Finally: Illegal who lived in church for a year to avoid deportation arrested; Update: Deported
posted at 7:16 pm on August 19, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
A year and a day after my first post about her, after various sick-making child-exploitation photo ops involving her young son at the White House and before the Mexican legislature, Chertoff finally decided to do his job. Sort of:
An immigration activist who sought refuge inside a Chicago church for a year was arrested in Los Angeles this afternoon after taking her campaign on the road.
Elvira Arellano was arrested about 4:15 p.m. Chicago time by law-enforcement officials after leaving Our Lady Queen of Angels Church in downtown Los Angeles, said Emma Lozano, an adviser who was there during the arrest.
After talking to news media inside the church, Arellano and her supporters got into their van to head north to San Jose, where she was scheduled to speak at another church, Lozano said. Moments after they entered the van, an unmarked vehicle stopped them.
The driver of Arellano’s van, Roberto Lopez, poked his head out because he wanted to see why they were being blocked. Several other unmarked vehicles surrounded their van.
Why do I say “sort of”? Because the church she’s been living in for the past year is in Chicago, not L.A. She left the building a few days ago for the coast, ostensibly to attend an immigration rally there (which she ended up not attending), and the feds evidently just … let her go, without interfering. As it turns out, she’d already lined up a new church to give her sanctuary in L.A. (“sanctuary” being an archaic common law concept that doesn’t exist under American law and would be grossly unconstitutional if it did, of course). I wonder if the feds got caught flat-footed on her new plans and swooped in when they did to avoid having to arrest her inside the church.
Exit question: Why now? Exit answer, as provided by Kaus: To make sure the ballyhooed immigration crackdown gets the worst press possible.
Update: Amazing how efficiently the immigration system works when it wants to. Your anti-assimilationist quote of the day:
“From the time I took sanctuary the possibility has existed that they arrest me in the place and time they want,” she said in Spanish. “I only have two choices. I either go to my country, Mexico, or stay and keep fighting. I decided to stay and fight.”
Meanwhile, an interesting backlash among illegals:
By Sunday afternoon, [Spanish-language radio host Javier] Salas was already on radio talking about the arrest, and callers were weighing in too.
Callers were “saying that she was traveling to Los Angeles and around the United States, she would provoke [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and the anti-immigrant groups,” he said. “There would be checkpoints everywhere.”
Salas questioned why it appeared that mainstream media make Arellano out to be the face of undocumented immigrants, while her actions have exacerbated the animosity toward them.
“She wasn’t down to earth,” he said, adding that Arellano acted entitled to rights “when there’s thousands and thousands of people in the same situation.”
“She made everything worse,” Salas said. “She’s not a face of the immigrants. My family without papers, she doesn’t represent them.”
She’s in Tijuana now so it’ll be easy to slip back in, but once she does the media’s going to cover it and that’s not the type of case study on border enforcement that the “undocumented community” is keen to have. I’m sure most of them are begging her to stay put, but her son’s here and she wanted to attend a vigil in D.C. on September 12 so who knows if she’ll listen?
What a moment if she turns up there next month to laugh in Chertoff’s face. Viva el crackdown!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
BWAHAHAHA!!!
Theworldisnotenough on August 19, 2007 at 7:18 PM
Her eyebrows looks fabulous.
SouthernGent on August 19, 2007 at 7:21 PM
That’s what I was thinking Southern Gent. Kind of ironic. Like the Rutgers Basketball team showing up to the post Imus new conference with perms so fresh they look like they came directly from the salon…
Theworldisnotenough on August 19, 2007 at 7:22 PM
Bad press? The majority of the country is pumping their fists. I know a certain city in New Jersey, where the Black community is not shedding a single tear for her.
*If Republicans were smart they would be engaging the Black community in the immigration debate.
Theworldisnotenough on August 19, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Heh. Thanks for posting this. I mentioned this yesterday and was hoping she’d be picked up.
JammieWearingFool on August 19, 2007 at 7:28 PM
Uh, in LA, we’ve had latino gangs targeting black people for years and nothing is done about it.
Blake on August 19, 2007 at 7:29 PM
Good
heroyalwhyness on August 19, 2007 at 7:29 PM
Always been a headscratcher…why aren’t blacks and LEGAL low-wage immigrants more anti-illegal immigration? Hurts them the most.
I can’t believe I voted for Bush. Twice. I might sit this one out. I don’t trust anyone anymore, Fred included. Been stabbed in the back too many times.
