Say It Ain't So, Dubya

In politics, it’s good to be up for grabs. And it’s miserable to be a sure thing.

As President Bush will prove today. In an expected announcement of sweeping amnesty and Social Security benefits for illegal Mexican aliens, the president will kick conservatives in the teeth in order to woo Latino voters.

It’s clear proof that the adage “Dance with the one what brung ya” doesn’t apply in the GOP.

In the GOP, conservatives exist to donate money and vote a straight ticket, and then be ignored. At least in this Administration and by this Congress. Time after time, the principles of those who put George W. Bush in office have been compromised and rejected. And now, on an issue that could forever alter the nature of the United States, conservatives are being betrayed by their president.

What are the details? We won’t learn until today. But it is expected that a new “adjusted work status” will be announced for most of the eight million Mexicans currently in this country illegally. Also, lifetime Social Security benefits will be guaranteed illegal Mexican aliens – even after they leave the United States – if they pay Social Security tax for as little as 18 months.

Lawbreakers will be rewarded, and the American taxpayer will become the primary funder of the Mexican retirement system.

And billions of dollars of wages earned by illegal aliens will continue to be sent back to Mexico – bleeding our prosperity and continuing as the second largest cash source for the Mexican economy.

Why is the Republican president selling out everything you would think his party stands for?

Simply put, the large number of Latinos in America have not yet clearly identified with a political party. And the Republicans want them. The Democratic Party owns the black vote lock, stock and barrel and the Republican Party wants to do the same with the Latino vote.

Democrats hope to draw Latino voters by convincing them – as they have African-Americans – that they are an underprivileged minority which needs the Democratic Party to avenge it against the larger American culture.

Republicans hope to draw Latino voters by convincing them – as they have American moderates and conservatives – that they are part of the larger American culture.

Democrats want people identified as minorities; Republicans want people identified as the mainstream.

Apparently President Bush believes that the Republican Party can win the heart of Latinos by rewarding millions of illegal Mexican aliens and by creating a welfare entitlement for people who aren’t even Americans.

Specifically, by caving in to a demand by Mexican President Vicente Fox – the author of the policy President Bush will announce today.

Latinos are powerful because they are up for grabs. Conservatives are powerless because they are a sure thing.

Honestly, if conservatives get ticked off at George W. Bush, what are they going to do? Who are they going to vote for?

After being walked on and ignored, conservatives will dutifully come out this fall to support not just President Bush but the Republican Congress. Why?

Because we want judges and cabinet secretaries and protections for guns and free enterprise and property rights – things we didn’t really get this go round but hope to get in the next.

Conservatives are patsies to the Republican Party, just like blacks are patsies to the Democratic Party. Both get stroked at election time, and both get some very pretty speeches, but when it comes time to make laws and keep promises, both groups are roundly ignored by their parties.

Critics of this policy – as comments from the White House spokesman already indicate – are going to be labeled xenophobes and bigots. There will be syrupy quotes about this being a nation of immigrants and how new people coming to America make it a better nation.

Well, it used to be that way. When our foreign forefathers came to America to be Americans.

But those days have passed. Overwhelmingly, Mexicans come to America to be Mexicans. The melting pot is broken. The language is not learned, the culture is not adopted, the customs and values are not acquired.

And in a couple of generations the Latin Quarter is going to refer to that part of America west of Louisiana and south of Oregon and Idaho. There is a broad-based Latinization of the United States underway, a cultural conquest that the Mexican army could not win but the American government is willing to surrender.

We are growing our own Quebec, and it speaks Spanish. Latino immigrants, and specifically Mexicans, are wonderful people. Yet their success in this country – and the continued integrity of this country – are dependant on obeying the law and acquiring the culture and values of the American Constitution and heritage.

And that is not done by rewarding those whose first act on American soil was an immigration crime.

Instead of granting amnesty and rewarding lawbreakers, we should make a guest-worker program that lets Mexican immigrants walk honorably through the front door instead of illegally through the back door. We have the jobs, they want the work, let us bring order to putting the two together.

And then secure the borders, with troops if need be, so that illegal immigration stops.

Reward those who do right, not those who do wrong. Quicker, more efficient legal immigration is right. Amnesty is wrong.

And this fool idea of opening the empty Social Security coffers to Mexican nationals in Mexico is insane.

Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves." -- Ronald Reagan's Speech at the 1964 National Convention

Some of this information is known by the general public...but the vast majority are unaware of the influence this ideaology/power bloc has on Government policy trends.

The CFR...[Council on Foreign Relations].....some members have served in both Democrat and Republican admins.

Bush 41...Emperor Clintonius..GWB..CFR members slotted thru their admins.
This reality is not just linked to foreign policy...no..it thinktanks the economy and has a history of relationship with the Federal Reserve.

Americas internal policies..even unto the state level are no longer isolated from the concept of the nations interworkings fiscally and economically with world government.
here..Corporate America is hungry to do business overseas and build political relationship to ensure their investment stability.

So..Corporate America needs high level real time info on foreign nations..hence their entwined relationship with the CFR.

The people who put GWB in the Whitehouse...now request that they be allowed to continue their investment path.

Is their a ruling elete?...Is America being lead down a path....then the media is directed to spin the path as beneficial.

