Illegal Immigrants Make Commercial Demanding Free Healthcare

[red states rule]

These Undocumented Democrats sure have balls. Like the libs that want to register them to vote and provide cradle to grave handouts in exchange for their lifetime of votes, they actually believe they are entitled to other people money



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjoK0Zf_N5Q&feature=player_embedded

[aboutime]

red states rule. All Liberal, Democrat, Progressives, and Leftists should be jumping for joy about Illegals demanding healthcare, or what is better known as Obamacare.

The best reason they should be jumping for joy is...They aren't smart enough to understand...THEY WILL BE PAYING FOR IT.

[red states rule]

and the liberal media is all behind and openly support these illegals

Case in point......





Politico's Cirilli Lets Illegal-Immigrant Advocates Falsely Claim That Many Illegal Immigrants Aren't Illegal

In an item about how Arizona Senator John McCain is sticking to his characterization of illegal immigrants as "illegal," Kevin Cirilli at the Politico (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/john-mccain-immigration-89308.html?hp=l2) relayed without the least bit of skepticism a claim by illegal-immigrant advocates that those who enter the country illegally should only be called "illegal" if they have previously been deported, and that those who illegally overstay their visas really aren't acting illegally at all.


McCain's current position (who knows what it will be tomorrow or a week for now?), as quoted by Cirilli, is that "Someone who crosses our borders illegally is here illegally. You can call it whatever you want to, but it’s illegal. I think there’s a big difference between someone who does something that’s illegal and someone who’s undocumented. I’ll continue to call it illegal.” Illegal-immigrant advocates -- incorrectly, as will be seen -- don't see it that way (bolds are mine throughout this post):


"Latino groups and the American Civil Liberties Union have advocated for the use of “undocumented” worker as opposed to “illegal immigrant,” arguing that being in violation of immigration laws is not a crime unless the immigrant was deported and then returns to the U.S. without permission, as The Wisconsin State Journal noted in 2010." The referenced Wisconsin State Journal item (http://host.madison.com/news/local/footnote-what-s-the-difference-between-illegal-immigrant-and-undocumented/article_07130c84-a015-11df-8d78-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz2OdgA6pA7) reads as follows, in part:

Latino groups draw a clear distinction between the terms, arguing that "illegal immigrant" distorts the debate because it suggests the person is a criminal or dangerous.


The American Civil Liberties Union issued a brief on the issue in February and said the act of being present in the U.S. in violation of immigration laws is not, standing alone, a crime. "Unauthorized presence in the U.S. is criminally punishable only if it occurs after an individual was previously formally removed from the U.S. and then returned without permission," it said.


Many undocumented immigrants enter the U.S. legally but overstay their visas, which is a civil violation, not a crime, the ACLU said. That's the basis for the argument used by local groups such as Latinos United for Change and Advancement, which strongly opposes use of "illegal immigrant" and prefers "undocumented worker.


Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2013/03/26/politicos-cirilli-lets-illegal-immigrant-advocates-falsely-claim-many-il#ixzz2OmmSWAVe