October 10, 2007

Don't Throw Illegals in That Breyer Patch

Hatched by Dafydd

A San Francisco-based federal judge, who grew up in San Francisco, a graduate of UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall Law School, former Watergate prosecutor, who worked as a counsel at the Legal Aid Society in San Francisco for his first job as an actual lawyer, has put the kibosh on a crazy scheme to send letters to businesses warning them about employees whose Social Security numbers don't match their names.

See if you can guess which recent president appointed Judge Charles Breyer, younger brother of you-know-who, to the bench.

Breyer said the new work-site rule would likely impose hardships on businesses and their workers. Employers would incur new costs to comply with the regulation that the government hasn't evaluated, and innocent workers unable to correct mistakes in their records in the given time would lose their jobs, the judge wrote.

"The plaintiffs have demonstrated they will be irreparably harmed if DHS is permitted to enforce the new rule," Breyer wrote.

The so-called "no match" letters, including a Department of Homeland Security warning, were supposed to start going out in September but were held after labor groups and immigrant activists filed a federal lawsuit.

Can someone please explain to me again why it will be good for the nation if social conservatives cast a "protest vote" for a third-party candidate in 2008, making it more likely that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Rodham (D-Carpetbag, 95%) will become President Hillary, thus getting to appoint the next three Supreme Court justices plus hundreds of other federal judges? Will her nominees be more like Justices Roberts and Alito -- or more closely resemble Judge Charles Breyer and his big brother Stephen?

[P]laintiffs, which include the AFL-CIO, the American Civil Liberties Union and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, saw the decision as a significant victory against a program they believe would foster discrimination on the work site, lead to job losses by lawful employees and expose businesses to additional expenses and the fear of prosecution.

Remember, we're only talking about DHS sending letters to businsses whose employee names don't match the Social Security number the businesses provided and warning those businesses that there are grim consequences for defying immigation law. I wonder how Judge Breyer would rule on a southern-border security fence?

So the next time "anti-amnesty" conservatives demand to know why we're not enforcing the immigration regulations that are already on the books... rather than blaming Bush first, they should instead try asking Judge Breyer and the scores of other federal judges just like him, who see it as a terrible and unconstitutional burden that businesses be forced to make an effort to determine if their employees are legally allowed to work; that county precincts take at least a quick peek at some picture I.D. before allowing someone to vote; and that the Border Patrol attempt to, you know, guard the border.

While beholdest conservatives the mote in Republicans' own eye, and beholdest not the Rock of Gibralter in the eye of the Democrats?

Hatched by Dafydd on this day, October 10, 2007, at the time of 9:05 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/2488

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Don't Throw Illegals in That Breyer Patch:

» Crazy Sam - Breyer's Patch from The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns
The 'Real' reason the judge struck down the illegal alien law. [Read More]

Tracked on October 12, 2007 6:40 AM

Comments

The following hissed in response by: Mr. Michael

Politicians, and Americans in general, just cannot allow a fringe group to make demands upon our elected officials. Welcome everyone to the table if they wish to participate. The tent is big enough to hold them. But if they want to walk away, it's their right... let 'em.

I don't believe that the Republican Party should allow a fringe group to make demands on who gets to run for office. I think the same should hold true for the Democrats.

I consider myself a very 'Right' Conservative... but if the guys who call themselves "Social Conservatives" decide to leave the Republican Party, then the Republican Party will move more towards the so-called 'Center'... and be more palatable to those Democrats who just won't vote for Hillary. I think there are more of those than there are Dobsonites.

Therefor, I think that if Dobson and his group pull a protest and leave the Republican tent, it would be BAD for Hillary Clinton's chances at becoming President. The key is to get the fringies to make loud protest noises early enough to get the word out. So far, so good.

Are you sure Karl Rove is in retirement?

In the end, I think Religious 'Leaders' should try to change America through Prayer, and stay out of Politics. Stick to your strengths, as it were.

The above hissed in response by: Mr. Michael [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 10, 2007 11:48 PM

The following hissed in response by: Terrye

I have no patience for anyone who would willingly allow another Clinton into the White House just for spite. And that is what it would be.

BTW, I also heard {somewhere} that Illinois is not honoring those letters. It seems that DHS is using the online verification system and critics say there are flaws in it.

Of course there are flaws in everything.

The above hissed in response by: Terrye [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 11, 2007 4:07 AM

The following hissed in response by: hunter

So now our properly passed laws should be vetoes by a Judge on non-constitutional reasons?
This is ridiculous.
The Judge needs a new career.

The above hissed in response by: hunter [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 11, 2007 5:50 AM

The following hissed in response by: David M

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 10/11/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

The above hissed in response by: David M [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 11, 2007 8:33 AM

The following hissed in response by: Baggi

I'd suggest to all of those here who are really concerned about another Clinton in the white house that they abandon Rudy ASAP.

