Counting

NYC officials are complaining  that the city has been under counted in the 2010 Census.  Their complaint goes like this:

1) We are a haven for illegal immigrants.

2) We have regulations that forbids city government agencies from asking people to prove their legal status.

3) We provide unlimited social services to all illegal aliens that live in New York City.

4) Because of 1-3, we are a magnet that naturally attracts more and more people.

5) When the Census counters knock on the doors of illegal aliens, they purposely decide not to answer.

6) As a result, the illegal aliens-- who violate federal law by entering the country and receive services provided by the U.S. taxpayer-- are under counted by the Census.

7) Because they are under counted, we will receive less money from the federal government, which we need desperately because we are a city that  by design is a magnet for illegal aliens.

And around and around we go.

We are doomed.

One Hospital, One Year

Parkland Memorial Hospital- does the name ring a bell? It's where John Kennedy died after his head was blown off by Oswald.

But nowadays, it's infamous for something else: the number of anchor babies that are born there every year.

The numbers are stunning, and because Parkland is a public hospital, it's all paid for by the taxpayer.

As far as maternity wards go, Parkland might as well be Grand Central Station, it's so busy. Every year approximately 16,000 babies are delivered there. And out of that 16,000, 70% are delivered by mothers who are illegal immigrants.

That comes to 11,200 babies a year.

That number is mind-numbing.

We are talking about just one hospital, in just one year.

This hospital is like Woodstock for illegal aliens, they come from near and far so that they can have a baby in the U.S. that-- just by being born in America-- will be granted full citizenship.

Think about that. Think about the crazy incentives we provide to illegal aliens: yes, you are breaking the law by being here, but if you happen to hatch a kid while breaking the law, that kid is a citizen.

The Anchor baby policy has to be rolled back. The new law should be called the "Fruit of the Poisonous Illegal Alien Act". It would be a law only one sentence long: "All children born on U.S. soil to illegal aliens are also illegal aliens."

And when President Christie signs it into law, I want him to open an INS Detention Center right next to the Maternity Ward at Parkland Public Hospital.

Please Be Quiet While They Beat The Shit Out Of One Another

I just read that there was a fight in the stands at the U.S. Open. They were fighting over which preschool has a higher acceptance rate into Ivy League colleges. How does it work when a fight breaks out in a tennis match? Do the fans have to be quiet while punches are thrown so they don't ruin the concentration of the brawlers? Are planes allowed to fly over the stadium while the fight is happening?

They asked the president if he had any opinion about the U.S. Open and he said, " it's never been more open. Fuc*k Arizona."

"F" K-Rod

So Francisco Rodriguez beats the shit out of the grandfather of his children in front of his kids and other kids. The Mets wanted to suspend him for a long stretch but the Player's Union stepped in and said beating up and old man is only worth a two game suspension.

And he served the suspension and is back on the team.

But there is another penalty available. And the Players Union has no jurisdiction on the penalty I am talking about.

It turns out this is not Rodriguez's first violent brush with the law. He has a criminal record in California and Venezuela. For violence.

Rodriguez is a guest in this country. He has a work visa. And that visa can be revoked if he is convicted of a violent crime.

If he is convicted of beating up the grandfather, he should be deported.

As far as I know, there is nothing in our Immigration laws that grants a waiver from deportation if you throw a baseball 90 miles per hr.

Send him back home, and let's see if Hugo Chavez will pay him $13 million to play baseball.

The Fix Was In

Remember in Goddfellas when Tommy went to the meeting thinking he was gonna get "made" but instead he got whacked?

How bout the 1988 Seoul, Korea Olympics, when Roy Jones Jr. beat his opponent (from South Korea) pillar to post but then lost a home-team decision to South Korean judges?

Or how bout the 2006 NBA playoff series between the Spurs-Suns, in which Baldman was a heavy investor, which had Tim Donaghy as a referee?

In each case the fix was in. The result was rigged before the process began.

And that's what happened with the 9-11 Health & Compensation bill. And no one knows that better than Anthony Weiner.

Here is what what happened:

As you know, most bills before Congress get passed by having a majority vote in favor of the bill. You get one vote more than the other side-and the bill passes and is sent to the Senate.

But the liberals in Congress did not use the "majority rules" process for this bill.

They set it up by requiring a super-majority: 2/3 of Congress was needed to pass the bill.

And they knew they could never get that.

So they brought a bill to a vote which they had no intention of passing.

Which is unspeakably cruel, when you consider that you are dealing with the health and welfare of the first responders.

The question is why? Why did they do it?

Here's why:

The Democrats put the interests of illegal aliens ahead of the 9/11 heroes.

Let me explain:

To pass a bill the "majority rules" way, you have to allow other members of Congress to attach amendments to the bill.

