W. Turcotte: President's stance treasonous

I would like to urge everyone (Democrats and Republicans) who are concerned about the future of this country to check out Senate bill 1070 and read sections C, D, E and F. You will see that the whole situation with illegal immigration, that is, what the states of New Mexico and Arizona are trying to do, is the law of this country. It is not profiling, or whatever else anyone chooses to call it.

President Barack Obama and his followers, siding with the Mexican government, are breaking that law.

The New Mexico governor has had his life threatened by a Mexican drug cartel and Obama is defending Mexico.

A president, standing in favor of a foreign government against his own country that he has sworn to defend against all criminals, foreign and domestic, is dealing in treason.

Wilma Turcotte, Auburn

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.

Advertisement

Comments

 's picture

Incoherent

Senate Bill 1070 - Is this US Senate, Maine Senate, Arizone Senate. Let's assume Arizona. The Sections in that bill are numbered 1, 2, 3 not A, B, C. So we have no way of knowing what Wilma is referring to. If it is Arizona Senate Bill and we assume she means the law that was adopted from the Senate Bill can not be the "law of this country". No state law can be the "law of the country". And this law was found unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court so it isn't even the law of Arizona.
For President Obama to work with a foreign government to solve a common problem is called diplomacy not Treason.
The President did not swear to defend the country from criminals. He swore as all Presidents do to defend it against "enemies".
I think we have descended here into the mindless hatred of the President based not on what he does but who he is.

 's picture

Incoherent

Well Jonathan it is Arizona Senate which seems to be the only ones with backbone enough to do something about illegal aliens and if you would take the time to scroll down further on the page of Senate bill 1070 and check number 16 you would find C, D, E and F. I never said it wasn't an Arizona Law but if they can adopt it then so can other states. Maybe you would like to try living on that border. Its alot easier for states/people that aren't dealing directly with that problem to turn a blind eye or have their head where they can't see or hear. People coming into this country destroying it by taking all they can from it and not contribute or honor it are enemies. The President is working with foreign governments like the little chat he had in Russia about waiting til after the election and he would be able to do more and "never turning his back on the Muslims" with their barbaric laws is enough to scare anyone to death. How many other closed door deals are there going on? A big problem is that no one with this countries best interests want the job or would get elected either as they would get eaten alive with all the crooks in Washington. Those that give large amounts of money to campaigns want something in return or they wouldn't be giving. More people not working, more people in jail, Americans are becoming the minority, more murders and violence in what was good neigborhoods, your children aren't safe on the streets. How is that working for you Jonathan? Brush up on your Sharia Law and better learn some Spanish. I am not in favor of Romney either.

 's picture

We don't need backbone; we need brains

Thank you for finally providing an accurate reference for what you were writing about.
1. Yes, Arizona adopted an immigration law SB 1070 - they violated the Constitution to do it. Since when is breaking the law, the responsible things for a government to do?
2. I do live in a border state. Or don't you recognize our long border with Canada oh sorry I forgot they are white..
3. "People coming into this country destroying it...Where do you get this nonsense. I can agree that the drug cartels fit that description, but the typical illegal immigrant is the same hard working, religious, honorable person who built this country and fought its war and gave their lives to defend this country from its enemies.
4. I should hope the President is working with other countries - That's his JOB. You know the Constitution, foreign affairs is one of the President's most important jobs. Taking out of context what the President says while popular with the Romney campaign and the wacko right dishonors this country. Where you got your weird quote I can't say - Glen Beck probably. But the President has done nothing to support Islam in this country and the barbaric laws of Muslim fundamentalists are no different than the barbaric laws that Christian fundamentalists propose down to and including the public stoning of women who committ adultery.
5. How many closed door deals are there - many, many, many. As there have been in every administration from George Washington on. I suppose you would oppose the Dutch loans that purchased arms for Washington's army had you had the opportunity. They were completely secret from the public.
6. "Americans are becoming a minority." You mean in America white people are becoming a minority. Good. The sooner the better. You comment is despicable.
7. Sharia Law is not, can not, and never will be adopted in this country as it violates the US Constitution and the views of 95% of the country. Its a paranoid delusion to believe it is anything other.