RW Wacko on August 19, 2007 at 7:30 PM
Big deal, she was arrested. She’ll be back in a couple of months. I hope she keeps coming back every three months to show everyone how ridiculously porous the border is.
The more the MSM keeps selling these sob stories, the more regular (non-right-wing blog readers) I hear discussing immigration and becoming royally pissed off about the situation. So I say keep the LA Times and NY Times immigration puke pieces coming. Enrage the common man and woman some more, please.
RW Wacko on August 19, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Actually deporting her would be even more satisfying. Arresting those responsible for harboring her -and fining them an equal amount to what she cost taxpayers over the years, as well as forfeiting tax exempt status for any religious institution playing politics. . . would serve justice. It’s time to fix the financial burden of illegal immigrants on the law breakers and their abettors.
heroyalwhyness on August 19, 2007 at 7:38 PM
Bush and Co. are still making a total joke out of the notion of US sovereignty. It is pathetic, and worthy of impeachment in my book.
Bush cannot be out of office soon enough for me. And, quite frankly, if the guy had any decency, he would not have run for re-election in 2004 (which he almost lost, even though it was a clear lock). I would have voted for ANYONE to the right of Bush in ‘04.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 7:38 PM
Please don’t sit it out. We have a 5/4 SCOTUS now. The next 8 year president can get a 6/3 or even a 7/2 court. THIS presidency is the biggy. Once rational judges control the court we can reverse the years of insanity with lib/Dhem judges. To have a Dhem in the White House now is unthinkable.
Mojave Mark on August 19, 2007 at 7:38 PM
I’ve never understood this one. Deport her and let her take her son with her if she doesn’t want to be torn from his side. Or what Geraldo refferred to as “torn from her nursing breast”.
ctmom on August 19, 2007 at 7:39 PM
I have to say it but I wouldn’t let my 8 year old son sleep in a church.
Blake on August 19, 2007 at 7:40 PM
Apparently, that’s okay in Illinois. Remember the woman who was breastfeeding her seven year old and going on television to talk about it? I wonder what his classmates said to him. lol!
Blake on August 19, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Do I really have to point out who he was running against?
I don’t care how angry or disappointed you may be with President Bush. The alternative was a President Gore or, unbelievably, a President John Kerry.
My first Republican Presidential vote was in 2004, and although I’m not exactly as happy with Dubya as I was in 2002-2003 … it’s still (and will always be) the proudest vote of my life.
If only because it helped make President John F. “Genghis Khan Swift Boat Fake Purple Hearts” Kerry never ever happen.
Don’t sit it out. If 537 Floridians had sat out in 2000, who knows where we might be.
I’d have more respect for you if you decided Hillary was really a better candidate and voted for her. “Sitting it out” because you’re peeved – when you obviously have strong concerns about modern neo-liberalism – is just not an option. If you’re really mad – work in the primaries. Support your guy there. Or find one to support. Or run your own damn self.
But I say again: President John Kerry. Say it with me. President John Kerry. First Lady Theresa Heinz-Kerry. The President and First Lady of the United States of America, John and Theresa Heinz-Kerry.
Just the thought makes me feel nauseous and queasy.
At this point in time, there is simply no scenario in which “sitting it out” is the better option. None.
Professor Blather on August 19, 2007 at 7:47 PM
It would be the opposite of justice. You would be applying law that didn’t exist at the time.
And yeah, let’s punish the church. They’re our enemy.
Christoph on August 19, 2007 at 7:55 PM
*If Republicans were smart they would be engaging the Black community in the immigration debate.
Theworldisnotenough on August 19, 2007 at 7:25 PM
Please explain why Republicans need to engage the “black community” (whatever that is) in anything? They still need engaging? “Vote for us and we’ll give you a treat”? Give me a break. It’s 2007. If you want to engage anyone, engage Americans. You pledge to protect our country, keep government to a minimum, keep taxes low, and follow our constitution to the letter. How about the “black community” engaging America for a change…
JWS on August 19, 2007 at 7:56 PM
Hear, hear.
RW Wacko, I fear your nickname has more than a grain of truth.
Christoph on August 19, 2007 at 7:57 PM
Well, it’s about time…
eanax on August 19, 2007 at 7:58 PM
Gee, I don’t see the left being so outraged at the churches who gave this woman ’sanctuary’. Isn’t imposing their religious beliefs over secular law what the left is always railing about when the warn of the coming theocracy?
