Gwinnett.talk

By AM

December 11, 2007 8:33 AM | Link to this

Lorraine Green is taking the correct first step, in this invasion of our sovereignty. The US judge needs to learn to follow the immigration policies on the books. You would think he could read the constitution and follow the law. We are being invaded by illegal lawbreakers and if left in the direction it is currently going our country will become cesspool of many cultures not assimilating. Not really wanting to be citizens of the USA, nor should they have the opportunity, since they broke the law. Whats next shall we change our flag? The name of our country? I wonder if the judge would OK that also?? We should all give the judge a call and let him know how we feel on this extremely important issue!

By Paul

December 11, 2007 10:02 AM | Link to this

Our federal government has failed us, and our county commissioner has stepped in to help. This is a bad thing - HOW?

By Ann Le

December 11, 2007 10:10 AM | Link to this

I think illegal immigrants do their job better than some legal people, so please let them work and don’t give them a hard time. Before I voted for you and all Republican but now I think I have to change and pick someone who does some thing good for everybody.

By a real insider

December 11, 2007 10:15 AM | Link to this

Reality check: The two groups brining these lawsuits against the county should be under I.C.E. investigation. They didn’t sue out of some interest in serving the finer points of the law. Start job site inspections (raids) on every project of every member involved in these associations (general contractors,contractors and sub-contractors). The real motives behind these lawsuits shall then be confirmed.

Hit dog always barks.

What else do you need Immigration and Customs Enforcement?

By Marge Wood

December 11, 2007 10:46 AM | Link to this

Lets get rid of these worthless employers who keep supporting this invasion. They claim that all of their workers are legal with proper documents when they know they are selling out the country for a few bucks. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that if a worker shows up and is dumber than rocks and can’t communicate with you that he may not be legal or worthy of employment. That goes for homeowners who don’t ask and insist that their contractors use American workers. They continue to enable the problem by just accepting the lowest bit. We all need to ask for contractors who use American workers. Forget the garbage workers with phony visas and forged documents. I don’t need to apologize for wanting people to work on my home who I can communicate with. Support American workers and close down these sham businesses that would not exist without their illegal work force.

By JanetP

December 11, 2007 12:45 PM | Link to this

If this idiot activist judge makes such an outrageous ruling the American people should rise up and demand a constitutional amendment that provides for ELECTION of federal judges. They are appointed for life and can render these extreme decisions that change our society against the wishes of the American people and never be held accountable.
We need a system that allows the grievances of the citizens to be heard at the ballot box.

By Bettybb

December 11, 2007 1:00 PM | Link to this

The judge is probably right, unfortunately. Immigration is a Federal power. But the Commissioner should have an ordinance that uses the power for State purpose, ie proper collection of state taxes, workers compensation which need valid SSN in order to be properly credit.

What is really going on here?

It is all moot. Amnesty is RACIST AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL. It would have to go the US Supreme Court.

AMNESTY IS RACIST, VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION, & THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE

The real agenda here is the creation of a North American Union. But rather than take it to the people, the “elite” are trying to hide it from Americans and “sneak it by us”.

No way Mexico can be part of the NAU until it becomes a first world country.

In Europe, Spain and Greece had to clean up their acts before they could enter. Otherwise the third world slum will turn the other countries into slums as the people flow like lava from the poor area to the rich area.

But the rich countries cannot subsidize all the poor folk - they have to create their own wealth. But the liberal media and our politicans are too dumb to understand that.