I know you aren't in favor of Romney. Too bad you aren't in favor of America either.

 's picture

America

For you to even say that American white people becoming a minority is a good thing just shows how low this country is sinking and being run by sicko's like you. You can say white people but if I say black people thats racists. You are more Un-American then any person that I can even think of thank goodness. I am in favor of America which is slowly going away because of people like you.

 's picture

Thank you; I don't normally get that kind of tribute in this

blog.
Your America is going away which is probably why you are so easily frightened by hate mongers like Beck. Mine, the America of the Constitution, the America that Madison, Hamilton, and Jay created and Marshall established is just about to have its day. Its an America where ideals not color, hard work not birth, honesty not wealth determine one's destiny.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

He also swore to uphold the

He also swore to uphold the U.S. Constitution; not circumvent it.

 's picture

Just for the other readers

And he always has upheld the constitution

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Of course; how could anyone

Of course; how could anyone see it any other way?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Twelve Million (+)

Twelve Million (+) undocumented immigrants is failure to enforce in my opinion. Neither democrats nor republicans are interested in enforcing our immigration laws as evident by the number of undocumented immigrants in this country.

Call it treason, call it failure, this behavior should not be tolerated.

Calling it diplomacy is just defending your love of government. The average Joe on the street knows Mexico does not have the resources to address the migration issue. The U.S. has to addres it.

Labor issues should be managed through established worker programs.

 's picture

twelve million

Twelve million was the same estimate given in 2008, they didn't all show up on Obama's watch. And never mind the fact that deportations are at an all time high.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

All valid points, but it

All valid points, but it still does not mean government did not drop the ball or is not continuing to drop the ball.

1. Why not make e-verify mandatory.
2. Why not check residency status during school admission and refer those who cannot prove citizenship or legal residency over to the INS.
3. I have someone using my SSN. Government knows the company that is reporting tax on my SSN. Why can’t INS (or allow local law enforcement) to investigate who is using my SSN. The government will not do anything – frustrating!

Any number of steps could have been taken since the 1980’s to limit the incentive to migrate illegally to this country.
I would ask you to look at the bigger picture and not make it an R or D thing or use this opportunity for Obama parrot talking points.

Lastly, we keep using the 12M number because no one knows what the number really is, some think tanks estimate up to 20M. Since 12M is still a very large number and indicative of failure, it still resonates.

Get off your talking points and love of Obama to look at the big picture.

 's picture

Why not some priorities.

1. Agree. Should be part of every employment process (so you do support big government, intrusive government interferrence in business). As long has it is coupled with vigorous enforcement of the laws prohibiting the employment of illegal immigrants. Coyottes are the invention of business. They recruit and transport illegal immigrants to the US and are paid primarily by their employers, US businesses, and they also are paid by the immigrant. Companies that hire coyottes directly or indirectly and then employee the illegal immigrants coyottes provide whether they use or don't use e-verify should be heavily fined up to an including revocation of their charter if convicted multiple times and management that participates in the violations should be fined upto and including barred for life from holding a similiar position in any other business.
2. Why. The fundamental principle is the government (you know the thing you hate) must prove that you are here illegally. You are not required and never should be reguired to prove that you are here legally. Its the difference between big intrusive government and small government that is limited by a citizen's fundamental constitutional rights.
3. Local government does have the authority to investigate. They bring identify theft prosecutions constantly and they are in the news. The INS has no reason to investigate until some other investigation indicates that the identity theft is related to illegal immigrants. Every use of an SSN number is not by an illegal immigrant. Its probably not investigated because its a low priority (not murder, robbery, or rape. If its not on the FBI report its probably not top of the chief's list of priorities. Should be.

I never use talking points. My views are my own. Organization types chringe everytime I hit the keyboard. I look at the big picture through the Constitution because that does limited what can be done.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

2. Government does not have

2. Government does not have the resources. School registration should require applicants to produce a birth certificate and school should be required to cross check with vital records from the issuing state - simple.

