The Obama administration has since 2009 issued roughly 5.5 million work permits to non-citizens beyond what Congress has authorized, according to recently-released documents that critics of U.S. policy say reveals a “shadow” or “parallel” immigration system stifling wages and taking jobs from Americans.
The information was obtained by the conservative-leaning Center for Immigration Studies through a Freedom of Information Act request and has prompted Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions to call for an investigation.
Congress authorized an estimated 5 million green cards and 3.5 million guest worker permits during the 2009-2014 period, in addition to the 5.5 million issued by administration action, a Senate staffer said Wednesday.
Jessica Vaughn, the study author and the center’s director of policy studies, argues the administration has discovered the power to issue work permits outside the limits set by Congress and that it has become “the vehicle” for Obama’s executive actions — in which he has offered deferred deportation to millions of people now in the country illegally.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/02/07/obama-administration-issues-55-million-work-permits-to-non-citizens-that/
As I have explained to you before, the Center for Immigration Studies is a hate group founded by a white nationalist.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Immigration_Studies#Criticism
Please stop citing hate groups founded by white nationalists.
“As I have explained to you before, the Center for Immigration Studies is a hate group founded by a white nationalist.” Chris
Chris, I’m sorry I can’t keep up with your infinitely long list of racist white nationalist news sources. We just report the news as accurately as possible at the time. Perhaps it would be easier to claim its untrue and then cite why you think so?
Feel free to delete the source you didn’t like and use the following, that I hope you will like better: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/7/obama-administration-issues-55m-work-permits-to-no/
I did my best to vet the Washington Times news media to be sure that nobody on their writer’s staff had any white nationalist so it would be met with your approval as a news source.
Curious…. do you go after any other people, perhaps like with oh, say….Black nationalist/militants? They do not even bother with the truth, they are all about hate and fear mongering. They have no problem going straight to a big whopper of a lie if it suits them. And seem to do so with impunity on a regular basis? I’m thinking of the Black Panthers, Louis Farrakhan, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton, Yet, I never hear any criticism from the group you tend to identify and relate too the most, so is it the truth you care about or something else? Lying to stir up trouble seems to be a far worse transgression than merely reporting the truth, but its odd that I never hear you complaining about that part…and I wonder why? I think I know…
Oh, here’s a tidbit for you…does any of this bother you?
Race Hustling… A Race Hustler is a term coined to describe those individuals of a particular race who project themselves into the media spotlight as spokespersons whenever there is an alleged racial incident which involves their race. The use of the word “Hustler”, included as a part of the term, also implies that these individuals exploit a racial situation to serve their own interests. Recently, this term has been used to describe the Reverends Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Syracuse University professor Boyce Watkins.
Race Hustlers are also referred to as race-baiters and victimization pimps. ( Have you ever openly criticized any of the race hustlers Chris? You are so sensitive about racism…just curious. )
Academic Marxism….
Racism, to a Marxist black supremacist, means anything that stands in opposition to the economic and political interests of black Americans. If the economic and political interests of black people are better served by robbing white people, then anyone who stands in the way of robbing white people is a racist. This is the entire philosophical base for affirmative action and reparations.[6]
Kamau Kambon At a panel called “Hurricane Katrina Media Coverage” held at Howard University Law School on October 14, 2005, which was broadcast in its entirety on C-SPAN, Kambon said:
“The only solution in my estimation is to exterminate white people.” (Have any words of criticism for this characters comments Chris?)
Black Supremacist Politicians
Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick at the 51st annual Fight for Freedom Fund Dinner, a major NAACP fundraiser that drew 10,000 people, was quoted as saying…
“On behalf of the city of Detroit, I say Bring it on! If you want a fight, there is one waiting for you right here. There will be affirmative action here today, There will be affirmative action here tomorrow and there will be affirmative action in our state forever.” ( How does this impact your high minded racial sensibilities Chris? Any criticism of this fool? )
Turns out they may also be eligible for retro tax credits of up to $24,000.
‘Amnesty Bonuses’: Illegals May Be Eligible for Earned Income Tax Credit:
“President Barack Obama’s executive action on immigration that temporarily allows up to 5 million illegal immigrants avoid deportation may have opened the door to giving them access to “amnesty bonuses.”
According to The Weekly Standard, a recent Homeland Security Committee hearing on immigration uncovered that illegal immigrants with deferred status may be eligible to receive the Earned Income Tax Credit and could be able to file an amended tax return for up to the last three tax years, possibly receiving as much as $24,000 in tax credits.
“The law makes a social security number a requirement of eligibility to receive the earned income credit,” Eileen O’Connor, a tax lawyer and former head of the tax division of the Justice Department, said at a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security Committee.
“But in 1999, the Chief Counsel’s office of the IRS ruled (in a non-binding, non-precedential way, but no one but the IRS pays attention to those disclaimers) that when a person receives a social security number, he can file amended returns to claim the credit for the three preceding years during which he did not.
