LC 41 0714S

Illegal aliens rally in Atlanta against immigration enforcement, January, 2016 photo: DIS files

Mindlessness is confusing…

On immigration, the Atlanta Journal Constitution would rather be inaccurate and politically correct than get the story right. And they are willing to prove it.

A post on the AJC’s ‘Political Insider’ blog today describes the election-year objection from Georgia Republican Congressman Tom Graves to the Library of Congress’ capitulation to the anti-borders mob with its announcement that the legal and accurate term “illegal alien” would be replaced with the usual Newspeak goop.

But, in a story about the term “illegal alien” the AJC editors couldn’t bring themselves to use the term in the blog’s headline. Instead, it reads “Tom Graves leads revolt against Library of Congress effort to drop ‘illegal immigrant’”

Get it?

Decide for yourselves how far gone Atlanta’s newspaper really is, but even La Times and the Huffington Post could muster the courage to be accurate with the proper headline on essentially the same story.

We are guessing that current management at the AJC hasn’t yet considered the problems it now faces from the illegal alien lobby here in Georgia with use of the term “illegal immigrant” to replace illegal alien. We suspect they will, soon enough. A Georgia character, Jerry Gonzalez, who runs one of Georgia’s corporate-funded illegal alien lobby groups (GALEO), made it clear years ago – pre-Obama – that just uttering “illegal” connected to “immigrant” is “an offensive slur” and akin to use of the “N-word.”

We assume the AJC will fall in line soon to stay on the good side of GALEO and the other speech police, but for those of us who have dodged the re-education camps, we offer some real world evidence that yes, AJC editors and staff, there really are illegal aliens in Georgia and the words are good enough for the IRS, federal law, Georgia law and even for the “Wise Latina,” U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10204390597563527&set=a.10202233127508124.1073741832.1788184646&type=3

Debate.org

Washington Times
April 22, 2016

Illegal immigrant families crossing border at record pace in 2016

Illegal immigrant families are streaming across the border at record pace, according to new Border Patrol statistics released Friday morning that show more than 32,000 have been caught trying to sneak into the U.S.

That’s nearly 40 percent higher than the previous record of 2014, and it’s well more than double last year’s pace, suggesting that the government’s relaxed enforcement policies have backfired and invited a new wave of illegal crossers.

There’s somewhat better news when it comes to children traveling alone. The record pace has slackened slightly — though an uptick in March suggests that the warmer months could once again see a massive wave at the southwest border.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson had thought he’d licked the problem two years ago, after surging manpower to the border. And indeed the numbers did drop in late 2014 and early 2015.

But the pace of both families and unaccompanied children picked up last summer, just as Mr. Johnson announced new relaxed rules for detaining illegal immigrants, and it has remained high ever since. HERE

Gwinnett County’s dramatic demographic shift illustrates question: “Who are We?”

September 5, 2012

By David Pendered

The notion that Gwinnett County is home to a population that’s predominately white and affluent is as out-of-date as the idea that two painted water towers along I-85 in Norcross still proclaim: “Success Lives Here.”

Success Lives Here : Gwinnett County’s water towers

Gwinnett County’s iconic towers were demolished in 2010, the same year in which the Census recorded stunning shifts in the county’s demographics. Credit: www.11alive.com

The 40-year-old towers were torn down two years ago. In the decade before their demolition, 40,000 whites had moved out of Gwinnett. Now, the county’s population is predominately non-white, and less wealthy and less educated than it was in 2000.

The demographic shift in Gwinnett speaks to the broader question of “Who are We?” That was the topic Wednesday, at the quarterly meeting of the Atlanta Regional Housing Forum.
Out of the entire two-hour program, the most stunning report was provided by Lejla Slowinski, executive director of the Lawrenceville Housing Authority.
Slowinski provided a snapshot of Gwinnett’s population that gave some real heft to the demographic report on the metro Atlanta region that was delivered by Michael Rich, an associate professor of political science at Emory University who heads Emory’s Office of University-Community Partnerships.