It’s not the hypocrisy that bothers me as much as the outright stupidity.
Drew on August 19, 2007 at 7:58 PM
Being from the Chicago area, it’s about time. You never hear about that little cuban boy anymore (see I can’t even remember his name), and this one also will fade away away away. Her and her type of brood are the kind that ran me and my family out of our home. They actually did me a favor, after seeing what they are, and what they are capable of, you will never feel the same about these illegal ones again. I’m getting the popcorn ready for the 9 oclock news and then the 10 oclock.. Best news I’ve heard in awhile.
Legions on August 19, 2007 at 8:05 PM
Kaus has been great about the immigration issue. His humor helped me get through the amnesty-shamnesty. I’d call him paranoid, but I feel the same way! :-)
INC on August 19, 2007 at 8:10 PM
She’ll never be deported. Think of what the press would make of her American citizen son being torn from her arms as she’s dragged, screaming, onto the bus or airplane.
On second thought, she just might be deported – think of the PR victory for Shamnesty that would be! I wouldn’t put it past Bush or Chertoff to do it.
Laura on August 19, 2007 at 8:17 PM
Jeez, I should have read the Kaus article before I commented:
and
Laura on August 19, 2007 at 8:20 PM
The kid goes with her. If she abandons him here to be raised by the state as an orphan, she is an unfit mother. So, what does she love most: Her little drama as an activist? Or, her son?
Blake on August 19, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Other parents would take their children with them. Most have; I’ve read the sob stories about American children forced to live in mud huts in Mexico. But she’ll leave him, because
she loves America so much and wants the best for her precious sonit’ll provide the maximum PR victory for her side, and what’s a mother’s love compared to that? Kaus pegged it – things are going to get really ugly – Bush’s parting slap against his base. They’ve as much as admitted it:Laura on August 19, 2007 at 8:29 PM
She and her child will be safe in Mexico.
Zorro on August 19, 2007 at 8:36 PM
Next time she should try a mosque.
profitsbeard on August 19, 2007 at 8:37 PM
Where is this boy’s father? Why doesn’t he take him? Oh maybe this is another case of we should all give special treatment to someone who is a single mother right?…such noble people…
Why don’t we allow ten poeple waiting to enter this country legally a jump to the front of the line if they will agree to take one of the jobs “Americans won’t do” for a year or two? Wouldn’t that give others the incentive to go through the legal process instead of diregarding our laws and coming in when they want. How about the companies that are crying about not having the labor take these legal immigrants and oh yeah provide housing and health care so the rest of us don’t get handed the bill(the very expensive bill). I’m so sick of all this…
ot: Does anyone else have a problem getting on to Robert Spencer’s Blogging the Qu’ran? I can’t ever post a comment to it on the Sunday it appears…
CCRWM on August 19, 2007 at 8:39 PM
Its about time, but Im holding off the celebration when we finally secure our borders so they can’t just come back over it again… and again… and again… etc…
TFM
ThinkingForMyself on August 19, 2007 at 8:40 PM
Church as a “sanctuary”. Like AP says, no such thing. In this case it was sure treated that way. Just walk in the unlocked door and apply the cuffs. At least they finally did the right thing. Let’s see if they follow through and send her back home. If she chooses not to take her son, that will speak volumes about her character.
Now, let’s deny “sanctuary” cities federal funding so we can all work together to send the dangerous illegals back home, (after an appropriate jail sentence) and build a fence to keep ‘em out!
This is such a winning issue for the Republicans. Hopefully there will be no disappointment this time around. Perhaps (do I dare think it?) public opinion is such that the current administration might start enforcing the law???
Ordinary1 on August 19, 2007 at 8:43 PM
Now where are those beloved government agencies that showed up at the Branch Davidian’s compound to incarcerate Americans when you need them?
BowHuntingTexas on August 19, 2007 at 8:44 PM
People are drawing the wrong conclusions about illegal immigration from the disaster that is George W. I feel have a good tract record about politicians. The only time George W did anything that surprised me was his making that area of Hawaii into wildlife refuge, and even that I understood as an effort to not look like the “kill everything now” president. So please don’t be too cynical about the current Republican candidates regarding immigration. A Republican President elected in 2008–barring it being the disaster that is Brownback or Paul–will pursue a sensible immigration policy. The other candidates have internalized the lessons of the 2007 immigration debate.
Let’s not forget that in 1999 what George W’s immigration stance was known to those so small number of us who listen.
