Heated debate outside last week's City Council (Source: The Signal)
This morning, while perusing the various LA Times reader reactions to Kellargate from points far and wide, I came across this reasoned statement from SCV resident Bill Moore:
The Times’ article about Kellar’s shout-out at a recent anti-illegal-immigration rally that he is a “proud racist” is interesting to me as a African American who moved to Santa Clarita and built a home here for my family over 20 years ago.
Actually, I had never even heard of a group called the Santa Clarita Valley Independent Minutemen. I find them quite amusing. Their rantings about the “rule of law” would be laughable if they weren’t so pathetic. If these people want to go stand at the border and block illegal entry, so be it — but Santa Clarita is not Tecate.
Kellar may or may not be a racist. But he certainly is stupid, as exemplified by his unthinking remark. Does he not know of the inflammatory nature of the word “racist”?
Contrast Mr. Moore’s statement with that of Mr. Bossert’s, who flails about the subject with the animosity toward Ferry obviously still fresh from the longstanding-but-still-relevant annexation debate. Mr. Bossert is using illegal immigration as a stalking horse issue against incumbents who are vying for annexation. The reality is, other than decry illegal immigration and issue a meaningless resolution, what can the City Council really do to resolve the problem without significant unintended consequences?
Questions:
- Before the roadshow from Antelope Valley and Hesperia rolled into town, was this a topic of concern for the City Council election? Is it now?
- What exactly do you expect the Santa Clarita City Council do about illegal immigration?
- Does illegal immigration trump the myriad other City Council priorities?
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=A6_xgKWzhRw
I expect the council to use whatever legal leverage they have to address the situation. The PC approach by our government official is absurd. God bless Bob Kellar.
Illegal immigration impacts every single one of us. According to what I found, between 15-18% of prison population are illegal aliens in California to the tune of about 173,000 inmates. According to the California Joint Committee on Prison Construction and Operations, this costs the state about $500 million per year. While these figures are a couple years old, I doubt they have changed much since our policy of don’t ask, don’t tell continues to tolerate the problem. If nothing else, Kellar’s dumb remark has brought this back into the news.
Isn’t it sad to have all this bad press for the City?
The Signal, dutifully part of the GOBN, publishes a “news” story/interview with Bob as part of his damage control… or does ANYone believe the timing of this article is just coincidental?
http://www.the-signal.com/news/article/24041/
I’m glad Dave Bossert called Frankenferry out for being soft on illegals because he’s Catholic. Why else do they call it a Sanctuary City? Why don’t more people talk about this?
Stay tuned.
I have had many out-of-town acquaintances talk about our Councilman. Everyone of them has been positive. Evidently there is way more support for Kellar than not.
“Racist” has become the new N word. If being the proud owner of an American made automobile makes me a “racist” then so be it. It sounds stupid but it’s the same sentiment.
cash: nice dodge. What is the real priority of illegal immigration for the Santa Clarita City Council? What exactly do you want them to do? They can “legally” do lots of different things, most of which won’t do a darn thing to combat the problem (or have unintended consequences).
navigator:
If he would have left it at that, there wouldn’t be such a brouhaha. He extended it to “proud racist,” which I noticed you omitted from your strawman.
CC:
Figures lie and liars figure. A UCLA study a couple of weeks ago found that amnesty helps our local economy.
NAFF:
You know Catholics induldge with a little Sacramental wine on the occassional Sunday, myself influded. I just thought I would throw that out there in the context of the “Buying Boos on Sunday” debate going on in the hinterlands of this blog.
ferryfan is right! the catholics have too many babies and take directions from the pope, not our American leaders. in fact, i think the mexican illegals plan to turn America into Catholic country instead of Christian!!
It’s starting to come together now… THAT’s what they mean by “JFK Democrat!”
All this reminds me of the show I watch over the weekend on Discovery Channel (Predators vs Prey). Sad.
Notaferryfan:
So you are anti-Catholic now?
I don’t care who I offend. If Frankenferry is taking cues from his boss, he needs to be called out. His boss wants to undermine our sovereignty and coddle the illegals. Kellar and the minutemen are right – they don’t bow to the Pope, they serve America.
Re: Dave Bossert
It is now official. Dave Bossert has lost his mind. This is particularly troubling since he (and for that matter Dave Gauny) are members of a minority that has been subject to persecution throughout history.
Cash wasn’t dodging anything. You just don’t like his answer. It REALLY is that simple. As OUR elected officials they are expected to uphold the law and the constitution. Just because the state and the feds have tied our (local government’s) hands doesn’t mean they shouldn’t do anything.
