnesty an Obama care so far an too keep Gov open.

I have heard liberal minded people say we need to just tear up that Constitution it is outdated etc. These type of people are scary to me but then they don't believe in the Bible either so I am not surprised at what they say. Rural America needs to stop being so shy we have a big number but most do not have puters or keep up on Social sites I do what I can to spread the word an ask them to watch CSPAN at least to see what is going on if they have cable even guess we are close to being Amish out here haha not really.

I don't get it !!!  Who voted to nominate Romney ???????????? It was the REPUBLICANS that went to the poles and voted !  Then we had many, like the "leader" of the 912 group in Rochester, NH tell people that he would not vote for Romney under any circumstances.  In other words Obama is better than Romney would have been.  As I see it, the voters, including registered Republicans, voted for a personality and not for what is best for the Country: is that stupid or what ?

I think that when you add up all voters that support the Democrats and Obama, the Governors and Democrats in the state legislatures you have a majority of voters that support the Democrats !

And besides, even if the Democrats don't have an exact simple majority, they have the Media and the university professors and the feminists that scream and use hysteria to sway the vote; in other words they have the power as if they are the majority.   And they get laws passed that the Republicans can't change because they don't have enough support from the people.

So, the bottom line is; it's the stupid voters that got Obama elected and it's the stupid Republicans that refuse to boycott companies that advertise in the M.S. Media and it's the Republicans that can't outsmart the Democrats and make the voters feel the pain.  For example Obamscare can not and will not be implemented.  People would be "born again" and convert to Tea Party members if the Republicans would declare that they don't have the people behind them to overturn the law of the land.  People will not suffer the pain of Obamacare! (im out of room)




Political Cartoons by Tom StiglichPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel


Florida Sheriff — “I Will Not Enforce Assault Weapons Ban, Neither Will Most Sheriffs”

Dennis Lemma, who is the Sheriff in Central Florida’s Seminole County, told a group of 2nd Amendment activists recently that he would not enforce an assault weapons ban that could soon become Florida law if the “Ban Assault Weapons Now” amendment passes in the Sunshine State.

According to News965, the ban has the following specifications.

The amendment proposed in the state legislature would ban possession of assault weapons, which are defined as “semiautomatic rifles and shotguns capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition at once, either in fixed or detachable magazine, or any other ammunition feeding device.”

Lemma, an ardent supporter of the 2nd Amendment and a first term sheriff who is running for re-election, said this about whether or not he would enforce such a law.

“It’s not only that I wouldn’t, the majority of sheriffs across the state would not do it,” Lemma said in the video. It’s up to the sheriffs what they are willing to enforce.”

Trump Holds Rally in Milwaukee, WI 1-14-20

© 2020   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service