3. Local law enforcement will not investigate because using another person’s SSN is not fraud and there is no financial loss to me. Now if they use my SSN to, say, get a loan, and then that is a different story.

 's picture

Let's turn this around

Why is illegal, undocumented immigration a problem?

Technically, if you don't control your borders you can't really be a nation,an integrated whole

Increased size of labor pool reduces the general level of wages (so does a high birth rate)

On the Pro side:

Introduces different ways of doing things (both good and bad)
Introduces different levels of energy and business skills
Export of eranings reduces internal money supply

 's picture

Nothig simple about it.

All kinds of problems with birth certificates, people move lots, any documentation gets lost. Check with what vital records. Their is no national vital records system in the US. SS comes closest and its too unreliable to use accept as a source of leads. I once calculated based on the Canada experience how much it would cost to create a national long gun registration system based on the Canadian experiences of a few decades ago. Around $300 billion to create, about $50 billion/year to maintain with an accuracy below 30%. That made no sense. Think of the cost of a big intrusive government vital statistcs database. Its so big most states don't attempt anything like it. Think of the timing. Without it every school would have to check the vital statistics of every jurisdiction from which a child originated. Simply impossible.
3. Excuse me. They do and, as I said, its in the papers. Using the SSN of another person is fraud and is investigated. Perfect example was the ICE raids on Hormel Meatpacking Plants in I think 2009. Sole reason for their raid was reports from IRS that invalid SSN were being used. Most of the people (citizens) arrested in the raids were charged by local police with identify theft.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

I should also add that I

I should also add that I asked SSN for the company name and address that is reporting on my SSN, so I could at least call them and let them know they have an individual using my SSN. I was denied.

How helpful is my government – not very, they create more problems than they solve.

 's picture

Why would you even imagine that they would

Their complying with your request only violates about a dozen types of laws. I can't get vital statistics from my town office unless I'm talking about people who have been dead for 100 years or more (which I have done frequently).

MARK GRAVEL's picture

You throw up more roadblocks

You throw up more roadblocks than the Republicans, make enforcement happen. We can change laws….

 's picture

I'm like Romney - an analyst, a numbers man

Which is why I know he should never be president.

You solve a problem by breaking it up into its least reducible issues; then find solutions for those issues. Ready, shoot, aim rarely works. See my new reply.

What problems does illegal immigrant cause. If it causes no problems what's there to solve. If it does cause problems, identify them and why they are problems, and fix them.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Besides being illegal to be

Besides being illegal to be here undocumented, these are generally low skilled low wage individuals that consume resources that we presently cannot afford, such as education and healthcare resources. Drive uninsured. To name a few.

I did not say round them up and deport them, just denied them access to benefits afforded citizens and documented immigrants.

Moreover, at 8% unemployment, we should insist these people be employed before undocumented immigrants.

 's picture

Mark, its obvious facts and Paul and Mark don't mix.

That Reagan created the immigration problem doesn't matter. Why he created the problem (his rich argicultural friends in central California need cheap labor) doesn't matter. Its all the immigrants (they're just ugly brown scum anyway) fault so the solution is simple get rid of them because we don't need them anymore. Disassociate the problem from its cause. Standard conservative logic. Always have to protect the rich all us working people are just scum whatever our color.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

It's also obvious that you

It's also obvious that you know everything there is to know about everything, and that whether you're right or wrong doesn't really matter. I suspect that if you knew half as much as you think you know, you'd know twice as much as you really know.
If you find that offensive, so was the opening comment of your last post.

 's picture

I'm finally understood

Good

MARK GRAVEL's picture

You took the opportunity to

You took the opportunity to deaminize Republicans, so where are the Democrats on this issue.
Pocket your Obama talking points for now and look at the bigger picture. It is clear by Democrat’s behavior they have no interest in solving this problem.

Most Americans want something done about illegal immigration, so why aren’t the Democrats using this rallying point against the R’s? Why are the Democrats also turning a blind eye to the immigration problem?