Because Republicans wanted to make sure that only the 9/11 heroes received the benefits of the bill, they wanted to add an amendment that said illegal aliens were not eligible to receive any benefits from the bill.

Not a dime.

Since there are citizenship and residency requirements to be a firefighter or policemen-it seems like a very reasonable provision-right?

Shouldn't every penny go to the heroes?

Isn't that the obligation of our elected officials-to make sure that the money goes ONLY to those who it is intended for?

Do you have any doubt that if left to their own devices, the radical libs in Congress would turn this bill into an open-ended entitlement program?

Even if you told them that it can only go to cops & firemen, libs like Pelosi & Weiner would argue: "The cop who was a 9/11 first responder used a nightstick that was made from a tree from Mexico. Therefore Mexico helped us on 9/11-because we were all Americans that day."

And that's how you end up with illegal aliens getting paid off on the 9/11 bill.

Think that's a stretch?

Don't you see how these people think?

Look at affirmative action.

It was designed to help those African-Americans who are the descendants of slavery or suffered from the Jim Crow laws in the American South-all admirable goals.

But once the liberals in Congress got it's hand on it-affirmative action was extended to groups that never suffered under slavery or Jim Crow.

You could be a millionaire immigrant from Zaire and qualify for affirmative action.

Or a Hispanic.

Neither suffered from slavery or Jim Crow.

Neither are supposed to qualify for affirmative action.

But they do-because of liberals in Congress and the Courts-they do.

So with liberals the exception not only becomes the rule-it overwhelms the rule.

And that's what Republicans were trying to stop here.

By putting in provisions that the money go to only 9/11 heroes-Republicans were doing the right thing here.

But liberals see illegal aliens as their core constituency group.

Think about the absurdity of that.

So they did not want to be put in the position that would make them vote on a bill that would put them on the record of choosing the heroes over the illegal aliens.

To the libs, that was too much to bear.

So they rigged the process-and did not allow any amendments.

But when you do so it requires a 2/3 super majority-which they knew they could NEVER get.

So they stood with the illegal aliens over the 9/11 heroes.

All that needed to happen to pass this bill was to add an amendment that said illegal immigrants could not qualify for the funds.

And never let anyone tell you any different.

Round One

So Judge Bolton issued a preliminary injunction blocking Arizona from implementing its Immigration law. Of course, that is not the last word, but some thoughts:

1) The decision has no basis in law. None. The Arizona law does not pre-empt federal law; it mirrors it. Exactly. Always remember that.

2) Telling Arizona that it cannot enforce its immigration laws because it would produce a strain/drain on the feds is tantamount to a judge saying you can't enforce murder/robbery or any other law because there are not enough jails and therefore it would jam up the judicial system. It's senseless.

3) Obama is the racial arsonist in chief. He poisoned the well early on by saying that "a Hispanic could be walking the down the street eating ice cream with his kid and the police could stop him and ask for his papers." He knew the Arizona law DOES NOT ALLOW that. He just wanted to demonize the good people of Arizona. Never forget that.

4) Bolton was appointed by Clinton. When you elect Clinton & Obama, you end up with Bolton & Sotomayor. In legal jargon, these activist judges are called "the fruit of the poisonous liberal." Ever the more reason to oppose Kagan-real hard. They had Dead Kennedy slander Bork. They had their minions trump up fraudulent sexual harassment charges against Clarence Thomas. And we have Lindsey Graham asking Kagan where she went to dinner for Christmas. Enough.

5) After all the demagoguery by the racial arsonist in the White House, the Justice Department, the left wing press, the ACLU, the libs in Congress, and the rest of that cabal, after all that, 75% of Americans support the Arizona law. That is 3 out of 4. There is strength in numbers, folks.

A Shorter Trip

After losing in the World Cup, the Mexican team decided to save time and money for all those involved so they flew directly to Arizona.

Border Wars

Obama calls Kyl a liar:

“The President didn’t say that and Senator Kyl knows it," White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer told ABC News. "There are more resources dedicated toward border security today than ever before, but, as the President has made clear, truly securing the border will require a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system.”

Some thoughts:

1) I never ever want to hear the word "comprehensive" again from this cabal again. They say it more often than Ed McMahon said "Here's Johnny." Enough.

2) Why does "truly securing the border" require anything else than securing the border? Can you imagine if Bloomberg said that he would refuse to enforce assault & battery laws until the New York passed his no smoking in public places law? One has NOTHING to do with the other. In the words of Phil Leotardo, "It's apples & bowling balls."