I suppose I should point out that a President Barrack Hussein is the worst case scenario on immigration. Pray for Hilary instead.
thuja on August 19, 2007 at 8:45 PM
CCRWM,
Even single US mothers don’t get this kind of special treatment such as this women has received. Many of our single mothers are just making it to survive.
The father of this boy is probably either already Mexico or working the jobs “Americans refuse to do“. But she isn’t going to point him out or he’d be deported, or living next to her in the Church.
/end sarcasm
TFM
ThinkingForMyself on August 19, 2007 at 8:46 PM
You do that then you are setting up a real ugly issue.
The Vatican is its own country
As a result any church under the Vatican is somewhat like an “embassy”. (The best analogy I can come up with).
Does anyone not remember Manuel Noriega
Where did he flee too? Why did we not invade then?
If the US government starts ignoring the claims of a little country in Rome, and busting into churches to arrest someone that the church is harboring on their own free will. Just think of the “crap”storm that will follow.
Hell the ACLU may even get involved with that one. (Wishful thinking I know).
That is why they detained her when she was not in a church.
Disclaimer: I was brought up a Catholic, however I do not consider myself a Catholic any longer. That being said I do have a brother, currently in Rome, studying to become a priest.
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 8:50 PM
Well at least the fed’s weren’t kicking the door down,
weapons drawn,like Janet Reno did in getting the little
kid from Cuba,which they then deported him.
At least we won,t have to worry about headlines,
Like Republican’s storm trooping the church,immigrant’s
assaulted at gun point.
That way the libs would be denied the spin pitting the
religious right with the rest of the Republicans.
canopfor on August 19, 2007 at 8:51 PM
Um… American citizen criminal Mom’s get arrested too. That’s what happens to criminals. Best way to avoid arrest? Hmmm. Don’t break the law, maybe? Just a thought.
Ordinary1 on August 19, 2007 at 8:51 PM
Who cares? They are tax exempt and need to follow a strict set of rules to maintain that status.
Being a church is no entitlement to break the law with impunity. And when a CHURCH impedes on US sovereignty I don’t think there is any question on which side the US government ought to come down.
They didn’t want to detain her at all. They wanted to make her a citizen, which is why this joke is going on.
Anyone who thinks that Bush will enforce US sovereignty is just hoping beyond hope. Bush is an internationalist who doesn’t believe in the concept of the nation-state.
He only made good appointments to the SCOTUS because of his religious leanings, not because he’s conservative in any way.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 8:55 PM
Ok I’ll risk getting flamed but… why are we so happy this woman was arrested and deported? Now granted if she committed some kind of beyond coming here illegally fine, good riddance. No way should that psycho in Newark been allowed to roam free let alone in this country. If this lady didnt do anything else though I have a hard time cheering it, it’s more like a necessary evil.
If I were in a crappy country and I had no legal way in I’m pretty sure I’d try to sneak in here. That’s just an honest truth.
Dash on August 19, 2007 at 8:56 PM
But, if you had any decency, you would try to adapt to the country saving you, not try to turn it into the country you just ran away from. That sort of action is just obnoxious. Then, if you marched in the streets demanding all of this …
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 9:01 PM
Then why did we not invade a “nation with-in a nation” when we were after Noriega?
Why do we not invade embassies in DC?
As much as a disagree with the church, since they are a sovereign nation the US cannot “just go after them” like you are suggesting.
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 9:03 PM
I do not think that Catholic Churches are all legally considered embassies.
JayHaw Phrenzie on August 19, 2007 at 9:06 PM
Alway’s been a headscratcher:
RW.Wacko on August 19,2007 at7:30PM.
Voting twice for Bush,been back stabbed too many times,
might sit this one out.
Please tell me that Republicans aren’t going to play this
game again,especially with the stakes this high.
Hillary and the War on Terror.
Why and the world would it be better,to have the DEMOCRATS
in power than REPUBLICANS.
canopfor on August 19, 2007 at 9:07 PM
How does Mexico treat it’s illegal immigrants? If your going to break immigration law, the U.S. is a good place to do it. Even when we are enforcing the law, we are civilized about it. (Not saying Mexico isn’t. I really don’t know what their policies are. Something tells me they aren’t quite so forgiving.)
Ordinary1 on August 19, 2007 at 9:09 PM
Neither do I but as I said in my first post….
(The best analogy I can come up with).
