Hermosa Beach Declares War on Free Markets. Mayor Declares War on Cars (Video)

                         


Ben Been is following Gary Gileno's skillset.

He is assembling the powerful statements of individual citizens who are challenging the Big Green Agenda in their own cities.

Hermosa Beach residents are waking up to how left-wing their city council has become. Carolyn Petty was the only sensible voice and mind on the city council, and even she got tired of butting heads with the eco-terrorists who want to run Hermosa Beach into the ground.

Citizens need to step up and fight against this anti-science bull--sh*t.

And they are rising up. We need more people doing what Gary Gileno and this man are doing. It's great to see that citizens of all backgrounds are roaring up and fighting back right here in the state  of California

No DACA! No Deal! (Video from Alex Jones)

Why would there be any discussion about DACA, the young illegals, or any other concerns?

What is going on in Washington DC?

Why would @realDonaldTrump grant amnesty to a million+ illegals who HATE HIM and those who voted for him? #NoAmnesty #EndDACA #DeportDACA 🇺🇲 pic.twitter.com/bR7fk7Ttnu

— Darren Espiritu 🇺🇲 (@SBDarren) September 16, 2017

I want to make sure that there is no amnesty. Giving amnesty or some kind of legal status to the "illegal kids" would trigger massive immigration from the same countries. Can we ever forget what happened in 2014? President Trump announced DACA in 2012. Then tens of thousands of young illegal aliens crowded the borders and surrendered themselves.

Breitbart Texas exposed the whole immigration fiasco, and the unintended consequences of all the "DREAMer" talk ended up cutting House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's career.

American citizens need to be the priority of the American government.

No more shame, no more guilt trips, and no more stalling.

No DACA! No amnesty! No racist USA!

What did InfoWars have to report?

I do agree with Alex Jones' assessment on the DACA issue versus all the other good that Trump has been doing.

It's only gotten better, by the way. The Trump Administration has cut off VISAs to countries which refuse to take back their illegal alien populations in our country. He has also ended contracts with illegal aliens in our military.

The wall is getting built--and that does include repairing the already extant fences.

But there should be no more amnesties whatsoever. I also believe that this country needs to curtail legal immigration and rethink the entire H-1B VISA program entirely.

Despite my concerns--and Jones' argument that right-wing immigration purists are just engaging in virtue signaling--I think that Trump has not stepped away from doing what is best.

After all, I went all over Congress over the past two days lobbying Congressmen to reject any DACA/amnesty deal.

Good News: CA Sanctuary State Bill SB 54 Faces More Delays. Find Out Why!

The Sacramento Bee finally reported on the growing reservations about SB 54.

After all, Governor Brown has to be the adult in the room--in a sense--since all the bloodshed following from allowing illegal aliens to stay in the state of California will fall on his shoulders.

Is that the kind of legacy that Brown wants to leave for the state of California? More dead Californians?

At this time, SB 54 has been re-referred to the Rules Committee.

What is going on? Are they waiting for the bill to get more momentum? Perhaps there is a growing revolt within the Assembly Democratic caucus that will kill this piece of legislation on the floor of the state assembly should it make it to the floor.

This is just plain madness.

Since when did elected officials get the idea that they can waive federal laws and do what they please? This is beyond shameful.

Here's what we have from the Sacramento Bee at this time:

Will Jerry Brown water down California’s ‘sanctuary state’ bill?

Immigrants suffered a life-altering blow earlier this week when President Donald Trump announced his decision to end a program that allowed young undocumented people to apply to live and work in the country without the fear of deportation.

Not immigrants, Taryn. Illegal aliens!

Now advocates for the undocumented community are bracing for a possible second shot Friday, this time from California’s political leaders.

People are not pieces of paper, either. They have moral agency, and they need to comply with our nation's immigration laws. Either they get with the program, or they go back to their home countries.

Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León introduced Senate Bill 54 in response to Trump’s campaign threats to target and deport undocumented immigrants. The measure essentially builds a wall between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement, with some exceptions.

Leon wants to build walls between law enforcement, but he opposes a wall along our southern border. What a hypocrite! Does he have walls for his home? Does he have a door? Does he lock it at night?