And that is what you are implying by saying “what can the City Council really do to resolve the problem without significant unintended consequences?”
As elected officials they have more access to more powerful people. They can make noise and get noticed. The American people ARE AGAINST AMNESTY. And clearly…so is Santa Clarita.
ND: I’m pretty sure you don’t understand the definition of strawman.
We already tried amnesty under Reagan. It didn’t work.
Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing and expecting a different result.
Time for Plan B.
scvfan:
Again, what do you want the City Council to do? What should they do about abortion? What should they do about gay marriage? What about nuclear armaments? The space program? These subjects just aren’t in their purview.
spine: what’s your plan B ? And what is the City Council’s role in this new plan? This group of protesters isn’t interested in “comprehensive reform.” Spend some time on the websites that organized the rally.
Notaferryfan:
So you are stepping to every Roman Catholic in town at OLPH and Blessed Kateri? Of course you don’t care who you offend because you hide behind your alias.
Not everyone. Some of them put America first. The next video will let you know who is who.
NotaFerryFan:
I don’t much like religious bigotry so I think you and I need to meet face to face to discuss this.
“The American people ARE AGAINST AMNESTY.”
Where did you get this scvfan? How do you know?
And I have to join NickelDime in asking what is it exactly that you want the City Council to do?
Make noise and get noticed? That’s your solution?
You (among others) see a problem you don’t like, yet you don’t think about how to actually go about fixing it in detail. Step by step. Seems like there is a lot whining and waiting until someone else “makes some noise.” Where are your solutions?
I agree that immigration is a problem in the U.S. I don’t like to think that there are people out there benefiting from my tax dollars. BUT, what about all the businesses hiring these illegals for cheap labor? You want to go in and “make some noise” in the orange groves out there in Ventura? You think these businesses will like that? Not only will they be slapped a fee for hiring illegals, but they will be forced to hire legals for minimum wage (or higher)… something these small businesses probably can’t afford (hence the illegal cheap labor) and therefore these businesses will eventually fold only adding to unemployment rates and failed businesses.
Either way, someone is going to lose.
Where are the solutions?
NotaFerryFan:
On second thought, I think you better stay behind your veil of anonymity since I just sent your Birch/Klan material to the Catholic League for Justice and Civil Rights-Los Angeles Chapter, and they just might have an opinon.
@scvfan,
Re: straw man
I’ll admit to hesitating before using the term, but thanks for keeping me honest.
I can feel the love in all your comments
With apologies to Jack Nicholson, “you want me on this blog. You NEED me on this blog.”
Timothy Myers says “This is particularly troubling since he (and for that matter Dave Gauny) are members of a minority that has been subject to persecution throughout history.”
Tim I take exception to your comparing religious persecution to a nation protecting its borders and restricting entry to those persons who have been vetted and approved. There is a vast difference. No one is being persecuted. Everyone is asked to obey the same requirements and laws in order to be granted legal entry no matter what race, religion, ethnic background, country of origin, sexual preference, etc.
On the matter of the Catholic Church: In this country, our forefathers decided it was wise to separate church and state. Cardinal Mahoney has decided to ignore that by offering sanctuary to illegal immigrants. The Catholic Church avoids paying millions if not billions in taxes as a non-profit church entity. Since they ignore the law, they should lose non-profit status and pay taxes like every other BUSINESS in the country.
NickleDime, so you post figures that you agree lie? wierd
“CC:
Figures lie and liars figure. A UCLA study a couple of weeks ago found that amnesty helps our local economy?
Oh CC. Do I really have to spell it out? You’re making me spell it out. OK.
Many moons ago, when the second hand smoke debate was smoldering (hardeeharrharr) both sides were making their case using the exact same EPA study.
It was comical.
My point is this: we can debate the costs that are involved but will get no where because there are puts and takes on the issue and each side will cite their own study.
The energy being expelled with the local city council is best served with our elected Federal representatives.
Since I’m asking questions, I s’pose I can go out on a limb and state my own position: secure the border (it is a national security issue), provide a path to citizenship for the hardworking folks that meet objective criteria, punish the businesses that hire folks that aren’t authorized to work in this country.
side note: when I say “secure the border”, I realize this is a vast pit of money with very little effect. But I’m a realist and know that’s what it will take to get this pig through to the President’s desk. Punishing businesses for breaking the law, on the other hand, will work handily.
spineflower, we have to grant amnesty. We can’t send them all home, that’s just not practical nor is it humane. And the last time we did amnesty, we didn’t do the rest of it, so I just don’t agree with your conclusion. I get that it’s moral hazard, but the alternatives aren’t palatable in my opinion.