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 9:09 PM
I guess so, I just think it’s pretty sad so many want to come here so badly because wherever they’re from is a mess. Dont you all thank God or fate or at least your parents that you were born here? I do.
Demanding is obnoxious. Coming here illegally is a crime. It’s wrong and obviously we cant let everyone in and cant fix the whole world but I still have a problem cheering it unless the person just slaps their unwilling hosts face by committing further crime. It’s a sad situation.
Dash on August 19, 2007 at 9:11 PM
Radical concept, enforcement of US immigration laws. About time. Think Washington finally got the message after the absolute failure of the Shamnesty bill?
katieanne on August 19, 2007 at 9:18 PM
Expect the worst possible backlash.
I predict the crying on TV by a parade of anti America activists will be endless.
Chertie will most likely exploit this poor besotted womans (and her ‘American’ sons) plight to the max, it’s the only reason he actually would have Elvira arrested.
Speakup on August 19, 2007 at 9:19 PM
What I want to know is when is Geraldodo going to go on a hunger strike.
Day 7: Has Geraldodo eaten anything yet?
Day 14: Geraldodo, if you haven’t eaten anything yet, how come it looks like you are gaining weight?
Day 21: Geraldodo, is that a full-meal-deal burrito that you are hiding behind your back?
MB4 on August 19, 2007 at 9:23 PM
Don’t know. It was another nation and another Bush. I thought the rock music, or heavy metal or whatever, was pathetic. I found it to be quite embarassing.
Embassies are not churches and churches are not embassies.
The Vatican has an embassy.
I don’t see it that way. Produce the citizenship papers for those nationals …
I would strip islam of its classification as a religion and all mosques of protection for religious sites and I would strip all other churches of their tax-exempt status and religious status for working to undermine the sovereignty of the US.
That’s how I see things. Harboring fugitives is pretty cut and dried.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 9:23 PM
This church was doing exactly what Rudiani did for his years as America’s Mayor.
Send a message to the outlaw churches:
1. Remove 501c3 status from the non-profit harboring illegal aliens.
2. Get one of the churches (just one) in federal court under RICO. That will scare the majority of the “brave” pastors and pastorettes.
Then, let’s send a message to the GOP Rockefeller wing:
Don’t vote for America’s Sanctuary City Mayor Rudiani. His position on illegal aliens is clearly anti-American.
Rudiani (credit to Laura Ingraham) is America’s FLIPPER candidate for president on this issue. Now, Rudiani says he can seal the border. A couple of years ago he said that it was an impossible dream.
Rudiani is not to be trusted to…
-appoint a pro-life constructionist jurist
-enforce immigration law
-protect 2nd amendment rights, namely gun rights.
-stop dressing in drag
saved on August 19, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Then they’ll be shocked again when most Americans cheer.
TheBigOldDog on August 19, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Anybody catch the black activist Friday night telling it like it is about illegal immigration? It was refreshing. He basically said the illegals are undercutting African Americans and forcing them out of jobs by undercutting their wages. He called it a form of slavery. The illegals have threatened his life and even spat in his face. He had Susan Estrich completely flummoxed. It was beautiful!
TheBigOldDog on August 19, 2007 at 9:31 PM
Finally, her year-long nightmare is over. She can go home now.
Dork B. on August 19, 2007 at 9:31 PM
Let me correct myself, the Vatican doesn’t have an “embassy”, but it does have diplomatic representation in the US.
Personally, I don’t consider it a “country”.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 9:32 PM
And you would do that under what article of the US Constitution exactly?
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 9:33 PM
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 9:33 PM
Constitution? Constitution!?!
Hell’s bells we’re talking Islam here.
billy on August 19, 2007 at 9:36 PM
Stripping islam of its classification as a religion (and reclassifying it as a political ideology, like Communism)? I don’t think I need the Constitution for that. Islam demands the power of state. It is not a religion in the Western sense of the word. It is a political ideology with a mythology. Nothing more.
Taking away the tax-exempt status of churches that harbor fugitives and otherwise intentionally harm US sovereignty? I don’t think I need the Constitution for that one, either. If they were embassies, their personnel would be ejected from the US. That’s okay with me, too.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 9:37 PM
He called it a form of slavery. The illegals have threatened his life and even spat in his face. He had Susan Estrich completely flummoxed. It was beautiful!
TheBigOldDog on August 19, 2007 at 9:31 PM
Most of the left does not know what to do when you call the employers of illegals plantation owners and the illegals that they are employing serfs (aka slavery lite) and the Mexican ruling class ethnic cleansers.
