From the Redpills blog on Sotomayor and Schumer

http://www.redpills.org/?p=4513

and,

one on Schumer and the immigration bill:

SCHUMER AT CENTER OF THE ILLEGAL ALIEN AMNESTY CONTROVERSY

DR. JERRY C. FRADY, MINUTEMAN CIVIL DEFENSE WRITER

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N. Y., has done it again! He has managed to arouse public awareness about "amnesty for illegal aliens" and

augument a current Conservative backlash against that disastrous effort. With no disrespect to the Pope, Schumer was doubtless basking in the glow

of the twin majorities Democrats have in Congress when he delivered a pope-like pontification, A recent May New York Times article reported he

asserted that "Now voters should be ready to accept a law that legalizes illegal immigrants (aliens) and rewrites immigration rules." Don't you just love

it when the political elites make their generalizations about us as though "once they have spoken, we must obey."

He also said, "We can pass strong, fair, practical and effecitve reform this year." Note his self-confident attitude and his word choices which are code words. The "strong" is code for comprehensive, wide-ranging and all inclusive. So, if his amnesty bill becomes law, it will contain an open invitation for every Third World type to flock into this country, thus, importing mutiple health risks, illiteracy and billions more in welfare. The "fair" means that all illegal aliens, including criminals, gangs, and terrorists, will be welcome and forgiven for their past illegal activities. Oh, that includes rapes, murders, bombings--the whole range. It also includes the notion of "wealth redistribution" as summed in the catch-phrase, "Su casa, mi casa." "Practical" simply means whatever the Democrat elites believe is good for everyone. Schumer and his ilk take pride in their "pragmatism"--just doing whatever works, without allowing any Constitutional, religious, ethical standards, or "the expressed will of the people" to affect their actions. The "effective" code word means "doing whatever it takes" to turn the USA into a socialistic, multi-cultural haven for the world's misfits under the control and direction of the United Nations.

The immigration subcommittee chairman offered this disingenuous, false and calculating assessment of the present national security with reference to

our borders at a hearing devoted to bolstering his viewpoint. He "argued tht the demands of securing the nation's borders have been met, including the

hiring of 20,000 border patrol agents." Schumer added that, " now is the right time for amnesty...the U. S. borders are more secure than ever, which is

the first step to overhauling the current immigration system." He received dutiful "yes" answers when asking "if the steps taken had slowed the

flow of 'illegal entries into the United States" from officials from Homeland Security, the Border Patrol and Customs Enforcement. One should ask how

many of those new border patrol agents have already been deployed since each of them have to spend several months in training before attaining that

eligibllity. Also, one must factor-in the retirements and resignations to get the true picture. Schumer seems to prefer usuing "generalities" rather

than "specifics" in his reports. He likes percentages over actual numbers. And he often omits important data. While promoting the idea that

Congress is serious about "border security," he noted a 27 percent increase in border arrests this year yet ignored "the impact the

declining economy has had on illegal border crossings" according to NumbersUSA. Hidden in all of his rhetoric is the false notion that the 2007

defeats of the amnesty bills then were "merely because our Southern border with Mexico was not secure." Now the mantra is that a decline in

arrests on that border is all the proof needed to renew a vigorous campaign to give amnesty to all of the illegal aliens already in the U. S. Only

HIspanic/Latino/Chicano advocates and sycophants, elitiist globalists, the National Chamber of Commerce, and politicial hacks seeking the Hispanic

vote would fall prey to such shallow thinking. Schumer must think that the rest of us are ignorant, gullible, or both. No independent thinking person

accepts the premise that "fixing one part of a 'comprehensive' problem' is all one need do to correct the problem."

Schumer's "credibility" is an issue which has been tested previously as well as in this case. Californians may well remember the

key role he played in the disastrous failure of the INDYMAC Bank. The Los Angeles Times reported that "federal regulators" blamed Schumer for

a "run on the bank." The Office of Thrift Supervision's press release said, "The OTS has determined...The immediate cause of the closing was a

deposit run that began and continued after the PUBLIC release of a June 26, 08, letter to the OTS and the FDIC from Senator Charles Schumer of

New York." That letter included statements about the bank's solvency and "viability" or chances of success. That initiated a "run on the bank" that lasted

for the next eleven business days. More than $ l.3 billion were withdrawn by depositors and the bank failed. John Reich, OTS Director, noted the

bank's "distressed" state but added, "I am troubled by any interference in the regulatory process." Schumer's response was simply to blame

the OTS for not doing its job by allowing "IndyMac's poor and loose lending practices." His intrusion was dishonorable, and the bank paid the price.

That incident clearly reveals his refusal to be held "accountable" for any disastrous thing he does. Too, there seems to be no limits to his

ambition or insolence. NewsMax reported Schumer plans to ask the Justice Department "to sue states that do not offer voter registration at public

assistance agencies and welfare offices." A form and assistance to complete it must be included. Schumer's complaint is about the "rogue behavior

of a large batch of states" whom he claims have complicated the simple process. One might wonder if the real problem is that workers at those

locations do not speak Spanish or "street language"? Of course, to any member of the "blame America first crowd," the workers must be the problem.
Four final questions. As their amnesty champion, how many "former illegal aliens" do you suppose Schumer will welcome to live

near him and his family in his neighborhood? And, how many "former illegal criminal aliens" do you suppose he will add to his senatorial staff, hire to

work odd jobs and share a meal at his home? Sound ridiculous. Why should Obama and his "amnesty point man" be isolated from the negative

actions they seek to legally impose on the rest of Americans just so they can gain and maintain their votes? The final question: has Schumer ever left his beltway ivory tower to go to the Southwestern Border to see the situation for himself? if so, why have we not heard of it? To the more than 75 percent of

of Americans NewsMax reports continue to oppose amnesty for illegal aliens, his vision for America is not "hope and change" but DOPE and DERANGE!

--
"We are less hurt by the contempt of fools than by the lukewarm approval of men of intelligence."

             ~ Luc de Clapiers de Vanvenargues ~

                  ** In GOD We Trust **