Well, well, well… has Corey finally turned the corner?  In the Washington Post article, entitled Stewart Softens Tone, Shifts Focus From Immigration to Economy, we learn that Stewart wants to

navigating Republican loyalists out of the immigration debate with the same vigor he used to help draw them into it


to become a consensus-builder.

What has caused these changes in attitude?  Is he serious?  Will there now be an overture of welcoming and inclusiveness?  What can we expect from the newly defined Chairman?  So many questions.  What does everyone think, is he for real?

116 Thoughts to “WP:Stewart Softens Tone, Shifts Focus From Immigration to Economy”

  1. Alanna

    You have claimed that your wife was once ‘illegal’. Then you have made ridiculous assertions about illegals, calling them immoral etc…

    Answer me these questions, since you loved an illegal alien…

    1. How did your wife’s moral character change when her legal status changed?
    2. How did your wife contribute to poverty when she was undocumented, did that change the minute she received her green card? Was she poor one second then rich the second she got government authorization to stay in the US?
    3. How did your wife’s legality encourage other illegals?

    I’ve listened for months as you have made ridiculous accusations that contradict your ‘experience’. It’s honestly caused me to doubt your story’s validity to the point that I no longer do believe it.

    Second, more diverse counties like Fairfax, Arlington, etc… presumably would have even greater numbers of undocumented. But strangely their real estate markets have not suffered to the same extent as Prince William.

    Just soime observations.

  2. Truly, in the context of PWC politics, it is grossly inaccurate to conflate “Probable Cause” and 287g, being that the successful push led by Elena and Alanna to REPEAL Probable Cause left us with the equivalent of an unnecessarily expensive VERSION of 287g … which is all Chief Deane wanted in the first place (except for the unnecessarily expensive part).

  3. Those are great points Alanna. You and Elena deserve a lot of credit for bringing the economic consequences of the Immigration Resolution to the forefront long before our County Chairman saw the light. “Switching from immigration to the economy” is exactly what you were encouraging us to do a year ago.

    There were others who actually predicted the economic consequences of the Immigration Resolution during Citizens’ Time as early as September 2007. If any of you are reading this, I’m sorry I don’t recall your names, and I’m even more sorry I didn’t believe you at the time. I believe you now.

  4. Elena

    I hear the anger directed towards Corey and it is well founded. However, besides Frank Principi, and John Stirrup who did the “ambushing”, the rest of the board also could not find their voices when they most needed them. Now, I was not on the recieving end of the “mob” so I can’t imagine how difficult that must have been, and on some level, frightening. Corey behaved badly, he has publicy said as much. However, if Corey is willing to actually demonstrate, not just with words, his committment to healing PWC, I support that goal.

  5. Elena

    Great POST!

    I concur, I believe Michael is yet again, another fictional character.

    Let’s not forget, Chief Deane, were it not for his outright courage in sharing with the Board. the “unininteded consequences of the resolution, who know where the illegal immigration hysteria would have led. I will forever believe he deserved an award for “Profiles in Courage”, for speaking in a leadership role, his concerns.

  6. Moon-howler

    Yes, Elena, I agree. Chief Deane, to me, is the real hero. He stood up for what was right even in the face of great adversity. He did his job and maintained his principles with quiet dignity.

    His words should be etched in stone:

    Deane said. “In simple terms, I expect you to treat all people with respect, professionalism and dignity — regardless of their background, ethnicity, economic status, station in life or their immigration status.”

  7. michael

    I disagree WHWN. 287G by itself was not going to remove all illegal aliens from the community. It was only going to remove “criminal” illegal aliens that post arrest were checked. This is an extremely small portion of the total number of illegal aliens and even a smaller number of the total number of “criminal” illegal aliens that have evaded capture and detainment for previous, un-prosecuted crimes and releases from previous jail time or arrests. It was NOT going to remove “criminal” illegal aliens that were not arrested, but instead would let them go free because they did not commit an arrestable crime on the occassion of their temporary stop.

    Only people who love “illegal” aliens, and want to protect illegal aliens from deportation became upset about the probable cause resolution. They use racial profiling excuses, as a political tool to prevent the rule of law resolution from inquiring into ALL people’s legal status, regardless of gender, race, religion or ethnicity, because it would require a mandatory check for legal status for everyone. And that includes you and me (if you do that you can’t racially profile, AND YOU CHECK STATUS FOR ALL TRAFFIC OFFENSES THE SAME.

    Your version actually increases the likelihood of ASSUMING who is legal and who is “illegal” because now it is a judgment call of the officer (they can pick and check whoever they want now) and it is not mandatory or equitable for all.

    A mandatory check of everyone at all traffic stops is the only way to remove all illegal aliens from our society, and prevent the economic collapse of our nation due to the negative impact on the wealth and stability of our communities due to “illegal” immigrants.

    As we see this current resolution does not work, we (the majority) will eventually repeal this, and require every encounter with the police to require a mandatory legal status check, just like every job will require a mandatory legal status check. You may have won the battle but you will not win the war.

  8. michael

    Moon-howler, I agree with you. However until we CAN distinguish between illegal and legal immigrants (using law enforcement to do it for us, rather than we the citizens be forced to do it (inefficiently and with great inaccuracy), we will not be able to deport all of the current “illegal” immigrants in our country.

    Your version of immigration reform is to simply turn the current “illegals” into legal immigrants, and claim the problem is solved. The poverty and damage the current “illegals” have done and are continuing to do, will not go away until they are removed. It is a population problem, not an ethnicity, gender, religious or ethnicity problem. As long as they are “illegal” we can remove them, reduce the population and remove the poverty problems they have caused in our neighborhoods be removing them.

    You cannot reduce the poverty and correct the job competition problem in a “double standard society” until you remove the current “illegals”, all 12 million of them over a period of time that takes as long as it takes.

    My version of immigration reform is to reduce the “illegal” population from our communities, reduce the level of poverty caused by “illegals” and continue to do this until the number of wealth creating jobs matches the population again. Then and only them am I willing to accept any “new” people under the currently sufficient and legal immigration laws we already have, but have not enforced. I do not support your version of immigration reform. It is not reform, but forgiveness of debt and damage to society, that will not repair the damage, only increase the liklihood that society will be damaged further by the next 12 million illegal immigrants encouraged to follow the footsteps of the previous success of 12 million “reformed” illegal immigrants.

  9. michael


  10. michael


    We have been over this before. My wife has nothing to do with my views, because my view is based on “illegal” behavior. While she was “illegal” I told people she needed to be deported (including the INS). It is the principle of the thing, and I don’t play favorites. Once she is legal, then she is legal, and I do not advocate she or any other legal person be deported. However, and this is my point, her POVERTY continues as before, her lack of wealth building skills continues as before and she has not changed her ethics one single bit because it is part of her culture. She behaves just as unethically and “illegally” with her “illegal” friends, as she did before she became “legal”. PEOPLE DO NOT CHANGE, only the paper status changes.

    1. My wife’s moral character did not change with her status, she is behaviorally the same person she was before she became legal. The only difference is that MY TAXES, and the LAW now require her to report her income, where previously she did not pay taxes, because of her illegal status. She still carries on the same black market social structure she established before we were married, except in those rare cases I talk her out of it by pointing out the LAW and the chances of getting caught doing something un-ethical, like sharing bank accounts, legal address documentation and charge cards/black market trade and lying about importing of goods normally taxed by customs or prohibited by copyright/trademark laws. I cannot prevent her or her friends from doing this even though it seriously damages our economy.

    2. My wife contributed to poverty by working for less than minimum wage. She still works for less than minimum wage, and actually reduces my overall wealth that I would typically return back to society, because I have to support her beyond her own means and at a wage levels and standard of living lower than I would have if I married a woman who has a typical “legal” or professional job. She also sends significant money back home to her sister and mother (50% of her salary), that does not go to increasing our family wealth, increasing the money supply in our own economy. She is increasing the economic wealth of her native country, rather than ours.

    Receiving a green card has not changed ALL of this, but it does require her to follow more laws, by reporting her STATUS legally to business’s, banks, IRS and a host of other state and local agencies that keep our community safer. She is now required to follow law or go to jail if she does not. If she has a car accident she is accountable, because she has to carry insurance and drive with a license, wheras she previously drove without one and never got caught or stopped by the police. As an illegal she was “invisible” and “invisibly” undermined our society, based on her native ethics and less-ethical value system.

    She got rich when she married me, it had nothing to do with her own legal status. If she had stayed un-married she would still be an “illegal” who undermined our society with increased poverty below the current “legal” poverty level. She used health care, national parks, recreation and county services (including education) for free, now she has to pay for it like the rest of us.

    3. Her “legality” process encouraged all of her other “illegal” friends to find a rich white guy to marry. To do that they first have to come here “illegally” and spend about 3-4 years learning enough English to date and communicate with potential husbands. 4 of them have been married in the last 2 years. 3 more have requested their employers sponsor them for green cards. It does not change their poverty status or reduce the number of people coming to the US with low skills, in fact her success has encouraged other “hometown girls” to do the same thing she did. 2 of her friends left all of their children at home. Now they are bringing them into the US, having obtained visas and green cards for their children, doubling the population of each family mamber they bring into the US. There are lots of lonely men of all ethnicities out there who are looking for beautiful and kind wives that are better in social nature and less emotionally selfish than the average American woman. The down side is they are also usually poor and obsessed by glamour and wealth, especially glamorous shopping and credit card availablity. I protect myself by seperating our incomes and bank accounts, and have a pre-nuptial so I am not accountable for her bad choices in life and debt.

    My story is valid, believe what you want.

    There are many, many documented fraud cases and cases of illegal behavior in the credit industry that made special deals for people based on their ethnicity, to get loans they would normally never be able to afford. These are called 8A policies from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as various ethnic-centric banks, bank managers, ethnic special interest groups, and loan officers belonging to ethnic organizations helping only their own ethnicity. These are the majority of foreclosures on record, and they have many ethnic group similarities, bepending on the black market circle and scope of financial fraud each ethnic culture brought into the country.

    You make a presumption that Fairfax and Arlington has more “diversity”. I believe it has less “diversity” than PWC and certainly more people of ALL ethnicities mixed together, but likely more “illegals” who could not afford the mortgages they obtained through illegal, discriminatory, and prejudicial means. PWC has had a greater influx of “illegals” than all the other counties, except now maybe Montgomery county in Maryland, and they are seeing how “illegal” immigration causes increased poverty and with it increased crime in their neighborhoods.

    It is a simple fact, “illegal” immigration causes increased poverty in neighborhoods and slows community growth and stability, while increasing population problems, political problems and discrimmination, and noticeably increasing ethics and morality decay.

  11. michael

    Moonhowler I agree, and I hope while his officers are arresting “illegals” they also call the INS to deport them, treating all of them with the same respect that they treat all of us, very respectfully, and I hope each person arrested for “illegal” alien status will very respectfully treat each officer who arrests them.

    I applaude Cheif Deane for making sure his officers and his policy toward the rest of us is fair and just for all by advocating a legal “double standard” to the problem of “illegal” immigration by not treating “legal” people and “illegal” people with the same respect, the same questions of legal status, and arresting all of us under the same immigration laws.

  12. Moon-howler

    Michael, if someone is arrested, their status will be checked. If they turn out to be out illegally in the country, an ICE detainer is placed on them. This is all part of our 287(g) memorandum of understanding. What happens to them once ICE gets them is out of our control.

    Most of the people on this blog support 287(g) because we don’t want criminals on our streets. There are a few people who do not. We would probably all agree that 287(g) is not the perfect vehicle for removing criminal illegal aliens but it is the best we have.

  13. Elena

    COME ON Michael!!!!!! Do you seriously believe that I am going to buy that you turned your wife in to INS?!

    Michael, you said:

    “I protect myself by seperating our incomes and bank accounts, and have a pre-nuptial so I am not accountable for her bad choices in life and debt.”

    “She behaves just as unethically and “illegally” with her “illegal” friends, as she did before she became “legal”. PEOPLE DO NOT CHANGE, only the paper status changes.”

    Why would you “marry” such a person if you could not trust her, believed she behaves unethically, and is a negative drain on your personal well being, etc etc etc. Not buyin’ it, but thanks for the diatribe that fits all the stereotypes about the “illegals”. 🙂

  14. Moon-howler

    Michael, I guess I am curious too. I am trying not to be judgemental but were you aware of all this before you married or were you just smitten by love? I don’t think everyone’s situation is the same as yours.

    You were vague about the illegal behavior. Is this something you could get caught up in? I would think that your job would be jeopardized.

  15. ShellyB

    Dear God. I just now read Michael’s ode to marriage. Just in time for Valentine’s Day. I had a good laugh about that one. I don’t know if he’s making it up. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.

  16. Elena

    Shelly, I’ve seen some bad marriages, but really, this has got to be a put on! If not, I strongly recommend marriage counseling 🙂

Comments are closed.