 's picture

They do????

Most Americans?? Democrats have proposed repeatedly comphrensive immigration reform. 'R' did too previously. Remember McGovern. The legislation McGovern, moderate Republicans, and Democrats supported before McGovern ran for President was responsible, constructive legislation which would have addressed the real sources of the problem. Died in a firestorm of Republican "built the wall" silver bullet doesn't solve anything hysteria. McGovern almost lost the nomination because of his stand and every future Republican got the message - we don't want solutions we want vengence.
In the present political situation nothing will be gained. No legislation. No political brownie points. No solutions. So, No Democrat can seriously touch it now knowing that the Republicans will filibuster anything proposed even if its their own proposals and will lie about the issue for political gain. That's the same reason Democrats will not propose and have not proposed since 2000 real firearms controls. No matter how many US guns are sold to known murders nothing will be done because its toxic politically. When Republicans are out of power. Comphrensive immigration reform will be one of the "rebuild the middle class" reform measures Democrats quickly get onto the President's desk.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

How come Americans cringe

How come Americans cringe when they hear the words “Comprehensive Immigration Reform?”

Americans cringe because no one, absolutely no one, proposes methods for deterring future illegal immigration before talking about amnesty. People see this as another Reagan deal.

Enforcement first, amnesty second.

BTW – another post filled with partisan politics.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Which tends to reveal just

Which tends to reveal just how bad the problem really is. If they weren't here in the first place, we wouldn't have to send them back, would we?

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Paul, I clearly said this is

Paul,

I clearly said this is both and R and D issue, but look at the Obama defenders come out of the woodwork.
No wonder this problem does not get solved.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

oBAMa's supporters would

oBAMa's supporters would defend him if he were found in a closet with a dead woman or a live boy. Somehow, they'd find a way to lay the blame on Bush.

 's picture

The opponents of Obama would and have

claimed that he can't swim when he walked on water. For them its not what he has done or will do but who he is.

 's picture

Right on time Mark

"Call it treason, call it failure" Those are hardly equivalent words. One is "let's lynch the bastard and the other is oh well, try again. You trying to act like they are just the same thing is absurd.
So its a failure; nowhere is the constitution does a state have the right to supercede a federal law whether the Feds have failed to enforce the law or not.
Calling it diplomacy is fact not an emotional temper tantrum like calling it treason.
The failure is not enforcing comphrensive immigration reform. Reagen broke it in 1986 to get cheap labor in the country; now we have to fix it to get qualified labor in the country.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

How to read between the

How to read between the lines:

Call it pinky lee, I don’t care. Fix it!

Outcomes matter.

 's picture

We'll fix it

That's Democrats will fix it. When these supply-siders, xenophobes, Tea Partiers, "job creators", propagandists, and liars are back in Dontgothere, In population 300 Republicans, are out of power replaced by committed responsible Americans we will begin adopting solutions to American real problems daily.
Outcomes do matter and the Republican Wars on women, the middle class, and American's constitutional rights will in the end leave them at home baying at the moon.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"Give the democrats free

"Give the democrats free reign and they'll fix all of America's problems!!" screamed the raucous parrot who'd been sniffing the paprika container again. "But", said he, "Be sure to brush up on your Spanish; or your Russian; or your Chinese".

 's picture

and your reason

and your reason

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Spoken like a true partisan.

Spoken like a true partisan. Why not propose a solution instead of dribble talking points?
A solution to the immigration issue is a simple list of actions, no politics necessary.

No wonder this problem has not been solved for decades.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Such hatred and vitriol.

Such hatred and vitriol.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

At least it is short and

At least it is short and readable!

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

That 7-18-12 16:44 post was

That 7-18-12 16:44 post was not directed at you, Mark.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

“Outcomes do matter and the

“Outcomes do matter and the Republican Wars on women, the middle class, and
American's constitutional rights will in the end leave them at home baying at
the moon.”

The first step to having a successfully outcome is to successfully define the problem. All of the above are just political hyperbole and very broad statements.