MB4 on August 19, 2007 at 9:39 PM
Gee nice to know that based on your definition of a “country” every other country, in the western world, disagrees with you.
Only question I have is what does that say about you?
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 9:39 PM
Christoph – kindly re-read my comment. I have no problem with ‘the church’ as you imply. My problem is specifically with ‘Adalberto United Methodist Church in Chicago’, a storefront entity with a political agenda, masquerading as a church. No religious entity should be above the law.
*****
Following her arrest at the airport, Ms. Arellano pled guilty to a charge of using a false Social Security number.
heroyalwhyness on August 19, 2007 at 9:41 PM
I said “personally” to express the fact that I understand that my opinion differs. I was telling you my feelings about it.
What does it say about me?
That I can express my thoughts in an honest fashion. There are many “countries” that most people would not consider to be real countries. I believe a man-made one is for sale right now.
The way that we enforce (hah!) laws against illegal aliens in the US is dragging us down the path of “not being a real country”, even though we are huge.
I don’t see why my personal opinion of the Vatican as a real country offended you.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 9:45 PM
This is good news, but I’m not gonna get too excited. These types don’t go away quietly, and the next couple of weeks ought to be a real roller coaster. Of course it will start with “Geraldo the Open Borders Shill” and will soon involve the ACLU and other anti-American groups.
csdeven on August 19, 2007 at 9:47 PM
She and her child will be safe in Mexico.
Zorro on August 19, 2007 at 8:36 PM
Zorro: You recognize that famous sign?
Old Man: Si senior. It is a Two.
Zorro: That is a Z!!!
Old Man: But in the school, that is how they teach my granddaughter to draw a Two.
Zorro: *I* say it is a *Z* – For El Zorro!!!
Esteban: To guards: Remember, he is cunning, he is crafty. He’s not just going to walk in here and say ‘Here I am!’
Zorro: Here I am!!!
Apesadumbrado, apenas pienso en mi pelicula preferida, “Zorro, la Lamina Gay” cada vez que veo tu muestra.
MB4 on August 19, 2007 at 9:50 PM
Ya,, where’s Ms. Reno when you really need her.?
Legions on August 19, 2007 at 9:54 PM
You are really telling on yourself instead of berating me. Yet I feel generous this evening, so much so that humoring the imbecile is within my ability.
en·gage /ɛnˈgeɪdʒ/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[en-geyj] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -gaged, -gag·ing.
–verb (used with object)
1. to occupy the attention or efforts of (a person or persons): He engaged her in conversation.
Republicans need to have a conversation with the Black community instead of cowering whenever the likes of Al Sharpton raise their voice. The Democrats are able to spout ridiculous rhetoric that plays on cultural prejudices for it validity rather than campaigning on an actual platform. Democrats do this because they can, because Republicans let them. With the Black vote split 90/10 and Democrats absolutely dependent on the Black vote to maintain their political standing don’t you think it might be important to engage (Read converse) with them? Yeah me too…
There you go exposing your own prejudices based on streotypes, good job!
Are kidding me a$$hole? Does the name Crispus Attucks ring a bell? How about the Tuskeegee airmen, Frederick Douglas, Phyllis Wheatley, Benjamin O. Davis Sr., Thurgood Marshall? Hmm any of those names sound familiar?
JWS, shut your ignorant, bigoted mouth…
Theworldisnotenough on August 19, 2007 at 9:56 PM
Ya,, where’s Ms. Reno when you really need her.?
Legions on August 19, 2007 at 9:54 PM
Didn’t she become a pro wrestler with the WWF?
MB4 on August 19, 2007 at 9:58 PM
Just like every other citizen who is pissed off about illegal immigration, angry black citizens do not get any legitimate press coverage.
Just like every other citizen who is pissed off about illegal immigration, blacks who oppose open borders are labeled as racist and xenophobic. The same can be said of the many Latinos who also oppose illegal immigration. Remember, the left has even less love for those it perceives to be sellouts. So you will never get a true snapshot of minority politics from the mainstream media. Never.
The ONLY time that mainstream reporters show any indignation towards blacks as a group is if that group displays any conservative values or ideals. There are many conservative pro-choice, pro-American, literate, law-abiding capitalists who happen to be black. 8-15% of blacks consider themselves conservative and/or Republican depending on what stats you read.