Obama to Kyl: Fuck The Border

Arizona Senator Jon Kyl is one of the few people we can trust in government. Listen to him tell how he met with Obama to talk about securing the border and Obama's response: I will not do so until I get Amnesty for illegal aliens. He knows the border security is horrendous, he knows it's his obligation to secure it-and he is intentionally not performing his job as commandeer in chief.

What a disgraceful man.

Quote of the Day

Charles Krauthammer on Obama refusing to enforce our immigration laws:

There is something very odd about this. The executive is required under the constitution to execute the laws. We have laws about immigration. The government, by its own acknowledgment, has failed 10 million times to enforce it. (Since there are that many illegals in the United States.)

And now it says: We'll only enforce it if we get comprehensive reform, i.e., we are not going to enforce existing law until we get a change in the law or new law.

[But] you can't hold an existing law hostage — [hold up] enforcement of it — to a legislative agenda you have. You have to enforce the law.
I do not understand how they can say this with a straight face in a constitutional democracy. You have to enforce the law.

A Disgraceful Move

"I'm the President of the United States; I don't endorse boycotts or not endorse boycotts. That's something that the private citizens can make a decision about." -Obama when asked about the boycott of Arizona


Did you ever think it would come to this? That the President of the United States would refuse to DENOUNCE an economic boycott of one of the states? He wants us to know that he is above it all? How can you be neutral when you are the President and people are calling for a boycott of a state?

Listen: it's a matter of public record that the Stoop is not fond of Obama-but I never thought he would stand by and give his tacit approval to an economic boycott that would hurt Americans. And that's what this is: approval. He even put the boycott into motion with his "walking while getting ice cream with the kids and the racist Arizona cops will come and shake you down" description of the Arizona law.

He thinks that because he is the President that he doesn't have to take a position? Think again. It's precisely because HE IS President that he must speak out against the boycott-and put down the ACORN playbook.


And what's this "I'm the President " talk all about? He has used this line several times recently: at West Point, at that fraudulent Health Care Summit with Congressional leaders, and at the press conference where he mentioned it above when talking about Arizona. Don't you think it's a sign of insecurity? If there is one man on earth that does not need to announce what he does for a living, it's the President of the United States.

Hey Obama-we know you are the President. You don't need to remind us. But you should do the right thing and the presidential thing: go down to Arizona and buy a cactus.

Come On In

News item:

Under pressure to take action, President Barack Obama on Tuesday ordered 1,200 National Guard troops to boost security along the U.S.-Mexico border, pre-empting Republican efforts to force a congressional vote to send the troops.

My guess is that the President will order these troops to hand out voter registration applications to all those who are crossing the border.

I mean, you could be an undocumented person crossing the border with your kids eating ice cream, and then the National Guard can ask you for identification? Sounds like Nazi Germany to me. And we have been lectured on how horrible it is to stop people and ask for proof of legal residence.

So the Stoop believes that the National Guard is there to escort people directly into the nearest voting booth.

The Road To Ruin

Things We Need to Prepare For If We Enforce Our Immigration Laws

A loyal Stoop reader (for the hell of it, let's call him "Robbie") received an email from his cousin-a liberal lawyer- on all of the "horrible" things that will happen if America begins enforcing its immigration laws. It was a list of the usual liberal bullshit: Americans are lazy, illegal aliens do jobs that Americans refuse to do, so be prepared to cut your own grass, paint your own house, etc. (Isn't it funny how people who devote their lives to lecturing others about the evils of stereotyping engage in the worst of stereotypes when they describe America & Americans?)

Anyway, Robbie had his own list of things that would happen if we did start to do the lawful thing and enforce our borders.

Here is his response to his cousin-the liberal lawyer:

You forgot to put these things on the list of what would happen if we enforced our immigration laws:

10)find new place to buy Kilos of Heroin
11)Force Teenagers to get a job
12)pay US Citizens 18$ an hr instead of paying illegals 8$ an Hr
13)pay 1.50 for a head of lettuce instead of 1.20
14) be prepared to wait an hr less in the emergency room

I could go on forever.

Did you hear about when ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) raided the Swift meat packing plant in Oklahoma?

400 illegal workers were taken away. The next day, they had 800 citizens applying for the Jobs.

When Mexican lawyers are allowed to argue cases in court for $10 bucks an hour, I think we
might be hearing a different tune from you.


Hasta La vista Chaz.
From Cousin Roberto

They Can Be Bought

Regarding the Suns-Lakers, can't they both lose? The Stoop is a Suns-free zone after the team came out in support of illegal aliens. But I can't root for the Lakers either after LA set up its boycott of Arizona.

The solution? Everyone who supports the enforcement of our immigration laws should send $10 dollars to JD Hayworth. Hayworth can take the untold millions and buy the Suns from the current owner. We'll have the team renamed the Arizona Wall, and of course, they will truly be America's team.