By Cherubim

December 11, 2007 1:29 PM | Link to this

In Mexico there is a very rich ruling class of elites. Mexican citizens should stop marching in the streets of the U.S., and go to their own government and demand the officials in their government stop being corrupt and stop taking money from the drug cartels. I fear that the ruling elites on both sides of the border are in a plot together: The ruling plutocracy on the Mexican side want to dump their poor into the U.S. so the U.S. Middle Class tax payers will take care of their education and health needs, while the ruling plutocracy on the U.S. side want to get slave labor and cheap ocean front property. By the way here is the forbes.com list of Mexican billionaires. Why won’t the Mexican citizens in the U.S go home and march in front of their streets: Mexican billionaires: Names Personal worth in billions Carlos Slim Helu Mexico 49 U.S.billion dollars (Carlos Helu has now surpassed Bill Gates, and is now offically the richest man in the world) Alberto Bailleres Mexico, 5.0 billion dollars Ricardo Salinas Pliego, 4.6 billion dollars Jeronimo Arango, 4.3 billion dollars Emilio Azcarraga Jean, 2.1 billion dollars Roberto Hernandez Ramirez 2.0 billion dollars Maria Asuncion Aramburuzabala family, 2.0 billion Isaac Saba Raffoul & family, 1.8 billion dollars Lorenzo Zambrano & family, 1.7 billion dollars Alfredo Harp Helu, 1.6 billion dollars

By No Name

December 11, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

If you quit hiring them, housing them, giving them checks, free medical and social security they will stop coming. America has outstretched arms for the illegals and the tax payers pay for it. Problem is that a lot of tax payers dont have even close to the same benefits. America first, send them home and build the fences. If then they want to come to the American dream, get a visa.

By howard

December 11, 2007 2:18 PM | Link to this

This problem would exist if it wasn’t for the carpetbaggers(companies that employ illegals). I don’t blame them for not wanting taxes dollars going to carpetbaggers. Since the carpetbaggers wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for a federal govt. not doing the job they were elected to do, it is up to the local government to pick up the torch.

By Adobbs Hitler

December 11, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

Great to the federal government starting to take charge against The American Neo-Nazis. We need these people to stay.

By Adobbs Hitler

December 11, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

Great to the federal government starting to take charge against The American Neo-Nazis. We need these people to stay.

By Adobbs Hitler

December 11, 2007 4:04 PM | Link to this

Great to the federal government starting to take charge against The American Neo-Nazis. We need these people to stay.

By AM

December 11, 2007 4:27 PM | Link to this

Thirteen comments - 9 against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION - 2 FOR IT. Read them for substance and reasoning. You will find the 2 FOR the illegals - one says were Americans are racists and the other the illegal do better jobs and the republican do not do good things for everyone (Clueless ie ILLEGALS). NOW THOSE ARE GREAT REASONS! Vote out all Amnesty candidates!

By Dr Coles

December 11, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this

Criminals did NOT build America; Citizens and LEGAL immigrants built it. Illegal Aliens and Immigration is NOT the same thing. 80% of the American people want an end to anarchy! This is NOT a Democrat, Republican, Independent issue. It’s an American Issue.

Illegal aliens are criminals, those who hire them are criminals and those who aid-and-abet them are criminals.

Illegal aliens in America have NO rights. We are required by law to arrest and prosecute, deport them. (Title 8 U.S. Code) To report illegal aliens call the DHS National Hotline 1 866 DHS 2ICE. (1-866-347-2523)

No, matter your political party affiliation, and setting aside your thoughts on issues. We all need to remember what it is to be an American Citizen. We need to make sure our elected representatives obey their Oath of Office and keep their Oath of Allegiance. See http://tinyurl.com/2znnvl Know whom you are voting for.

By SPQR_US

December 11, 2007 4:49 PM | Link to this

The obvious Kanagroo court of Cooper issues another traitorous ruling. Essentially U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper is in the employee of the government of Mexico and the Open Borders Lobby. He is an absurd spectacle. Would this Kangaroo stop the arrest of a Bank robber by local cops? Bank Robbery after all is a FEDERAL crime. Local municipalities have all sorts of laws against bank robbery.

When are you people going to stand up and demand your contry back? Tell this pompous bag of crap what you think about him: U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper:

(404) 656-3450 You’ll have to have the secretary stuff the message in his pouch as he’s too good to take calls directly from the people. Make sure you let them know how you feel about his betrayal of our country.

By Buzzm1

December 11, 2007 5:02 PM | Link to this

In FY 2004, the average low skill immigrant household received $30,160 in direct benefits, means-tested benefits, education, and population-based services from all levels of government. By contrast, low-skill immigrant households paid only $10,573 in taxes in FY 2004. A household’s net fiscal deficit equals the cost of benefits and services received minus taxes paid. The average low-skill household had a fiscal deficit of $19,588 (expenditures of $30,160 minus $10,573 in taxes).