“The logic is puzzling: the credit is not available if you don’t have a social security number, but you can receive it retroactively for years during which you did not qualify for it because you didn’t have a social security number.”
Nebraska GOP Sen. Ben Sasse and Wisconsin GOP Sen. Ron Johnson have written to the inspector general of the Treasury Department to get further confirmation about what benefits the law might afford to illegal immigrants, the Standard reported.”
Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.Newsmax.com/US/illegals-executive-amnesty-tax-breaks-IRS/2015/02/06/id/623192/#ixzz3RHTRwodt
Jack: “Feel free to delete the source you didn’t like and use the following, that I hope you will like better: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/7/obama-administration-issues-55m-work-permits-to-no/”
Jack…seriously? Did you even read your own link? The Washington Times piece cites the Center for Immigration Studies as its source too! How could the Times piece possibly be better when it cites the exact same white nationalist group as its source? Think it through, man.
It’s funny to me that after finding out that you have once again cited a source with white nationalist roots, you attempt to make ME the problem. As if it is irrational to ask for more legitimate sources and perfectly fine to link to white nationalists.
“Perhaps it would be easier to claim its untrue and then cite why you think so?”
No, that’s more difficult and time-consuming, and when the source is this bad, it’s unnecessary. I don’t have to go through every claim in Mein Kampf in order to find fault with it, or people who would cite it as factual; when a claim comes from a hate group, it’s best to err on the side of assuming it’s BS until proven otherwise.
I don’t know if the claims in this particular report are true. I do know that the CIS has a history of issuing extremely flawed reports based on bad methodology:
http://observatoriocolef.org/Noticia/659
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/15/inside-the-center-for-immigration-studies-the-immigration-false-fact-think-tank.html
http://immigrationimpact.com/2014/07/07/nativist-group-cherry-picks-data-to-show-false-decline-in-central-american-deportations/
Romney supporter Jennifer Rubin warned conservatives to distance themselves from this extremist group:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/01/08/daylight-on-immigration-reform/
You should take her advice.
“Curious…. do you go after any other people, perhaps like with oh, say….Black nationalist/militants?”
If I were on a blog where a black nationalist or militant was cited as a source for a statistic or other truth claim, then yes, I would critique the person citing them just as vigorously. But I honestly can’t remember a time when that has happened in my experience. Mainstream left-wing sites do not typically give legitimacy to groups like the New Black Panthers. This group is recognized by the SPLC as a hate group. Barack Obama publicly denounced Jeremiah Wright’s hateful comments. Yet here and on other mainstream right-wing sites, extremists like the CIS or the Family Research Council are often cited uncritically as experts. That is a problem.
I’ve said before I don’t like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, but I don’t believe they are on the same level as the NBPP or Jeremiah Wright. They are cynical self-promoters, but they’re not nearly as radical as the others you’re lumping them in with.
“Racism, to a Marxist black supremacist, means anything that stands in opposition to the economic and political interests of black Americans. If the economic and political interests of black people are better served by robbing white people, then anyone who stands in the way of robbing white people is a racist. This is the entire philosophical base for affirmative action and reparations.[6]”
Where did you get the above quotation from? I tried Googling it and only got one result, a website called “Metapedia.” I am on my school computer (we have the day off but I am getting my classroom cleaned up) and I could not access the site because it is marked as “Hate Speech.”
Are you citing a white supremacist site to back up your opinion AGAIN?
When I looked at the Wikipedia entry for “Metapedia” it says this in the description:
“Metapedia is a multilingual, far-right electronic encyclopedia which states that it focuses on culture, art, science, philosophy and politics. It contains white nationalist, white supremacist, Neo-Nazi,[2] and far-right points of view.[3][4][5]”
Good God, Jack! Where are you getting your information?
I should also point out that the statement you quoted is also offensive because Martin Luther King, Jr. himself supported reparations and affirmative action. That did not make him a “black supremacist” or a “Marxist” as your white supremacist site suggests.
““The only solution in my estimation is to exterminate white people.” (Have any words of criticism for this characters comments Chris?)”
Of course that’s wrong! The guy sounds like a complete nutjob. But I have never heard a mainstream liberal cite this guy as a source. I’ve never even heard of him. So bringing him up to deflect your blog’s mistake in citing a white supremacist source (and then defending that with yet another white supremacist source) is entirely besides the point. “Look, a black guy said something crazy one time!” is not a persuasive response to criticism of this blog’s habit of routinely citing white supremacists and other assorted nutters. Especially when you usually cite them in order to support the larger argument that minorities have it too easy in this country.
Last week Tina cited a black minister telling black people to clean up their act and “get over” racism. It turned out that this same black minister has praised slavery and told black people that they should be grateful for being brought to America as slaves! When I asked her if she had any comment on this guy’s extreme remarks she said nothing. The article is still up.
Why are you asking me to comment on the remarks of random black people I have never cited nor even heard of, while the bloggers here say nothing about the extremism of their own sources when asked? How is that at all reasonable or fair?