A lot of lefty pundits throw around the figure of 10% when talking about the proportion of gays to straight Americans. Well I think that figure is dubiously high. But, imagine if a more realistic 10%, black Republicans, got the same attention or had the same political clout.
Just about every political seat held by an African-American in Southern California has been challenged by a Latino. That is because the demographic shift allows politicians to play on people’s frustrations. Blacks coalesce around their dwindling power base and Latinos organize in opposition to the now angry blacks.
I don’t care if your ancestry is from Asia, Africa or Mexico. Once you set foot into this country your allegiance must be in line with our laws. Othewise you are un-American. I make no apologies for my language.
Ugh!
Disjointed rant out.
The Race Card on August 19, 2007 at 10:13 PM
If “the church” is going to break laws, they need to be taxed…to death.
SouthernGent on August 19, 2007 at 10:15 PM
Oh damn. Look what happened before I hit submit. This could be interesting.
…grabbing kettle corn and a Sam Adams light.
The Race Card on August 19, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Nice dodge however you never answered my real question… About Rome being a “real country.”
.
Real countries vs all of western civiliation. Somehow you don’t seam to have a leg to stand on.
Your personal opinion did not offend me, however when you go against history, and think your view is what matters, I am certainly going to call you on it.
I made my views well known with my disclaimer, I disagree with the church, with their statements about illegal immigration, however I can not change history and pretend that the church does not have any powers in this mess. The best course of action is to work around the church’s position rather then confronting it head on.
If you suggest removing the tax free status of the Roman Catholic Church you are opening up a “crap”storm”. First the Roman Catholic Church, then what? The Pagans, Baptists? etc…
Do you get it now?
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 10:30 PM
Skinheads rallying with SOS and Minutemen.
Rule #1: Link anti illegals immigration activists with neo-nazis or other racists.
The Race Card on August 19, 2007 at 10:32 PM
Amen brother! I was just fixin’ to say the same thing.
Halleluiah and praise little baby 9 pound and 3 oz Jesus!
By breaking the laws of the very government that protects it’s tax free status it no longer meets the criteria of a church but that of a crime syndicate.
And that is that!
TheSitRep on August 19, 2007 at 10:33 PM
The day is coming, but it will be hate speech laws that will bring it about. Kinda hard to read the parts of the Bible that say homosexuality, fornication, and adultery are wrong when the hate laws will be on the books. Still, Pastors will, because it’s God’s Word.
Having said that, I can’t imagine any church that I’ve attended trying to protect an illegal immigrant who apparently broke several laws herself. That IS wrong, and the Feds should’ve walked right in there and arrested her. If a Pastor, or anyone else, interferes then you can arrest them too.
Ordinary1 on August 19, 2007 at 10:45 PM
Heh – it’s not an unusual sentiment. Right before the May Day rallies, Cobb said –
Laura on August 19, 2007 at 10:50 PM
Personally I think she had the kid for the sole purpose of producing an anchor baby.
I also think this is all a set stage. Jerkoff is setting this up for a big media event where the meanie ICE agents literally tear the child from her arms as she is hauled off to be deported — all on HDTV. Followed by a background story of the poor, inhuman conditions of the ICE detention cells….
In the end Jerkoff and Bush (and congress) will show pity and award her citizenship or at least a green card.
And is that a preview button I see?
CrazyFool on August 19, 2007 at 10:52 PM
They don’t have to tear him out of her arms, deport them together. He can go or he can stay. She, however, goes. If she wants to hold to him, they both go.
Blake on August 19, 2007 at 10:55 PM
That’s what I was thinking. I wonder who did them?
Jaibones on August 19, 2007 at 10:56 PM
No it isn’t.
Christoph on August 19, 2007 at 10:58 PM
That was not what I was suggesting. Perhaps I was not specific enough. I want that particular church to lose its tax-exempt status – not every Catholic church. Now, if the Vatican came out with something encouraging their churches to break US law, then I would come down on all Catholic churches (with the same applying to others), but that is not the case. The case, here, is the one particular church that housed her, and all the people who did it.
As to the Vatican as a country, it has less than 600 citizens. I don’t consider that enough to be a “country” but maybe you do.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Dude, I am so sick of idiotic bullshit like this. You voted for him because he ran against a total whackjob (Gore), and then a total leftist douchebag (Kerry). Hopefully you were at least aware of Bush’s political portfolio and listened to his stated intentions, rather than just look at the “R”, but if you did, maybe you wouldn’t be whining now.