At the state and local level, the average low skill immigrant household received $14,145 in benefits and services and paid only $5,309 in taxes. The average low skill immigrant households imposed a net fiscal burden on state and local government of $8,836 per year.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/tst052107a.cfm

By Brittanicus

December 11, 2007 5:15 PM | Link to this

Only Huckabee could be the man for the Oval Office. The other Presidential contenders do not have the backbone, to fight the (OBL) Open border lobby.

The estimated profit to U.S. corporations and businesses employing illegal aliens in 2005 which was more than $2.36 TRILLION dollars; The cost of immigration to the American taxpayer in 1997 was a NET (after subtracting taxes immigrants pay) $70 BILLION a year, [Professor Donald Huddle, Rice University]; the cost is MANY TIMES GREATER now in 2006! In 2006 the average cost of each Illegal Alien here is 11,000.00 per year for American Taxpayers!

American citizen population who are fed up with paying the tab for pariah employers.The annual cost to taxpayers is about $22 + billion a year according to Center for Immigration Studies and the tax burden will grow — because 15 million more immigrants are set to arrive by year 2017 according to their latest research.

Posted on: Dec 11, 2007 2:59 PM

Report Abuse

Brittanicus

More than 10 million immigrants have arrived since year 2000; it is estimated that nearly 6 million are illegal. All told, the group of immigrants now account for 38 million at the moment according to the White House’s own census bureau. The “SAVE ACT” that can alleviate much of the frustration and anger of the American citizen. Using of penalties from predator employers of heavy fines and confiscation of business profits, would pay exceedingly well for internal enforcement?

Emphasizing the principles of Attrition Through Enforcement. The SAVE Act (H.R. 4088) will broaden and enhance border security and interior enforcement. CONTACT YOUR (Public Servant) SENATOR OR CONGRESSMAN/WOMEN TO CO-SPONSOR THE “SAVE ACT.”

ITS IMPERATIVE TO TELL ALL FAMILY, RELATIVES & FELLOW WORKERS TO SPREAD THIS URGENT MESSAGE!

By Ruben

December 11, 2007 5:31 PM | Link to this

I See a lot of pro illegal Supporters Saying that we need to be fair to ILLEGAL Invaders but yet We did not ask them to come here they came because they did not want to build there own country they wanted to take from the A

By Ruben

December 11, 2007 5:35 PM | Link to this

I See a lot of pro illegal Supporters Saying that we need to be fair to ILLEGAL Invaders but yet We did not ask them to come here they came because they did not want to build there own country they wanted to take from the American people whom build this country from the ground up and don’t give me this bull crap slaves build this country we had slaves in THE SOUTH NOT THE NORTH !!! LOOK IT UP !!!

By AM

December 11, 2007 6:02 PM | Link to this

Brittanus; as of right now Ron Paul has the best and most effective approach in his platform against illegal immigration. I am happy to hear that Romeny and Huckabee both have NOW good plans also. I will vote on this single issue as everything else will not mean much if this invasion continues. As a matter of fact alot of other issues and problem stem from this invasion (ie: schools declining/ neighborhoods declining/depleating our resources, to name a few).If this goes unchecked much longer we all will be loitering on the corner with them and they will be living 6 to our house.

By Hombre Viejo

December 11, 2007 6:44 PM | Link to this

, U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper is not serving the interests of the American Citizen. Apparently the man has his own un-American activist agenda. He casts doubt on the legality of our defense efforts to end the illegal invasion. Since he isn’t helping Americans he should be removed.

By Bruce Wicox

December 11, 2007 9:32 PM | Link to this

“AMNESTY IS RACIST, VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTION, & THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE”, it ws legal when President Reagan did it in 1986, nothing has changed.

Does that mean we don’have to hire a Director at $150,000 to tell us how to operate an illegal program?

Is the county going to waste el mucho thousands fighting the Federal Govenment like Barrows County did?

Insead of sending our commissioners to the rereat on the mount, why not give them bus fare to a Cobb County commissioners meeting where they seem to enact ordinances that actually do something besides buy votes.

By ImWatching

December 11, 2007 11:18 PM | Link to this

How about this approach: It uses money against those who are suing the county.