Slowinski prefaced her remarks by saying she would talk later about ways in which Gwinnett’s civic and government leaders are leveraging the county’s diversity. But first, she said, she wanted to provide a bit of context about Gwinnett.
Speaking without any visual aids, such as a PowerPoint slide show, Slowinski riveted the audience’s attention with a cascade of nuggets derived from the 2000 and 2010 Census reports. The data shows that Gwinnett isn’t just changing – it is a changed community:

*Per capita income has fallen by $7,000;
*The proportion of whites in the overall population has fallen to 49.3 percent from 67 percent;
*No single Census tract has a white population of greater than 90 percent;
*32 percent of households speak a language other than English;
*61 percent of students in the county school system are non-whites;
*High school graduation rates for non-whites rose to 70 percent from 50 percent;
*25 percent of Gwinnett commuters spend at least 45 minutes a day in the car.
*Sources other than the Census provide additional insights:
*18 percent of Gwinnett’s children live in poverty;
*The county’s poverty rate rose from 5.6 percent in 2000 to 13 percent in 2009;

The number of foreclosures in Gwinnett has topped Fulton since 2009 (Fulton formerly had the region’s highest number of foreclosures).

One relevant point is that Gwinnett’s government and school board are trying to serve the human needs of this population with an ever-decreasing amount of tax revenues.
At the Piece by Piece annual meeting last week, Gwinnett County Commission Chairman Charlotte Nash said the county’s digest has dropped 25 percent during the past five years. That decrease has reduced the amount of property taxes collected by the county and school system, which is the main source of funding for both governments.

“The population has continued to diversify,” Nash said. “According to the 2010 Census, Gwinnett was the most diverse county in the southeast. That very different from what it was 20 years. It’s created language considerations, and the demand for additional types of flexibility in terms of how we deal with the community.”

Slowinski said the Gwinnett County Chamber of Commerce works diligently to reach out to, and serve, the minority business community. The number of firms owned by Hispanics and African Americans is still a small proportion of the overall mix, but it’s growing, she said.

“Gwinnett wants to be a middle of the road county, but also can see itself being an international gateway, and some of that is evident in the efforts to bring a [commercial] airport to the county,” Slowinski said. “They really are pushing the concept of, ‘Success Lives Here.’”

At the start of the meeting, Rich set the framework for the forum’s conversation. The purpose of the quarterly housing forum was to discuss ways in which changing demographics are reshaping the region.
Rich used a comparison of Census data from 2000 to 2010 to note that:

*The city of Atlanta’s population has shifted from almost ¾ African American to slightly more than half African American, as whites and other ethnic groups have moved into the central city;
*Non-whites represent almost half the population outside the city of Atlanta, a region in which whites formerly comprised over ¾ of the population;
*Poverty has risen dramatically in the suburbs, as opposed to being concentrated in the city of Atlanta;
*Whites tend to reside in Census tracts where most residents are white;
*African Americans and Hispanics tend to reside in communities where less than half the other residents are of their heritage.   HERE.

ABC

From a 2011 Univision re-election campaign speech from Obama: “I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books … now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”  HERE

Photo added by DIS – anti-enforcement rally in Atlanta, Jan. 2016

Obama’s immigration plan goes before top court, Justice Kennedy calls it ‘upside down’
By Elizabeth Llorente

Published April 18, 2016

Fox News Latino

“Under the old constitution Obama does not have the authority to simply use ‘prosecutorial discretion’ for five million individuals. If he did, he would have used it on day one of his second term,” said King, who lives in Georgia. “Would Barack Obama and the chanting mob outside the Supreme Court be as rabidly anti-borders if the hordes of illegals were English-speaking, potential conservative voters pouring across the border from Manitoba?”Even for a Supreme Court case, this is an extraordinarily high-stakes challenge.” D.A. King

It involves the powers of the president, and just how far he can go in acting alone when Congress will not pass a measure he or she wants. It involves the always emotionally-charged and deeply complex subject of immigration, specifically people who live here illegally and are the parents of U.S. citizens or legal residents.

