Right On The Right

Michelle Malkin has been chronicling Absolut Vodka's reconquista ad campaign. According to the company, they are only running the ad in Mexico, and it's designed to cater to a Mexican audience. Michelle has also updated us on her readers responding to the ridiculous ad. Check out the ad:

We've made some strides in fighting illegal immigration recently. One of the major developments is that the fight for enforcement has gone local. Now, we're seeing the beginning of the implementation of the virtual fence. See-Dubya blogs about it on Hot Air:

Chertoff said the virtual fence already is working.

On Feb. 13, an officer in a Tucson command center — 70 miles from the border — noticed a group of about 100 people gathered at the border. The officer notified agents on the ground and in the air. Border Patrol caught 38 of the 100 people who tried to cross illegally, and the others went back into Mexico, said a Homeland Security official who spoke on condition of anonymity because he isn’t authorized to speak publicly.

See-Dubya points out that a 38% success rate isn't exactly the best. He also points out that they need an actual fence in addition to security cameras and flyovers from drones. If the White House needs a real fence, so does our border.

"Clear the damn backlogs first!" has become a rallying cry for people that want to see our immigration system reformed and an end to the "immigrate now, ask questions later" system we currently employ. To attempt to clear these backlogs, the Department of Homeland Security is taking an approach that will add to our security problem, not improve it:

In a major policy shift aimed at reducing a ballooning immigration backlog, the Homeland Security Department is preparing to grant permanent residency to tens of thousands of applicants before the FBI completes a required background check.

Those eligible are immigrants whose fingerprints have cleared the FBI database of criminal convictions and arrests, but whose names have not yet cleared the FBI’s criminal or intelligence files after six months of waiting.

The immigrants who are granted permanent status, more commonly known as getting their green cards, will be expected eventually to clear the FBI’s name check. If they don’t, their legal status will be revoked and they’ll be deported.

They'll be deported? As Bryan points out, that'd be possible if we could find them. Our system is broken because Secretary Chertoff and the other bureaucrats in the Department of Homeland Security are worried about efficiency more than security, and public image more than public defense. Clear the backlogs, but not like this!

The federal government has constantly refused to secure the border, but that doesn't mean we can't fight illegal immigration. Border security is going local according to Michelle Malkin. The good news:

After groups challenging state and local laws cracking down on illegal immigration won a series of high-profile legal victories last year, the tide has shifted as federal judges recently handed down several equally significant decisions upholding those laws.

On Thursday, a federal judge in Arizona ruled against a lawsuit by construction contractors and immigrant organizations who sought to halt a state law that went into effect on Jan. 1 imposing severe penalties on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. The judge, Neil V. Wake of Federal District Court, methodically rejected all of the contractors’ arguments that the Arizona law invaded legal territory belonging exclusively to the federal government.

On Jan. 31, a federal judge in Missouri, E. Richard Webber, issued a similarly broad and even more forcefully worded decision in favor of an ordinance aimed at employers of illegal immigrants adopted by Valley Park, Mo., a city on the outskirts of St. Louis.

And, in an even more sweeping ruling in December, a judge in Oklahoma, James H. Payne, threw out a lawsuit against a state statute enacted last year requiring state contractors to verify new employees’ immigration status. Judge Payne said the immigrants should not be able to bring their claims to court because they were living in the country in violation of the law.

These rulings were a sharp change of tack from a decision in July by a federal judge in Pennsylvania who struck down ordinances adopted by the City of Hazleton barring local employers from hiring illegal immigrants and local landlords from renting to them. In that case, the judge, James M. Munley of Federal District Court, found that the Hazleton laws not only interfered with federal law, but also violated the due process rights of employers and landlords, and illegal immigrants as well.

The article goes on to talk about how the recent decisions may encourage more cities and states to enforce immigration law locally. The federal government may continue to subjugate our sovereignty, but that doesn't mean the fight is over. We can continue opposing amnesty nationally, and pushing for enforcement locally. The fight is far from over.

If we put up a candidate that opposed amnesty and stood for strong borders, we'd have a very distinct advantage on the issue over the various Democrats. Because we're on the brink of putting up John McCain, we're on the brink of losing that advantage. The scary thing is, the Democrats know it. Here's Barack Obama:

Sen. Barack Obama: "I think they will pounce on any issue that has to do with immigration. But as I said, my position has been very similar to John McCain's, who's maybe the likely Republican nominee. And if he wants to try to parse out this one issue of driver's licenses, an issue of public safety, my response is that we have to solve the overall problem."

Ignoring for a moment the sheer horror you should feel when you realize a liberal Democrat is touting the fact he agrees with our presumptive nominee, think about the advantage this takes away. Big states like Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico may all go Democrat (ok, maybe not Arizona), because we're choosing a pro-amnesty nominee. We're losing our platform, and our principles.