ADVERTISING

De León previously accepted amendments at the request of law enforcement to allow police to respond to federal immigration requests related to inmates who are serving time for or who have been previously convicted of a violent or serious felony. Prior changes also require Immigration and Customs Enforcement to be notified at least 60 days before the scheduled release date of an undocumented immigrant who is either serving time for or has previously been convicted of a violent or serious felony, among others.

The phrase about serious felonies is still dangerously misleading. There are number of felonies which will not be included in the crimes that will allow local and state law enforcement to release illegal aliens to ICE.

Of course, no misdemeanor will trigger the release of these criminal illegal aliens into ICE custody at all.

A new round of amendments expected today, reflecting negotiations between the Brown administration and the pro tem’s office, are stirring concerns. The California Sheriffs’ Association, major opponents of the measure, have also been in communication with the governor’s office.

The Sheriff's Association should throw down as hard as they can and oppose, oppose, oppose SB 54 in any or all of its forms.

This is just a disastrous piece of legislation which should never see the light of day ever again.

Gov. Jerry Brown has expressed reservations about SB 54, suggesting he wants further changes.

How about "Kill the bill"? That would be the perfect change!

Advocates feared the new amendments could drastically expand a list of prior offenses that exclude an immigrant from some the protections set forth in the measure, which the sheriffs have asked for, among other key changes.

The press is complicit in this criminal behavior. They continue to label men and women who have broken into this country as "immigrants." They are not immigrants. They are illegal aliens!

Advocates marched on the Capitol Thursday, urging lawmakers to stand their ground ahead of the anticipated amendments.

Chris Newman, legal director for the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, said this week that he and other advocates were “a little bit in the dark.”

Good! The Governor must be really scared. The truth is that this hedging is about so much more thatn concerns from law enforcement. US Attorney General Jeff Sessions has already cut grants to sanctuary jurisdictions. The United States Congress has already passed legislation to cut further federal funding to these locales, including housing and transportation grants.

California is already bankrupt. They need every federal dollar they can scrounge up just to get by ... and it's not looking too good that they will get any funding should the state of California insist on defying federal law.

“Gov. Brown runs his office a bit like the Vatican,” Newman said, comparing the Jesuit seminarian’s process and rituals to those of the Pope.

“Our biggest fear is that he will be bullied by the sheriffs into watering down the bill,” he said.

"Bullying"? Really? The real bullying is coming from Senator De Leon and his hackneyed Demo-rats who want to turn California into a third-world hellhole of complex lawlessness.

They are the bullies!

Senate Bill 54, as conceived, was standing on the shoulders of the Trust Act, according to former Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-San Francisco. Ammiano carried the Trust Act, an anti-deportation California law that was seen as a rebuke to the Obama administration and congressional inaction on immigration.

The TRUST Act has furthered mistrust among citizens against their government, and even among illegal aliens.

“If they are going to mess with it and water it down, I think that would be a very bad move,” said Ammiano in a phone interview.

DO IT GOVERNOR! DO IT!

On de León, Newman added, “Our hope and prayer will be that he uses all the political capital he now enjoys to get the best possible legislation signed into law.”

No on SB 54!

Spokespeople for De León and Brown declined to comment Thursday.

Immigration "Debate" in the Press: Still Slanted to the Left, Pro-Illegal, Pro-Amnesty

Immigration reform is the hot topic in the press--again.

It has been a hot topic for the last 30 years, especially with NAFTA and the surge of border crossings. All of this after the grand amnesty signed into law by Ronald Reagan, and one would think that all of these problems would be solved.

Sadly, the open borders lobbies--yes, there are more than one--are more interested in cheap labor, easy membership, and more votes for their pet causes.

Who ends up picking up the tab? You and me. A populist revolt has erupted throughout the country, however, and

What happens when both ends of the immigration debate talk it out? They challenge each other to create a reform bill.

Santos Aviles, who as a teenager immigrated illegally from El Salvador to the United States, has found it surprising that conservatives have been open to his suggestions on immigration reform.

Aviles, 44, a Redlands real estate investor, believes millions of unauthorized immigrants should be legalized but concessions must be made, he said.

No concessions. Sovereignty is not subject to concessions. Either we are a nation of laws, or we are not a nation of  laws.

What do you say to that?

This whole talk about "compromise" is unjust and insulting. This country already submitted to a compromise in 1987. The wall was not built, the border security never came through, and the 3 million who had entered this country illegally has now turned into 11 million, if not more. Vice Presidential candidate Tim Kaine declared that there are 16 million illegals in this country now!

This whole discussion is marred by the underlying--and false--premise that we United States citizens have to care about the plight of illegal aliens in our country.

My answer? No we do not. We do not have to make concessions to ensure that our government, whether federal or state, enforces our immigration laws.

E-Verify, the electronic employment-eligibility verification system, should be mandatory, he said. Law-abiding undocumented immigrants should be given temporary work permits, which would be revoked if they’re found guilty of any serious crime, he added. And, he said, the government should begin to legalize undocumented immigrants only after the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol has found a significant reduction in illegal border crossings.

E-Verify should be mandatory, period. No one should be working in the United States if they are not legal residents of the United States. That's pretty simple, I think. Does anyone find this political calculus confusing?

Aviles, who is now a U.S. citizen, presented his points in a closed Facebook discussion group called Talking Across Borders, which includes about 60 people from Southern and Northern California.

The point: Aviles is now a citizen. Next. What is the excuse for the millions of illegal aliens in our country who have not taken any steps to become legal residents? What is their excuse, indeed?

Roughly half of the group favors more immigration enforcement, about half opposes it, and a few represent the middle ground. Participants in the group challenged one another to come up with key components of an immigration-reform plan.

It’s part of a project spearheaded by Spaceship Media, a group whose aim is to use journalism to bridge divides and reduce polarization. During the monthlong discussion, which began in July, participants have suggested topics and questions for the group to address.

Media partners in the California Immigration Conversation Project include the Bay Area News Group, Southern California News Group and Univision, a Spanish-language TV network.

TALKING REFORM

The U.S. has not had seen major immigration reform since 1986 when Congress, under President Ronald Reagan, a Republican, enacted the Immigration Reform and Control Act. It granted legal status to millions of unauthorized immigrants.

Yes, except that it did not control the border and stop illegal immigration. The Democrats defunded the wall. What a terrible law. Reagan should not have signed it.

Cindy Hahamovitch, a University of Georgia professor who researches immigration and labor issues, said immigration reform has been long delayed because of decisions within the Republican Party.

Wrong! The Democratic Party, with Barack Obama as President and Congress at this disposal, including a filibuster-proof United States Senate, could have done something about immigration. Instead, they went after Cap and Trade, then Obamacare.

“That party has long represented business interests, including employers’ desire for access to foreign workers, but the GOP has also stirred up nativist sentiment in order to win elections,” Hahamovitch said via email. “As long as the GOP can’t get it together, and it controls Congress, we wait.”

"Nativist" sentiment? What does that mean? Racism? The desire to ensure only one ethnic background of Americans? What a lie. The truth is that there is nothing racist or nativist about enforcement of our nation's immigration laws. This is a simple and welcome expectation which every country has.

This is no debate, everyone. This is another attempt to paint men and women who want enforcement, not amnesty.

But, instead of just waiting, Jeffrey Thurnher, 55, of Pasadena asked fellow Facebook members to think of themselves as Congressional representatives, requesting that they present their own five- to 10-point immigration-reform proposal.

Who cares who these people are? How were they selected? I would like to see the total list of participants. What are their backgrounds? What are their affiliations?

“If we’re talking about trying to have some kind of dialogue about how we want to move immigration reform, and our politicians can’t do it, I thought, ‘Well, if you’re a politician, how would you put it out there so people could get on board?” Thurnher said.

Political aspirations are nonsensical. I do not want a politician's hand in this matter. We need statesmen who will do the right thing for the country, not just think about getting re-elected in the next term.

NEGOTIATING

Aviles’ six-point plan generated a lively discussion among Facebook group members.

Andrea Leon-Grossmann, an environmental organizer from Los Angeles, took issue with his temporary worker program because it wouldn’t allow workers to apply for residency. Thurnher thought Aviles’ plan was balanced.

How about we scrap it all together? I would like to see severe limitations to H-1B visas, too. The program has become so notoriously abused, and the misuse of the program--which has led to massive lay-offs of American workers, has generated so much public hostility. All of this is wrong.

American workers for American jobs. There is no reason, no excuse to import cheap labor.

“I’m going to propose something that can work for both sides,” Aviles said.

“I got a pretty decent response surprisingly from the people on the opposing side who are against illegal immigration,” Aviles said.

Men and women who oppose illegal immigration by-and-large will offer respectable responses, even if they vehemently disagree with a point of view offered from someone else.

But respectable disagreement does not mean that compromise is imminent, either.

“I’m having a harder time with people on my own side who are in favor of legalizing undocumented immigrants,” he added.

Exactly. The hard-line amnesty panderers want everything. Frankly, what they are agitating for is illegal, immoral, and unjust.

That's why they scream and yell for it.

MORE EMPATHY OR TOO RADICAL?

Leon-Grossmann, who immigrated to the U.S. from Mexico on a student visa, disagreed with various points in Aviles’ plan.

She said the plan, which doesn’t allow temporary workers to become legal residents, would create second-class citizens.

Temporary visas will always do that--if they are offered in a way which allows those same individuals to stay in the country definitely. 

Guest worker programs? That's a discussion we can have much later. For now, it's time to put the needs of Americans first.

“Companies know if you are being sponsored, they can overwork you. Because what are your options?” she said.

For this reason, in greater part, along with others, I adamantly opposes the DREAM Act, but want to see the RAISE Act brought before the President and signed into law. 

Leon-Grossmann came up with her own seven-point plan.

In her proposal, anyone from a country where the U.S. has conducted unfair trade practices, or where an American corporation has caused conflict, would be able to apply for permanent residency and for citizenship three years after that.

Define "unfair."

“If you do some damage in terms of the environment, in terms of politics ... you can’t just be abusive in other countries and not expect people to try to flee those circumstances,” she said.

Silliness. National immigration policies must support the best interests of the nation and its citizens. Immigration policy cannot be a feel good gesture for the world. Americanism, not globalism.

Work visas under her plan would be available for various professions and would not be tied to an employer. And workers would be able to apply for permanent residency. Family reunification also would be a priority.

“We’re supposed to care about family values in this country. We should really put that into context and into our law,” she said.

Wrong. Family values within a national governing structure, those are the values we need to champion.

To Leon-Grossmann, Aviles’ plan is not empathetic enough.

And to Aviles, Leon-Grossmann’s plan is not doable.

He said her plan is too “radical.”

“That just adds fuel to the fire. We’re not being realistic here,” he said.

MAKING COMPROMISES

Right away we have a problem. The next heading the article talks about compromises. There is no reason for any taxpaying citizen to compromise over the rule of law. How offensive is this! No citizen in any city should have to beg the local police force to protect them.

It is their job!

Thurnher said these are the type of conversations he was seeking when he challenged group members to craft their own plans.

“There has to be some kind of compromise,” Thurnher said. “That’s the only way we’re going to move forward.”

Wrong. Democrats have not compromised. They want illegal immigration, they want open borders, and they want to continue to politicize the situation of young illegal aliens brought into this country against their will.

Give me a break.

Thurnher has not finished his own plan, but the challenge has encouraged him to think about compromises he’d be willing to make.

He describes himself as a “guy who goes by the rules,” but he does not think the government is set up to deport millions of people who are here illegally. He’s pro-business and believes anyone from any country who is sponsored to work in the U.S. should be able to work here. He empathizes with young immigrants who were brought here as children.

Wrong again. The government can take charge and begin deportation proceedings against the hundreds of thousands of back-logged immigration cases.

Let's start with that. Enforce the E-Verify laws, stop the welfare, and watch the illegal aliens leave the country. Also, make sure that illegal aliens cannot enroll their children in public schools, and the government incentives which illegals have been seeking in the United States will be GONE.

What he’s unsure about is how to prioritize which immigrants should be granted a path toward citizenship.

"Illegal aliens" not "immigrants". The priority for pathways to citizenship are very simple: who has followed the law the entire time to enter into the United States? They are not only the priority, they are the only migrants who should receive attention and response.

“What I try to look at, if you want to come to a compromise, start with what you have in common and then build upon that,” Thurnher said.

Compromise is not open for debate.

The rule of law must be respected to its fullest, as much as possible.

Final Reflection

The local--or rather,  regional press--has never entertained real debate. A narrative of open borders, amnesty, and pandering over illegal aliens because of the younger generation of illegals, those brought int o the United States as children, who are in this country because of their parents.

No, it is not an act of love to violate our immigration laws. No, it is not right for elected officials to prioritize the needs of illegal aliens, regardless of the good works which they have done, ahead of the interests and basic legal rights of American citizens.