When you say War on women, do you mean the controversy the Obama administration created over contraceptives? The general term, if taken literally, based on emotion. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

War on middle class – what does that mean? Do the republicans want to raise middle class taxes, leave them the same, or lower them?

People are too diverse in thought to have a one-size fits all (big centralized government), the founding fathers knew this and attempted to limit the federal government via the constitution and give all undefined powers in the constitution to the state. The federal government has perverted the commerce clause and the general welfare clause to grab more power.

Better living through less government.

 's picture

Yes, tey are

But they are accurate characterizations of the Republican Party and its policies - over 1100 anti-women state and federal bills originated by Republicans in Republican controlled legislatures which limit, repeal, revoke basic health care for woman based solely on her sex in just the last 18 months.
The world is not made up of just taxes. Since 1980, the standard of living of those in the middle class have fallen, wages have stagnated, opportunities have disappeared, education and health care has become unaffordable. In 1980, my father could raise a family of 10 on $5,000 a year as a small business owner/manager. Even adjusting for inflation, just do that today. The reason you can't; the Republicans have changed the laws to make that impossible starting with Reagan's breaking of the Air Controllers Union (not as a major factor but as a symbol of all the anti-labor changes he made in the Federal Government.)
First the founding fathers did not such thing - ".... limit the federal government via the constitution and give all undefined powers in the constitution to the state" . The undefined powers were not left to the state. They were left to the "states respectively or to the people".
What does that mean. Nothing. With necessary and proper and the other undefined generic phrases used in the Constitution to identify Federal power who knows what those powers were that were delegated and how they were to be divided between the states and the people. But that's not the biggest problem with the 10th amendment. The Civil War and the 14th Amendment are. The 14th Amendment repeals the 10th in substance. The Civil War affirms the Constitutional provision that the states are wholely subservient to the Federal Goverment. Now our confederate supreme court hasn't come to that point but it was Congress' intent. Its amazing that conservatives demand enumerated powers for the Federal Government but vague generic meaningless language for powers delegated to the states. Only Confederates at the end of the Civil War still maintained anything else.
Second, the Federal Government has perverted nothing. Congress, our representatives, have expanded the Commerce and general welfare clauses to correctly deal with issues and problems like corporations which did not exist in the time of the Founders. That's their job as stated in the preamble of Article I and as enumerated by the list of powers explicitily delegated to Congress.

John Frecker's picture

Senate bill 1070

I couldn't find any reference to a U.S. Senate bill 1070; all references were to the Arizona Senate bill 1070. After the recent Supreme Court decision, the major parts of 1070 were upheld, and it's now the law, in Arizona, not this country. Perhaps if the enforcement of Arizona's law goes well, more states (Maine?) will adopt similar laws.

I retired from the Border Patrol in 1995 and can say that, at least from 1969, no administration has done much to get serious about immigration enforcement. Obama is bad on immigration enforcement, but so was President Bush (43) who wanted amnesty for almost all illegal aliens and who signed the North American Union agreement with Mexico and Canada. And President Reagan signed an amnesty for illegal aliens and then failed to implement the enforcement provisions of the law.

I'm not saying "two wrongs make a right". To me, nothing will change until more Americans, a large majority of whom still believe in immigration enforcement, bother to take the time to tell our politicians that we want that enforcement. It takes about 5 minutes to make a toll-free phone call to your Congressional delegation and to tell them what you want. I have done a little lobbying in the past, and I know that they do pay attention to their constituents, when they hear from them.

 's picture

Sorry, one provision was upheld by SCOTUS

and that because it already was Federal Law - that is police officer after stopping some one for a valid legal reason could ask about immigration status. SB 1070 is not therefore law in Arizona. You retired in 1995 so you have no experience with how Obama is enforcing immigration. Otherwise a very accurate and balanced comment that I agree with.

John Frecker's picture

Senate bill 1070

I couldn't find any reference to a U.S. Senate bill 1070; all references were to the Arizona Senate bill 1070. After the recent Supreme Court decision, the major parts of 1070 were upheld, and it's now the law, in Arizona, not this country. Perhaps if the enforcement of Arizona's law goes well, more states (Maine?) will adopt similar laws.

I retired from the Border Patrol in 1995 and can say that, at least from 1969, no administration has done much to get serious about immigration enforcement. Obama is bad on immigration enforcement, but so was President Bush (43) who wanted amnesty for almost all illegal aliens and who signed the North American Union agreement with Mexico and Canada. And President Reagan signed an amnesty for illegal aliens and then failed to implement the enforcement provisions of the law.

I'm not saying "two wrongs make a right". To me, nothing will change until more Americans, a large majority of whom still believe in immigration enforcement, bother to take the time to tell our politicians that we want that enforcement. It takes about 5 minutes to make a toll-free phone call to your Congressional delegation and to tell them what you want. I have done a little lobbying in the past, and I know that they do pay attention to their constituents, when they hear from them.

John Frecker's picture

Apologies

I apologize; I hit the "Save" button twice.

Jason Theriault's picture

Wilma is funny

Wilma, Wilma, Wilma, Wilma

Ok, where to be begin....
Well, how about with 18 USC § 2381 - TREASON. Treason is defined at the Federal level, so you can't be treasonous siding with Mexico against Arizona.

Mexico is having issues with the drug cartels, however that doesn't mean siding with Mexico is siding with the drug cartels

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Perhaps you should try to

Perhaps you should try to understand the issue instead of quoting law - this is an opinion page, so you don't to take the literal meaning of what people right. Put on your thinking cap and try to understand their point of view.

Are undocumented immigrants, from Mexico or anywhere, a problem – yes/no.

If yes, how do we address this problem? Enforcing current law is a good starting point, don’t you think.

Jason Theriault's picture

I disagree

Well, then I was only "figuratively" quoting the law.

I understand the point she is trying to make, and it's dumb. She is implying that by not supporting a dumb law, Obama is betraying Arizona and New Mexico. The reality is that he is sticking up for legal citizens who don't want to deal with this unconstitutional crap.
Example - from section 2 of the law:

" ANY PERSON WHO IS ARRESTED SHALL HAVE THE PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS DETERMINED BEFORE THE PERSON IS RELEASED. " (Sorry for the caps, blame Arizona)

So if they can't determine your status, you stay in jail. Boy, for a group that doesn't like the government and thinks it's slow and ponderous, you sure put alot of faith in it.

 's picture

Mexico = cartels

If the government of Mexico is stronger than the cartels, it is choosing to ignore them, if not actively support them. Their federales, like ours, have taken the authority to pick and choose which laws to enforce.

If the government is weaker, there's no point in the BHO/DOJ pretense that their dealing with an equal partner. Deal directly with the cartels. We can send them documents concealed inside the next arms shipments. This will have the added benefit of really torquing off the corrupt politicos in Mexico City.

Either way, this has gone on so long that tinkering around the edges is useless. Here's how to stop the flow of drugs and illegal aliens: Annex Mexico as US states 51 through 60. This converts both problems to explicit state issues, with spillover under the heading of interstate commerce, something which our government has no reluctance to meddle in - unlike immigration.

MARK GRAVEL's picture

Why annex a garage

Why annex a garage dump?

Decriminalize drugs to stop the violence and remove the incentives of migration, such as jobs, healthcare, and education.

That will fix a large portion of the problem.

RONALD RIML's picture

Wilma Turcotte now Trumps Supreme Court Decision

Now why wasn't this Front Page news???

 's picture

If you can shoot your mouth off in public ...

... so can Wilma. The 1st Amendment is still in place ... for now.

RONALD RIML's picture

Wilma gets to be just as wrong as she wants to

The 1st Amendment guarantees free speech - not accuracy.

That's where I come in.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

"I knew it!!", bellowed the

"I knew it!!", bellowed the bewildered parrot. "Veritas is an undercover agent for the Accuracy Police."

Advertisement

Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...