The Supreme Court on Monday started hearing arguments in a Texas-led case challenging two executive immigration actions that could affect millions on people in the United States who are undocumented.

The Obama administration is asking the high court to allow it to put in place two programs – 2012’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and 2014’s Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA) – that could shield roughly 4 million people from deportation and make them eligible to work in the United States.

As justices heard oral arguments on Monday, advocates for more lenient immigration policies staged rallies outside the Supreme Court building. Several members of Congress held a press conference calling for a ruling in favor of President Obama’s executive action.

Donald B. Verrilli Jr., the government’s top appellate lawyer, started the court session by saying that Obama had a constitutional right to set the agenda for immigration enforcement.

But some of the justices made it clear they did not see it that way, according to The New York Times.

Justice Anthony Kennedy questioned whether Obama could single-handedly decide that millions of people would get a reprieve from deportation.

He said “that is a legislative task, not an executive task.”

“It’s as if the president is defining the policy and the Congress is executing it,” Justice Kennedy said. “That’s just upside down.”

Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. asked Verrilli if the president would also be within his rights to declare that all undocumented immigrants are legal if he so chose.

Verrilli said he would not because there are laws that don’t allow a president to take such action.

MALDEF President Thomas Saenz, presented oral arguments on behalf of several mothers it represents.

“The justices seemed closely engaged throughout the entire argument,” said the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund head.

“As expected, the issue of Texas’ standing to be in court and challenge the president’s time-honored and constitutional exercise of discretion in immigration enforcement received particular attention,” he said. “We look forward to a decision that will enable the Administration to provide relief to the Jane Does and so many others building families and contributing to our nation’s prosperity.”

Meanwhile, the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Congress, Linda Sanchez, said on a statement:

“These immigration executive actions are a game changer for our community. DACA and DAPA are two simple but important actions that would allow young people and parents of U.S. citizens the ability to stay in this country, work, and pay taxes.”

Rep. Joaquin Castro, a Texas Democrat, said Obama executive action is necessary because of repeated congressional inaction on immigration.

“With this case, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to uphold DAPA and expanded DACA and provide peace of mind to millions of families who contribute to our nation and call America home,” Castro said on Monday. “Until Congress passes comprehensive immigration reform, President Obama’s lawful actions bring some order to our nation’s broken system.”

Proponents of strict immigration enforcement see the court challenge as one that is about whether a president can grant “amnesty” with the stroke of a pen.

D.A. King, a prominent national activist for stricter immigration policies, said to Fox News Latino: “The whole world is watching to see if ‘fundamental transformation’ includes immigration law being re-written from the Oval Office while [the Supreme Court] offers its stamp of approval. We hope the court agrees with Obama when he made it clear that he lacks the power to do executive amnesty with the lament ‘I am president. I am not king.'”

“Under the old constitution Obama does not have the authority to simply use ‘prosecutorial discretion’ for five million individuals. If he did, he would have used it on day one of his second term,” said King, who lives in Georgia. “Would Barack Obama and the chanting mob outside the Supreme Court be as rabidly anti-borders if the hordes of illegals were English-speaking, potential conservative voters pouring across the border from Manitoba?”

Texas is leading 26 states in challenging the executive actions announced in 2014, which have been put on hold by lower courts. They say the programs need to be blocked because President Obama overstepped his authority under the existing immigration laws and the Constitution.

The high court is expected to decide by late June whether the efforts can move forward.

The court also could decide that Texas and the other states don’t have the right to sue in federal court, a procedural outcome that would largely sidestep the divisive immigration issue.

Another possibility is a 4-4 tie following Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February. That would leave the programs in limbo, almost certainly through the end of Obama’s presidency.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Elizabeth Llorente can be reached at elizabeth.llorente@foxnewslatino.com. Follow her on https://twitter.com/Liz_Llorente

Number of children illegally crossing border up 1,200% between 2011 and 2014 – first months of 2016 see increase HERE.

https://t.co/Gz5nb3NZJt

— PFIR (@PFIRorg) April 18, 2016

Georgia Capitol – Bestimg-see.com

Marietta Daily Journal

Opinion

April 15, 2016

D.A. KING:

Georgia conservatives lose again under Gold Dome

“Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to provide that English is the official language of the state of Georgia?” — Proposed statewide ballot question for the November election contained in SR675 sponsored by Republican Sen. Josh McKoon.