He has been as advertised.
Vote in the primary and get involved with the candidate that most represents your views, or stfu. Even the Democrats understand this.
Jaibones on August 19, 2007 at 10:59 PM
Please this has already been addressed above, about 2 hours ago.
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 11:01 PM
right on bro.
see: Elian Gonzalez
Nothin’ like a little precedence.
TheSitRep on August 19, 2007 at 11:02 PM
Great news!!! Just got home and read of the arrest.
I take full credit, as I had sent emails to my (Repub.) Senator and my Congressman at noon today (PDT). (Quick response, huh??) I demanded that they get ICE/DHS/Chertoff to explain why they haven’t arrested an illegal alien who was a FELON (re-entry after deportation – Michelle explained this to me some time ago) working inside commercial airliners for God’s sake!!!!!! And Soc. Sec. number falsification is a $250,000 fine, or ID theft is ANOTHER felony.
You’re welcome.
fred5678 on August 19, 2007 at 11:03 PM
I believe that would be a Bic razor and a Maybelline eyebrow pencil. Less than $10 at any drugstore. I can’t imagine what would motivate someone to have such a harsh look, but it does seem to be the fashion for Latinas around here.
Laura on August 19, 2007 at 11:06 PM
Hooray for DHS! I don’t give a crud what their motivations were; it was long past time to arrest and deport this woman. She was making a mockery of Jerkoff, but then, who isn’t.
I actually have myself convinced that she will have a distinctly more difficult time getting in this country again. Wait…that’s just stupid isn’t it?
Jaibones on August 19, 2007 at 11:08 PM
Dude it is not up to you to define what makes a country.
Plain and simple end of story.
The Vatican is a country despite your view.
By your suggestion I don’t think Luxembourg is a country.
F15Mech on August 19, 2007 at 11:09 PM
I think the pure definition of State is:
A geographical area that has:
1. A population
2. A ruling Government body
3. Geographically defined borders
4. Ability and willingness to defend its borders
So it does meet those criteria.
But introspectively I think we are failing ourselves at #4.
TheSitRep on August 19, 2007 at 11:17 PM
‘Beautiful’ Muqtada al-Sadr, the “I’ll show you” who’s in charge here immigration activist, and ’serene’ and ‘courageous’ Hillary, all one on top of the other. I’m having a hard time choosing my favorite person-of-the-day.
Why doesn’t this woman go an fight as hard to build her own country? It needs someone with her endurance and determination. On second thought she’s been sitting in that church doing nothing for a loooong time.
OT – thanks for the preview button HA!!!
Entelechy on August 19, 2007 at 11:19 PM
You’re killing me. You called Catholic churches “embassies” and now you’re giving me a hard time for saying that a place with less than 600 citizens is a joke of a “country”?
Yeah, Luxembourg’s a country, too … until some gang of 10 year olds decides to invade it. I mean, really. Everyone I know laughed the first time they heard the description of Luxembourg as a “country”. I still laugh, and I’m not the only one. Anyone with a brain knows that Luxembourg is only a country so long as others decide it is. It has no power to defend itself in any way. You can call a tent a “house” and put a mailbox on it, but it really isn’t a house.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 11:25 PM
Geraldo to the rescue cried Santuary! Santuary!Happy ending
sonnyspats1 on August 19, 2007 at 11:26 PM
My bet is on her leaving him here, she let the poor little guy be exposed all around the country to provide for hers and others self serving purposes so she doesn’t seem all that attached to him.
The shock may come when depending on who raises him after being abandoned; he may not to anxious to import her and maybe his by that time siblings when he turns 18.
Speakup on August 19, 2007 at 11:27 PM
Do you really think that the Vatican could defend itself?
I don’t. 600 people couldn’t even fight off a group of angry girl scouts.
But thank you for putting it succinctly, SitRep. That was my exact point about real countries (that can defend themselves) and joke countries.
progressoverpeace on August 19, 2007 at 11:28 PM
Luxembourg — Population: 480,222 (July 2007 Est.)
Vatican City — Population: 821 (2007 Est.)
I think that it makes more sense to consider the Vatican to be a sovereign territory rather than a country.
MB4 on August 19, 2007 at 11:33 PM
The Race Card on August 19, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Man I really LOVE Sam Adams, specially their black lager, but Sam Adams light??? Thats a beer for girls …
doriangrey on August 19, 2007 at 11:35 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »