Skip to comments."By nominating me, my party has made a choice to welcome the new America."
Posted on 11/14/2012 4:49:23 AM PST by raybbr
Just after George Bush took office there was a great deal of talk about immigration. The GOP was in full capitulate mode hoping to corral the Latino/Hispanic vote by a proposal of amnesty.
The only thing, in my opinion, that stopped it was 9-11. Because of that Bush had to put amnesty aside.
We all know by now that Bush only got 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2000.
Now, about that title. It comes from a speech George Bush made in Miami during his campaign in August of 2000.
Here is an excerpt:
|We are now one of the largest Spanish-speaking nations in the world. We're a major source of Latin music, journalism and culture.
Just go to Miami, or San Antonio, Los Angeles, Chicago or West New York, New Jersey ... and close your eyes and listen. You could just as easily be in Santo Domingo or Santiago, or San Miguel de Allende.
For years our nation has debated this change -- some have praised it and others have resented it. By nominating me, my party has made a choice to welcome the new America.
Our future cannot be separated from the future of Latin America.
As I speak, we are celebrating the success of democracy in Mexico.
George Bush from a campaign speech in Miami, August 2000.
Got that? He promised them a "new America" and what did that get us?
Here is another part of the speech: " Should I become president, I will look South, not as an afterthought, but as a fundamental commitment of my presidency. Just as we ended the great divide between East and West, so today we can overcome the North-South divide.
This begins with a renewed commitment to democracy and freedom in this hemisphere -- because human freedom, in the long run, is our best weapon against poverty, disease and tyranny."
"Human freedom" sounds a lot like open borders in that context, doesn't it?
Another selection: " Should I be elected, I will use that November summit to keep Mexican-American relations moving forward.
We must talk about the availability and cleanliness of water on both sides of the border ... about opening the promise of NAFTA to small businesses and entrepreneurs ... about economic development in areas of Mexico that send illegal immigrants to this country ... about improving health and criminal justice in both nations.
Notice nothing about Mexico honoring our border. Nothing about strengthening our border security.
You can read the speech here.
Here is an excerpt of a good critique of that speech:
In equating our intimate historic bonds to our mother country and to Canada with our ties to Mexico, W. shows a staggering ignorance of the civilizational facts of life. The reason we are so close to Britain and Canada is that we share with them a common historical culture, language, literature, and legal system, as well as similar standards of behavior, expectations of public officials, and so on. My Bush Epiphany By Lawrence Auster
Here is an excerpt from the Limbaugh Letter. I used to work at a place that printed it and would literally get it "hot off the press". It's part of an interview with Pat Buchanan (August of 2005):
Rush: Let me go back to immigration. We know where we're headed. What needs to be done right now to stop this?
Buchanan: Three things. One, put a security fence along all the major crossing points at the border and use the National Guard in the other areas if necessary. Two, begin to enforce the employer sanctions against companies that chronically hire illegals. Three, expel every illegal alien who has been convicted of a misdemeanor or a felony. In addition, pass an immigration law which is generous, but which cuts us back to more reasonable levels of immigration and holds to that moratorium for about five years. It can done. But the hour's getting very late for preserving the unity of this country.
Rush: And, if we fail?
B: If you fail, you lose the country.
R: That's apocalyptic. Define that. What's losing the country?
B: If you get an overwhelming majority of Hispanics in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas these are decisive electoral votes. If those constituencies say, "We want an open border forever", I think we lose the country.
R: You're talking about illegals who end up voting.
B: No, all the children of these illegals are legal citizens. Eventually you could have a de facto loss of the American Southwest to Mexico.
R: I can't go to California without this becoming subject one, two and three.
B: Rush, every talk show I do it's No. 1. People cannot understand why the President will not enforce the immigration laws of the United States. If this were Clinton we'd impeach him.
R: I've gotten calls on my program from people in agribusiness who say, "If you roll back illegal immigration, be prepared for food prices to go up."
B: Tell them, "I'm prepared."
R: I said, "I'm already paying high taxes to support the social welfare programs for these illegals, who have access to the health care system, unemployment, and so on. It's already costing us." But that told me the problem is between two constituencies - the corporate contributors, who like cheap labor; and the average voter, who does not like it at all. That's the conflict.
B: It is. Again, go all the way back to the 50's even all the way back to the Civil War, and the great Republican era from 1860 to 1932. The interests of big business and manufacturing and of the workers used to be the same: "Look, we've got the greatest market in the world, we want the highest standard of living for our workers." As old Henry ford said, "I want my workers to be able to buy the cars they build." Both sides had tremendous interest in basically protecting the American market, in term of Americans having priority entry to it. Now, however, big business has moved so much of its manufacturing and production abroad that it has become the leading lobbyist for keeping the U.S. market open for dumping of foreign goods, bringing in foreign workers and the rest. So the interests of big business and workers - both of which were once Republican constituents - are now in conflict.
Read the entire speech. You'd think he was running for president of the Americas not the United States and he still only got 40% of the Latino vote.
The same is true of Rubio and McCain and, well, I don't know about Graham, I think he's just dumb as dirt.
Does your chest swell with pride when you think of Bush's words about "a new America"? Sounds a lot like "transform America" doesn't it?
Did your ancestors, fathers, sons and daughters sacrifice their lives to allow invaders the right to become citizens?
How do we stop this madness? Education doesn't seem to be stopping it. All these people see is "free stuff" and we are being forced to supply it. I've had enough.
The illegal immigration issue didn’t harm Romney. He never even raised the issue against Obama. The GOP brass keep running from conservative issues and then blaming conservatives when they lose anyway. Immigrants who come to America legally understand the difference. They left their own countries to seek a new life, not to have all the criminals and assorted scumbags follow them illegally to their new home. It is the legal hispanic immigrants who suffer most from the influx of illegals from Mexico, because those illegals end up in the same communities and prey upon other latinos.
The Conservative government in Canada has made significant inroads into attracting the votes of immigrant communities in spite of taking much tougher measures against illegal immigrants. They’ve done this by focusing on issues that are important to these communities: safety, lower taxation, and support for small business. And they’ve also tried to attract as many candidates as they can from these communities. You don’t win the hearts and minds of people by pandering to the lowest common denominator in their midst.
Spanish is the language of the conquistadors. It’s irrational for the descendants of the conquered peopled to attempt to impose Spanish on us.
It's irrational also to for the right to roll over and welcome illegal immigrants who are instrumental in the destruction of our country. If we jump on the amnesty bandwagon, I can tell you what will happen. It's the same damn thing that happens every time the left has bullied the right into doing things we know are wrong. When it's too late to do anything to fix the problem, and the fingers start to point, the left will say we were for it too. The way Bonnie Frank did every time someone complained about the left giving home loans to people who wouldn't qualify for a bicycle loan being the cause of the economic crash. "Bush and the Republicans were for it too". NO AMNESTY! If people are going to destroy this country, by turning it into a Latin American third world cesspool, they need to do it without my ok.
I agree. No amnesty. Anyone here illegally is breaking the law. That’s what the word “illegally” means.
Immigration reform should NOT include amnesty. However, since half of the people in America believe in the free lunch and voted for Obama because they are too lazy to work for a living, immigration reform should make it much easier to come here legally, while making it next to impossible to come here illegally. We need people who will work for a living. In spite of all the unemployment, there is a shortage of people who are qualified for available jobs.
“Qualified” does not necessarily mean degrees and credentials. One qualification includes showing up for work on time, and taking instructions from bosses. Another includes being able to read and think.
The New America - make it as bad as the rest of the world.
Bush was more into amnesty than Obama is. You are right, 9/11/01 threw a monkey wrench into his big show with President Fox and amnesty.
IMHO, we should tell the left that just to get us to the table, Welfare reform must be part of any talks of immigration reform. I'm not talking only restrictions on the new "citizens", I'm talking stricter work requirements for those receiving taxpayer funds. This, I hope, will piss off a lot of the people who receive welfare. I think this will turn them against talk of amnesty if they think their lives will be harder. I don't think it's unreasonable for the taxpayers to demand people on government assistance be expected to take the jobs that are now filled by illegals. We shouldn't be expected to support them if there are jobs illegal immigrants are doing. We'll be adding millions of new people onto the backs of the taxpayers. All those new "citizens" will expect to receive every entitlement American Citizens are eligible for. I think there's zero chance the left would go for it, but, it would show just how unfair the left is. Obama wants fairness, so do I.
“Welfare reform must be part of any talks of immigration reform.”
bump for later read.
My step-mother was from Canada, I have two step-sisters from Canada, two nieces from Canada, one brother-in-law from Honduras, and four of his grand-nieces who are all now naturalized citizens and registered Republicans.
You might want to be more careful and selective in who your hate is directed towards..........
Not to me......But I guess if I had the the same hatred as you towards anyone not born in the U.S. I suppose I could see it..........
My step-mother was from Canada, I have two step-sisters from Canada, two nieces from Canada, one brother-in-law from Honduras, and four of his grand-nieces who are all now naturalized citizens and registered Republicans. You might want to be more careful and selective in who your hate is directed towards..........
Were they invaders?
It seems to me you are the one who can't discriminate the difference between your relatives and the people I reference in my post.
You're seeing what YOU want to see.
Thanks for clarifying what we’ve been told all along: BUSH’S FAULT. That is all. Good work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.