That’s why this group doesn’t resonate with me: a “comprehensive solution” is a non-starter for them. They’re on the fringe.
BGH, Tim was pointing out Dave’s dissing Frank on account of his religion.
It’s sort of scary when even the satirical outrage gets an amen.
Mike: I did not get that at all out of Bossert’s comments. I got that he was upset that Mahoney gives sanctuary and that Ferry in a round a bout way works for Mahoney so would have a difficult time publicly disagreeing with his boss, if he does indeed disagree on the issue of sanctuary or illegal immigration.
Even if I agreed with your interpretation, I would still say no one is persecuting anyone. Not those of the Jewish faith or those of the Catholic Faith. There is disagreement on giving illegal immigrants sanctuary and enforcing immigration laws.
Thank you however for providing your take on the comments. Appreciate it.
BGH:
It was purposeful Catholic bashing or Dave Bossert is a douchebag, unintentionally channeling the John Birch Society and HL Hunt.
Where I come from if you step to people about their religion (ANY RELIGION) this is one militant Lutheran who is not going to take it lying down.
Obviously Mr Moore decided to comment on something he has experienced only one side of. As a black man, I am sure he has experienced true racism. But has he been on the other side? Has he been accused of being a racist because he values law and order, the sovereignty of this country or the belief that the borders should be controlled? If you have been called a racist, when you believe all illegal aliens should be forced to return home, regardless of color, language, nationality or ethnicity the word finally has lost its meaning. The pro amnesty groups thought by calling the opposition racist, it would further their cause. They have literally run the term into the ground, by over use. Keller’s remark is just the consequences of the term racist being over used and applied incorrectly. Most people who have been active against illegal immigration, have been called a racist so many times, it really has lost all meaning.
It seems to me that the Santa CLarita City Council can issue a strong resolution directing the state and federal representatives to ensure enforcement of existing law and to make other legislation that deals with illegal immigration in a serious manner. The resolution should call out our representatives by name on this.
In addition, the City Council can direct the Sheriff Dept. to enforce the law, or if they are not, to ask why not. If they are not, it might be a good argument for Santa Clarita to have their own police department.
Just my opinion, of course. Thanks for the question.
ND, we do agree that securing the boarder is the first priority. I am also good with punishing businesses who hire illegals.
As for giving people who have come here illegally, amnesty I totally disagree. I work in a multi-national company where people wait Years to go through the proper channel to gain citizenship. No way, do people who flout the law get a pass. I would prefer that we work on expediting the proper channels to make it easier for people to immigrate legally. No more anchor babies, no more free services, no more.
CC,
There are macro-economic reasons why amnesty makes huge sense, not the least of which involves staying competitive with other manufacturing countries and paying for Social Security.
But all that aside, let’s go down the humane route:
How exactly are we going to send illegal immigrants home? And for the families with kids who are naturalized, who have made a life here, are working hard, contributing to our society – we’re going to send them home because they skipped the line 10 years ago?
CC: I totally agree with your comments above.
I also agree with Mr. Ippolito’s comments regarding those who employ illegals.
ND: I disagree with your stance on amnesty. Yes, you deport them.
The United States of America has every right to deport the parents here illegally and they have the choice to either take their offspring with them or leave them behind. Most will take their children with them. Those left behind can stay with relatives here legally or go into foster care until their parents are approved for reentry. The taxpayer is already supporting many of them and their parents anyway. If nothing else, deportation will send an impossible to ignore message that our national sovereignty and immigration laws cannot be ignored without serious consequences. Send the receiving countries a bill for repatriation that will get their attention. It is time we firmly send the message to all foreign governments ignore our laws at your own peril.
The parents made the conscious choice to ignore the law and take their chances being caught without proper entry documents. Once repatriated, they may apply for legal entry, probably will move up the line if their children were born on US soil, and once approved enter the US legally. Amnesty does not work and only encourages more of the same. An expanded visa program and requiring at least minimum wage for the jobs illegals currently perform will help fill many of those so-called jobs Americans will not do. Expanding the work requirements for those able-bodied legal residents currently collecting public assistance will also go a long way towards making sure there are enough workers to do the work. Before there were so many illegals, newly arrived legal immigrants and those with less education filled those jobs. They worked hard, learned English, and bettered their economic circumstances. You cannot convince me otherwise since my immigrant parents did just that so that their children would have a better life and enjoy the many benefits of living in this great country.