As a late note on the end of the 2015-16 General Assembly, here are more examples of Gold Dome reality for people who don’t know how their government really works — and some observations.

Despite a December Rosetta Stone Communications poll showing a whopping 76 percent bipartisan public approval rate for amending the state constitution to make English the official language of government, Georgia voters will not be allowed to answer the above ballot question in November.

Unless there is a badly needed executive order from Gov. Nathan Deal changing current policy at DDS, Georgia will continue to give illegal aliens, foreign diplomats and Mercedes Benz executives here on a legal visas the exact same driver’s license.

McKoon’s SB6 would have created a new, vertically-oriented driving card for the illegal aliens with Obama’s deferred action on deportation amnesty and would have clearly displayed their illegal status. That would have made it more difficult for illegal victims of borders to board airliners, rent vehicles, enter federal buildings and register to vote.

Now that the doubt has again been removed on where Gov. Deal and corporate Georgia (sorry for the repetition) stand on religious liberty legislation, readers should take an interest in why and how SR675 and SB6 were defeated in a Republican-ruled state.

Both bills passed the GOP state senate. All 39 Senate Republicans voted to let voters decide on the official English Resolution. Only one GOP senator voted against the bill improving the security on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. That was restaurant owner Sen. Tommie Williams of South Georgia. Williams told the Senate he wanted to protect his illegal alien sous chef.

Nevertheless, both bills are as dead as Poncho Villa. They expired in the Republican-majority Georgia House controlled by Speaker David Ralston because of Ralston’s personal animosity for the bill’s sponsor and because of orders from the Georgia Chamber of Commerce. The legislation had all the usual enemies.

In a post legislative session sigh-of-relief editorial, the AJC Editorial Board dismissed the majority desire of the great-unwashed Georgia electorate on official English with “lawmakers rightly stalled other symbolic nose-thumbing at the status quo, such as bills that would have made English the official language…”

Further out on the left, the triumphant, corporate-funded illegal alien lobby is also still rejoicing. “The failure of the anti-immigrant measures was a step forward in the search for equal rights for everyone in Georgia,” says Adelina Nicholls, executive director of the anti-borders Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights.

Got that? Allowing American voters to decide on English as the constitutional official language of government and noting on their driver’s licenses that illegal aliens are illegal aliens is “anti-immigrant.” Nichols gleeful remark should be regarded as an answer to the question “how un-American are they?”

We note here that Nichols is an avowed Socialist — and that even when the Democrats controlled the state Capitol, illegal aliens could not legally obtain a Georgia driver’s license. We also note — again — that when the tribalist open borders organizers speak of “equal rights for everyone,” they are aiming directly at the end of immigration enforcement and voting rights for illegal aliens.

Republicans may want to ask Gov. Deal if it is somehow “best in the overall interest of the state of Georgia and its citizens as a whole” to give illegal aliens any type of driver’s licenses. And the governor’s staff needs to do a much better job of prepping him on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens and Obama’s executive amnesty. On archived video, Deal can be seen and heard telling a Telemundo reporter last month that “we verified the legal status” associated with the Georgia driver’s licenses, including those now belonging to illegal aliens. Reminder to all concerned, according to immigration law and the Obama White House, deferred action on deportation does not provide legal status.

Many Republican county and district conventions last year saw passage of resolutions supporting a ballot question on constitutional official English and ending the practice of rewarding any illegals with any Georgia driver’s license. The driver’s license resolution also passed at the Republican state convention. This was due to the courage and hard work of common sense, grassroots conservative activists in Georgia’s Republican party.

For Georgia conservatives, the failure of SR675 and SB6 to pass the GOP-controlled legislature should serve as obvious indicators of badly needed change.

D.A. King is president of the Cobb-based Dustin Inman Society and an independent voter. Twitter: @DAKDIS

HERE