And will give Steve Hash his walking papers (he already has his rolling papers).

LA: Mexifornia

Did you see this news item?

Los Angeles on Wednesday became the largest city yet to boycott Arizona over its tough new law targeting illegal immigration in a move that likely will affect some $8 million in contracts with the state.

The way Los Angeles handles its finances, it will rip up its $8 million in contracts with Arizona and replace it with $16 million in contacts with Mexico City.

Let's do some geographical math: what do you get when you add California and Mexico?

Greece.

He Says It All

Michael Savage says everything that needs to be said about illegal immigration and the lunacy that our elected representatives represent the interests of illegal aliens instead of American citizens. How can that happen? According to Savage, it happened because we let it happen-and we are garbage for letting it happen. A classic rant:

They Could Win It....

With their victory last night, the Phoenix Suns took a commanding 3-0 lead in their playoff series against the San Antonio Spurs-which means they have a legitimate shot at winning the NBA championship. And if they do, just think about how awesome that victory parade will be in Mexico City.

Great Editorial Boards Think Alike

In its editorial yesterday, The Washington Times takes the same view of the Phoenix Suns as the Stoop did (but their analogy is much better):

Imagine thousands of people were sneaking into Phoenix Suns games without tickets. The management would quickly crack down on the "undocumented spectators." Security personnel would engage in "profiling" - singling out younger male fans wandering around without obvious seats. They would want to see some "papers" - ticket stubs. Those lacking documentation would be deported out of the arena, or, in some cases, arrested.

EDITORIAL: Amnesty for illegal Phoenix Suns fans - Washington Times

Here Comes The Anti-Immigrant Suns

The Phoenix Suns will wear "Los Suns" on their jerseys in Game 2 of the Western Conference semifinals on Wednesday night as a protest against the new Arizona immigration law.

The Stoop believes that the "Los Suns" jersey is an attempt by Suns to distract from the racist, anti-immigrant patterns and practices that the Suns have engaged in and continue to engage in-even in the game against the Spurs where they will wear the "Los Suns" jerseys.

Here is the irrefutable evidence:

First, the Suns have implemented a rule that is strictly enforced that is solely designed to severely limit the number of undocumented persons that can attend the game. That limit is the 20,000 people that the Suns have arbitrarily decided can enter the arena. How can we believe that the Suns support an open border with no restrictions on who enters the country when they themselves put severe restrictions on who can attend the historic Suns-Spurs playoff game? In a state with a population of 480,000 undocumented persons, how can the Suns deny so many hard-working persons of color access to the game? The numbers speak for themselves: the Suns have instituted a policy that will deny more than 99% of undocumented people from attending the game.

But the Suns discrimination does not stop there. An undocumented person attempting to enter the arena will be stopped by the Suns security force that will ask them to produce documentation (a ticket). Doesn't that sound like Nazi Germany? If they do not have the documentation, they will be denied admission. Let me get this straight: the Suns think that you don't have to produce papers to enter the country but they reserve the right to ask EVERY SINGLE person for proper documentation? We all know that undocumented persons rightly are very wary to be put in situations where they are asked to produce documentation. Yet, the Suns management has a zero tolerance policy which requires people to produce proof. Clearly, this is a system designed to severely limit the number of undocumented persons from attending a Suns game. The bottom line is that the Suns are violating the civil rights of people of color by asking them to produce a ticket. They don't want them to attend the game, and the whole "produce a ticket" thing is nothing more than a pretext designed to keep the crowd whiter than Steve Nash. Obviously the Suns have a practice against "ATTENDING THE GAME WHILE LATINO".

Another way the Suns are engaging in civil rights violations is by requiring that undocumented persons pay money for tickets that will gain them admission to the game. We all know that the wages of undocumented persons are much less when compared to American citizens. Yet, the Suns have instituted a practice of charging prices for a ticket that is well beyond the means of the average undocumented person. The prices are so high, the Suns might as well put a neon sign on the marquee: Amigo, Stay Home. Moreover, the Suns have intentionally made the tickets closest to the court the most expensive. Thus, even if a undocumented person can afford to attend the game, it is very likely that the only ticket he could afford will be way up in the rafters. It is the Suns way of putting undocumented persons on the back of the bus. This is economic racism, simple and plain.

Finally, by wearing the "Los Suns" jersey, the Suns are being intolerant of other cultures. In a league where 75% of the players are African-American, why have the Suns never wore a jersey that reflects African-American culture? There is no excuse for such behaviour.

So there we have it. By limiting the number of people who can attend the game, requiring documentation to enter the arena, and engaging in economic racism in pricing the tickets, the Suns have proven to be hostile to the rights of undocumented persons.

And having millionaire players wear a "Los Suns" jersey does nothing to change that.