We need to secure our borders, deport those here without permission to be here, hire American workers to speed up the vetting and approval process, control the amount of visas, etc to a reasonable amount per year, and allow entry to those meeting the criteria already in existence for legal immigration. We need to stop spending taxpayer money to subsidize greedy employers by providing illegals with what they do not get from employers because they are here illegally. We need to severely punish human traffickers like those who were recently holding illegals for ransom in a Reseda house. We need to place heavy fines and sanctions against those persons hiring anyone from anywhere who does not have the proper documents to work in this country.
BGH:
“Rounding them up” is a non-starter and isn’t going to happen. Besides the fact that it won’t happen, it shouldn’t happen as it is inhumane and would be an international embarrassment. Imagine the documentaries, intimately showing the big bad boot of Uncle Sam stomping on the plight of the least among us. There would be heart-wrenching stories, stories that might even convince you that the action, while “ideal” in minds like yours, was not the right thing to do and had terrible unintended consequences.
Since I know you already wrote your response to the above in your mind, read this as my response to your response.
ND: as mentioned in my previous post above already read it. Agree with some comments, not with others.
Close the borders to anyone attempting to enter without permission. Continue by heavily fining and sanctioning the greedy employers and incarcerating the heartless traffickers. Without jobs, many here illegally will voluntarily leave as witnessed by our current economic downturn. Next criminals, deport posthaste. Next, those that do not have legal permission to be in this country that are collecting any government subsidies. Next, those decent, otherwise law abiding, hardworking people, including those with US born children. Fast track reentry to those meeting all requirements in my last category. The rest can stay gone no matter where they are from originally!
Timothy Meyers says: “Where I come from if you step to people about their religion (ANY RELIGION) this is one militant Lutheran who is not going to take it lying down.”
Tim, here we are in complete agreement. I was raised a Catholic and even considered becoming a nun. Can you imagine me taking a vow of silence? I know some of you wish I had. Too bad. I no longer participate but agree with you that I will stand up to anyone who exhibits religious intolerance. Human beings are gifted with free will and have every right to practice their faith or no faith as they see fit. God, or not, is a very personal belief system.
However, that said, I have no sympathy for church clerics who flaunt the law as Cardinal Roger Mahoney is doing. The church can sponsor for legal entry whomever they choose. He is not doing that.
By offering Sanctuary, he is breaking the law. You are either a church (non-profit) or a business (while making political statements). One avoids paying huge sums in taxes. The other would be required to pay its fair share, which would probably put a dent in our state’s economic woes. Cardinal Mahoney does not get to have it both ways.
OK, Berta – so who is in a position to enact this Great Roundup?
Hire and train more Border Patrol Agents and INS agents which helps with the unemployment problem too. Also, hire and train more people to process and approve visa and other guest type applications to speed up reentry for those meeting all requirements. Throw out prohibitions against asking for documents when any police agents are routinely performing their job. If they stop you for speeding for instance, you should produce a CA DL or other legitimate ID to prove you are in the country legally. If you are arrested for DUI or domestic violence, same. If you cannot provide proper documents, you should be detained and processed by INS. If you are determined to be here without permission, you are deported within a few days. No California Driver License’s for illegals. Helps employ people here legally, helps trim government subsidy expenditures, helps repatriate those here illegally, and helps the American taxpayer stop feeling screwed.
The guys with the signs were not even from this town. Hired troublemakers is all they are from a left wing group of nut jobs who think we shouldn’t have no borders.
Well, as soon as Mexico (or any other nation) gives US citizen’s the same rights these people that they want us to give to THEIR illegals, we’ll start talking.
Until then, close the boarders, deport all illegals and honor those that do it the right way.
To set the record straight. The other four council members are the ones in the wrong. All four of them dodged the question on where do they stand and made statements like, “our hands are tied” reiterating what the City’s Attorney stated at the Council meeting that night. — ALL BS!
The Federal law does allow state, county and local gov’ts to act on behalf of the federal gov’t in identifying, reporting and even assisting in the capture and conviction of illegal immigrants.
YOUR CITY COUNCIL PLAYED IT SAFE. THEY PLAYED THE POLITICS CARD TO STAY OUT OF DEBATE AND KEEP THE MINORITY VOTE.
I stand my ground: NO INCUMBENT FOR RE ELECTION THIS YEAR!!