The trade union that is suing to block Comissioner Green’s ordinance is GUCA and their web site is GUCA.COM.

Go to their member’s page and note the names of the businesses that belong to this organization that is suing us to FORCE US to use tax payer funding of illegals.

Now here comes the easy part: DON’T USE THESE COMPANIES! I note that Bill Heard (same as owns the automobile dealerships) is a key sponsor. Why not call his dealerships and tell them why you’ll never buy a car from them? Don’t hire any of the construction or contracting firms that belong to GUCA and let them know why.

Money is the only thing these guys understand. That’s why they want illegals in the first place. Let’s hit them in the wallet and watch them suffer like the rest of us are.

Financial punishment of those who harbor illegals: An idea that merits our attention.

By Bruce Wicox

December 11, 2007 11:55 PM | Link to this

Remember ImWatching the counties biggest contractor didn’t like the ordinance when it was first enacted, they “tweaked” it to please them, why not eveyone else?

By a real insider

December 12, 2007 1:59 AM | Link to this

@ImWatching

Add AGC to the lawsuit. They are not a trade union and their general contractor members have sub-contractors who do work illegal aliens on member projects.

Hit dog always barks.

By William Garland

December 12, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this

The judge’s reasoning is faulty; a good example of the judiciary substituting its judgment in a matter committed to the political branches. By enacting a law making unlawful entry into the US (8 U.S.C. 1325) a federal criminal offense, the federal government has already spoken and deemed the aliens presence in the US unlawful. The local or state law is not regulation of immigration but the denial of a benefit (working on a local public works project) to those whom federal law has already said are present in the country illegally. It is fully consistent with a first principle of justice: No one can be allowed to obtain a benefit or advantage out of wrongdoing. The federal government has no right to stop a state or local government’s decision that it does not want to do business with employers hiring law violators, for a state is free to conclude that having these persons on its public projects exposes it to a risk that a person who has already violated one criminal law may well violate another, a risk the state does not want to take. The failure to convict the person of the federal criminal violation, for whatever reason, does not prevent a state or local government’s considering the conduct in determining with whom it wioll do business. Just as the state may decline to hire these persons, it may decline to do business with those who do.

By William Garland

December 12, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this

The judge’s reasoning is faulty; a good example of the judiciary substituting its judgment in a matter committed to the political branches. By enacting a law making unlawful entry into the US (8 U.S.C. 1325) a federal criminal offense, the federal government has already spoken and deemed the aliens presence in the US unlawful. The local or state law is not regulation of immigration but the denial of a benefit (working on a local public works project) to those whom federal law has already said are present in the country illegally. It is fully consistent with a first principle of justice: No one can be allowed to obtain a benefit or advantage out of wrongdoing. The federal government has no right to stop a state or local government’s decision that it does not want to do business with employers hiring law violators, for a state is free to conclude that having these persons on its public projects exposes it to a risk that a person who has already violated one criminal law may well violate another, a risk the state does not want to take. The failure to convict the person of the federal criminal violation, for whatever reason, does not prevent a state or local government’s considering the conduct in determining with whom it wioll do business. Just as the state may decline to hire these persons, it may decline to do business with those who do.

By William Garland

December 12, 2007 2:09 PM | Link to this

The judge’s reasoning is faulty; a good example of the judiciary substituting its judgment in a matter committed to the political branches. By enacting a law making unlawful entry into the US (8 U.S.C. 1325) a federal criminal offense, the federal government has already spoken and deemed the aliens presence in the US unlawful. The local or state law is not regulation of immigration but the denial of a benefit (working on a local public works project) to those whom federal law has already said are present in the country illegally. It is fully consistent with a first principle of justice: No one can be allowed to obtain a benefit or advantage out of wrongdoing. The federal government has no right to stop a state or local government’s decision that it does not want to do business with employers hiring law violators, for a state is free to conclude that having these persons on its public projects exposes it to a risk that a person who has already violated one criminal law may well violate another, a risk the state does not want to take. The failure to convict the person of the federal criminal violation, for whatever reason, does not prevent a state or local government’s considering the conduct in determining with whom it wioll do business. Just as the state may decline to hire these persons, it may decline to do business with those who do.