Not that I listen to Dobson. Ive heard him on Fox News and know he has a radio show and some books but otherwise I prefer to listen to Hugh Hewitt and others.

Back on point. I'll not vote for Rudy. Not in the primary and not in the general and it has nothing at all to do with "spite" no matter how much you might think it does.

Rudy has some deeply held beliefs and he is honest about those beliefs. I can appreciate that. Unfortunately, they are liberal beliefs.

The nice thing about Hillary Clinton is, she doesn't have any beliefs. The Clintons go where the wind blows.

So if Hillary gets elected we still have a Republican social conservative movement in this country. Everyone will know that Rudy did not get elected because social conservatives like me refused to vote for him.

If Rudy does get elected the worst would happen. Social conservatives would no longer have a political party. We'd have no where to go and no matter what some of these folks might say, creating a third party is just not an option. Besides, most of us believe working within the party to get what we want is better than starting a third party.

So we're not going to leave the Republican party if Rudy gets chosen as the primary candidate. We'll go to the polls and vote a straight Republican ticket (Minus Rudy).

And if Hillary gets elected i'll blame those folks who voted for Rudy in the primary. After all, if your concern is a Hillary presidency, what the heck did you vote for Rudy for? We told you in advance what would happen if he was the Republican candidate.

You have no one but yourselves to blame.

The above hissed in response by: Baggi [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 12, 2007 5:55 PM

The following hissed in response by: cdquarles

Dafydd,

Alex, Who is Bill Clinton?

Thank you so very much.
It is the Federal Government's job to enfore the immigration laws. Not only should they rationalize the legal immigration path, they should be the ones that certify the status of and provide the proof of employment eligibility.

It is not the function of employers, whether they be individuals or giant multi-national corporations, to enfore immigration laws.

The only effect of increasing the cost of employing people will be to decrease the number of people employed, especially those not currently employed.

It is also the Federal Government's job to eliminate Federal payments to any State or local government that openly prevents enforcement of immigration laws.

It is Congress' job to impeach any Federal judge who arrogantly impedes immigration law enforcement.

The above hissed in response by: cdquarles [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 13, 2007 8:28 AM

The following hissed in response by: JasterMereel

Baggi makes the wild claim "The nice thing about Hillary Clinton is, she doesn't have any beliefs. The Clintons go where the wind blows."

She went to Wellesley in the '60s, for crying out loud! You're gonna actually believe she doesn't have strong leftist/Communist beliefs? Then why is (and has for years) she been pushing HillaryCare? She is just like ALL Communists -- she believes she knows what is best for all personkind (PC for mankind).

Remember: It Takes A Village. Not a family. A Village. We program your children with our leftist beliefs ... you know, so you don't have to. And because you don't want to. So we do it for you.

So, she has strong leftist beliefs. Why has she not pushed more strongly for them? Even her most ardent supporters from the very beginning acknowledge the goals she had for the Presidency. Once she is elected President, then her facade can finally come off... no more bowing to political realities in order to get elected. She is the ruler now.

First order of business: Do everything she can to allow the ~38 million illegal aliens to vote (you know, for her, but most especially to give confidence to Democrats that they will survive the mid-terms and cow the Repubs into supporting her initiatives). That way she is a shoe-in to get re-elected in 2012. Do so in response to all the well-planned accusations of racism and disenfranchisement of black and Hispanic voters. With the mid-terms and 2012 re-election future secured...

Second order of business is to signal to all the liberal SCOTUS justices that they can retire, safely knowing that they will be replaced with ultra-liberal activist judges.

Third, really kick in the HillaryCare to full throttle. Make SCHIP look like child's play. (Did I say Child's Play? What terrible puns.)

Fourth, pay back the enviro-zealots and control the business community all in one shot by passing carbon emission regulations.

Fifth, sit back and enjoy her power. Have a cigar with Fidel or Raul. [I wonder what She will do with her cigars when she's not smoking them. -- JasterMereel, don't do this sort of thing again; I won't have comments that read like Lyndon LaRouche attacking Jane Fonda. Thanks. -- the Mgt.]

Long story short... Hillary in the White House means two things that will be DISASTROUS for the nation: Ultra-liberal judges into SCOTUS and the federal bench, but even worse than that will be the fait accompli of the citizenship and voting rights given to illegals. (You thought Motor Voter was bad? Look out.) Conservatives in Congress will be put on the Endangered Species List. They simply will never be able to win an election in districts with even a modest population of illegals.

You think you social conservatives will keep even a single anti-abortion law on the books, much less overturn Roe? Hillary gets elected and everything will be over but the screaming.

The above hissed in response by: JasterMereel [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 14, 2007 1:02 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)


Remember me unto the end of days?


© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved