New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s Inconsistent Immigration Policies Defy Logic

Michael Cutler, CAPS, March 26, 2013

On September 27, 2012 the New York Post published an article, “Bloomberg blasts Bronx DA for not prosecuting trespassing arrests” which stated:

Mayor Bloomberg blasted the Bronx DA’s controversial policy of not prosecuting some trespassing arrests in public housing—saying that the move will bring the city back to its bad old days of crime and disorder.

I wrote a commentary for CAPS about that article comparing those who would trespass into public housing buildings with aliens who trespass into the United States–drawing the obvious analogy.

Now “Crusader Mayor” Bloomberg is adamant about mandating background checks for those who purchase firearms, but apparently couldn’t care less about the identities and backgrounds of millions of illegal aliens.

On March 24, 2013 Bloomberg Businessweek, ran a story headlined:

Mayor Bloomberg Unveils $12 Million Ad Campaign for Gun Checks

Bloomberg’s concern, and one I share, is that it is important to be sure that those who would purchase firearms aren’t convicted felons or  mentally ill. Certainly it’s a bad idea to have criminals or the unstable given access to guns.

However, when aliens enter the United States by evading the inspections process, no record of their entry is created. There’s  no way to know anything about their backgrounds:  Not their names, their dates of birth, their criminal histories or even their actual birth countries or  true citizenship.

The inspections process conducted at ports of entry is designed to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence would be detrimental to the United States and its citizens.  Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182 enumerates the categories of aliens who are to be excluded.  Among these classes are aliens who suffer from dangerous communicable diseases or extreme mental illness. Additionally convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists and spies are excluded as well as aliens who would seek unlawful employment or become public charges.

Aliens who circumvent the inspections process belong to one or more classes of inadmissible aliens. Yet Bloomberg’s sanctuary policies prohibit the NYPD from notifying ICE when a suspected illegal alien is encountered during the course of routine police work. Sanctuary policies shield illegal aliens whose true identities, backgrounds and intentions are unknown and unknowable.  As the saying goes, “You cannot tell a good guy from a bad guy without a scorecard.”

“Undocumented” aliens have no scorecards!

Incredibly while Bloomberg is nervous about who gets to carry a gun, he’s not nervous about the  identities and intentions of  hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who live and work in the “Big Apple!”



Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Tom Iron

    bloomberg is approaching the infamous level of the two top idiots who were ever NYC mayors, lindsay (happily, lindasy died a pauper – squandered away a fortune) and dinkins.

  • Bloomberg isn’t inconsistent, he’s perfectly consistent. Because what he really wants is “screw you honkey” and permanent left wing electoral hegemony.

    • The__Bobster

      Yes, he is. I’m sure he has armed bodyguards. He just doesn’t want you to be armed.

      • TheCogitator

        You’re damned right he has bodyguards, and they resent any questions about his inconsistency at having guns around him, but disarming us.

    • BonusGift

      He holds the views typical of most tribe members (who BTW happen to hold sway over our so called “elected” representatives); which is to say hypocritical and inconsistent but systematically anti-America/anti-American (i.e., as it was founded and intended).

      • Stentorian_Commentator

        Yeah, I’ve been thinking recently about some Jew who called the white race the cancer of the human race or something like that. That was supposed to be so profound, but of course not true. The Jews are the cancer of the human race, working their way into important organs unnoticed until it’s too late and they have redirected all nutritition to benefit themselves and starve the rest of the body. Blacks would be the ebola of the human race, because they can close to immediately take a functional organ (e.g., Detroit) and turn it into mush. I don’t have a good disease metaphor for East or South Asians yet, but they deserve one. I would say that non-Jewish whites are really no worse than the norovirus of the human race, potentially fatal, but usually only if the victim has some serious immune system dysfunction in the first place. For the most part lots of “indigenous peoples” are multiplying quite well.

        • BonusGift

          Really just different forms of parasites on the country and particularly it’s founding stock people, some extract blood, others gibsmedat, others some combination, others intellectual property, etc., etcetera.

        • Dr. X

          It was Susan Sontag who in the 1960s described whites as the “cancer of the human race.” She died of cancer a few years ago…

          • Xerxes22


    • jeffaral

      Bloomberg ia a typical Republican: Hypocrisy at its best!

  • Dr. X

    Bloomberg is an absolutely scary manifestation of the dystopian Big Government Nanny prophesied by Orwell and Huxley. There is perhaps no better example of Big Government “Newspeak” than the racial issue. As Orwell wrote, Big Brother would tell us that “War is Peace” and “Freedom is Slavery” — well, today we’re told that “Diversity is Strength” when in fact it is anarchy, chaos, and crime, and we’re told that “Illedals” are merely “Undocumented Workers.” We’re constantly subjected to a “Two Minutes’ Hate” by Big Brother — we’re supposed to hate guns, hate large sodas, hate trans fats, hate cigarettes, and especialy, above all else, hate whiteness. 1984 isn’t here, people… 1984 was almost thirty years ago!!!

    • “Orwell and Huxley”

      Instapundit had a link to a really good cartoon panel several days ago highlighting the differences between Orwell’s dystopianism and Huxley’s dystopianism. I would link to it except that the original blogger took it down, because of a copyright issue with the cartoon’s original artist.

      The point is, as I knew already, Orwell and Huxley were not samey-same. Huxley in fact heaped a lot of criticism on the Orwellian dystopians, because he thought they were out of sync with human nature. While an Orwellian dystopian was worried about a committee of malevolent censorious bureaucrats burning books, Huxley was worried that no such thing would be necessary because nobody would want to read for their self-immersion in trivialities. Orwell was worried about deliberate misinformation, while Huxley was worried that accurate and useful news would drown in the low information undertow. To put it in modern terms, an Orwellian would be worried about false news about important events being promulgated in “credible” media, while a Huxleyite would be worried about people not paying attention to easily available true news about important events because of TMZ gossip about the Kardashians and ESPN sticking cameras in front of naked men who just got out of the shower.

      As the last panel of that cartoon said, Orwell was worried about our doom coming from what we hate and fear, Huxley was worried about our doom coming from what we love and covet.

      I think that in the long run, Huxley was more right than Orwell.

      • Dr. X

        That’s an excellent post. Of course Orwell’s dystopian vision and Huxley’s were not identical. Still, both envisioned a future in which technocratic elites who thought they were superior to everyone else controlled society, and individual freedom (and individual responsibility) as our Founders envisioned it was considered dangerous.

      • Puggg

        Found it elsewhere:

        This should be it.

        I remember reading 1984 and BNW myself when I was just a pup. One thing that struck me as weird about 1984 is that Orwell thought that Big Brother would use opposition to human sexuality and adherence to celibacy (“Junior Anti-Sex League”) as a route to gaining and maintaining power. Huxley didn’t bring up sex, (not that I can remember), but I’m sure he would have disagreed with that notion, that in his nightmare world of distractions causing our downfall, his dystopian nightmare was one where people were just the opposite, too interested in sex.

        • Sean

          Huxley brought up sex constantly, “orgy-porgy” was a very shocking theme in BNW because of how young children began experimenting with sexuality. Still, you hit the nail on the head, the society is BNW was deluged with sex from the youngest age, much like my generation.

          Luckily for my generation (and unluckily for pre-16th birthday me har har) sex for many younger women has once again become a real expression of love and affection, even if that love and affection is misguided.

          • Correct. It’s been some time since I read both, but I remember sexuality being a bigger part of BNW’s narrative than 1984’s narrative, even though Norm is literally right about the difference between Orwell and Huxley therein.

        • newscomments70

          Ann Coulter believes that the liberals want to destroy religion and marriage. They push atheism and hypersexuality. People should worship and love the state. They should not worship God nor love their spouse. All of that energy should go to the state.

      • BonusGift

        Thank goodness, I was afraid of perpetual foreign war(s) and the genocide/replacement of white Christians at home, you’ve put my mind at ease (sarcasm off). I’m sure Bloomberg would’ve signed the NDAA whereas Barry Soetoro, hey wait a minute, you had me going; you’re pretty funny.

        • Except Huxley was hardly a utopian. Bloomberg can win election as mayor of a major city, but he just doesn’t have the “it” it takes to be President. Meanwhile, Obama was and is still a hit with the low information undertow.

  • bigone4u

    Bloomberg’s “sanctuary” (a word that is a despicable leftist distortion) policy is essentially an order to sidestep the law. Suppose I gave “sanctuary” to a murderer, rapist, or bank robber. Morally, I would be guilty if the criminal subsequently committed another crime because of my sanctuary policy. When illegals in NYC commit crimes, Bloomberg is morally guilty of those crimes. Morally, I am sure that His Honor is a murderer. Legally, I wish he could be held accountable in a court of law, but apparently not.

  • Bobby

    Man, I miss Mayor Koch, and I don’t even live in New York City. Towards the end of his life, Mayor Koch wrote an article, in which he actually sympathized with the plight of, GASP!!, White Males. Bloomberg wants them replaced by illegal foriegn nationals, at least in New York it seems, pronto. You European American New Yorkers are something else, I mean, ……..never mind.

  • newscomments70

    Illegals are allowed to rape children in NYC, but God forbid that you drink a 32 once serving of Coca Cola.

  • newscomments70

    Micheal Bloomberg: You’re the duke! You’re the duke of New York! And you’re “A” number one!

  • anarchyst

    This is what those of the “tribe” relish. . .total and dictatorial CONTROL.

    • White Mom in WDC

      The tribe needs control so badly because deep down they are so full of fear. They cling to their purse, their tribe, and their covetousness. Inevitably, they get the boot out of every society they are in. Screw them

  • jeffaral

    I hve no doubt that if Mr Michael Bloomberg was living in his country, Israel, he would be a radical supporter of border enforcement security.

  • Fed Up

    Bloomberg is simply another screwed up liberal fool!

  • Fed Up

    Bloomberg is simply yet another screwed-up liberal fool!