Why is our Government allowing this...the American Citizen asks?.

The shocking reply is..The CFR and Corporate Money work with either party...if it served their purposes...their would be a third party aswell.

You have outlined your list of valid grievances in a fair summary, but those facts are absent a few rejoinders..

I have been an employer in the hospitality industry for more than a few of decades, (at one point 3800 employees), and have employed more than my share of illegals. In the 60's in Chicago and throughout the Midwest, it was Greeks, Polish, and Lithuanians, even a few Russians, and Cubans. Most of these wonderful folks stayed long enough to establish a record of employment and opened their own businesses, or bought homes and learned English and blended into our lives as equals.

In the 70's it was Middle Easterners, and in the south, it was the beginning of the heavy Mexican influx. In the 80's it began the Pacific Rim invasion, Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, and more Mexicans. The 90's was more Middle Easterners, and a lot more Central American's, than Mexican. It became a joke and a pattern that we had a second shift of Muslims that would work Sundays and Holidays to keep the doors opened when everyone else wanted or just took those days off.

My jobs were in the beginning, low paying, bottom rung, entry level jobs. Jobs that were steady and dirty. Maintainance, housekeeping, kitchen, dishwashing, busboy.. I started hiring illegals as a practice in the 70's by necessity. By then, we had changed the school calendar (shorter summer vacation making training high school kids almost useless), child labor laws, under 16 unavailable, and with few exceptions (blacks), welfare or single mom minorities, that wouldn't work longer than 26 weeks. Just long enough to qualify for extended unemployment. It was far more insidious than just quitting after 26 weeks, they would fake an injury and file suit, or claim harassment, or labor claims against our company, costing thousands and keeping a law firm, not just a lawyer on the payroll (the 4th largest line item on my P & L statement).

For the most part, we kept these employees and raised their pay as they increased their effectiveness just to prevent the turnover. They would furnish us with relatives to replace themselves as they moved up the job ladder. NOBODY applied for these positions, and paying $12 an hour, plus benefits $6 more, for a dishwasher just doesn't work. These folks worked for $8, and would take home food, and learn a trade, cook, bellboy, bartender, waiter, and move up as soon as we taught them.

I left the hassle to raise my children, but just as much to escape the government and changing attitudes of my fellow countrymen toward immigrants.. and this sort of problem we are faced with today.. Bitch all you want, but you are not allowed to be as aware as you need to be.. Today you have almost exclusively fast foods and poor motel service because of this pressure to pander to your emotions,. Now you pump your own gas, pick up your own food in a restaurant, and soon you will make your own beds, or purchase fruits and vegetables from Timbuktu, because we cut off immigration... I'm outta here.. Bash Bush, bus your own tables, and feed your kids junk.. you are winning.. Developing..

RE: Your link the the Libertarian Party. OK, well here is what they advocate. I would think LP folks would be happy w/ Bush's new plan.

The benefits of open immigration
BY MICHAEL TANNER
America has always been a nation of immigrants. Thomas Jefferson emphasized this basic part of the American heritage, taking note of "the natural right which all men have of relinquishing the country in which birth or other accident may have thrown them, and seeking subsistence and happiness wheresoever they may be able, and hope to find them."

The Libertarian Party has long recognized the importance of allowing free and open immigration, understanding that this leads to a growing and more prosperous America. We condemn the xenophobic immigrant bashing that would build a wall around the United States. At the same time, we recognize that the right to enter the United States does not include the right to economic entitlements such as welfare. The freedom to immigrate is a freedom of opportunity, not a guarantee of a handout.

A policy of open immigration will advance the economic well-being of all Americans. All major recent studies of immigrants indicate that they have a high labor force participation, are entrepreneurial, and tend to have specialized skills that allow them to enter under-served markets. Although it is a common misconception that immigrants "take jobs away from native-born Americans," this does not appear to be true. In 1989, the U.S. Department of Labor reviewed nearly 100 studies on the relationship between immigration and unemployment and concluded that "neither U.S. workers nor most minority workers appear adversely affected by immigration."

Indeed, most studies show that immigrants actually lead to an increase in the number of jobs available. Immigrants produce jobs in several ways: 1) They expand the demand for goods and services through their own consumption; 2) They bring savings with them that contribute to overall investment and productivity; 3) They are more highly entrepreneurial than native-born Americans and create jobs through the businesses they start; 4) They fill gaps in the low and high ends of the labor markets, producing subsidiary jobs for American workers; 5) Low-wage immigrants may enable threatened American businesses to survive competition from low-wage businesses abroad; and 6) They contribute to increased economic efficiencies through economies of scale.

Confirmation can be seen in a study by economists Richard Vedder and Lowell Galloway of Ohio University and Stephen Moore of the Cato Institute. They found that states with the highest rates of immigration during the 1980s also had the highest rates of economic growth and lowest rates of unemployment.

Studies also show that not only do immigrants not take jobs away from American workers, they also do not drive down wages. Numerous studies have demonstrated that increased immigration has little or no effect on the wages of most American workers, and may even increase wages at upper income levels.

Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that immigrants come to this country to receive welfare. Indeed, most studies show that immigrants actually use welfare at lower rates than do native-born Americans. For example, a study of welfare recipients in New York City found that only 7.7% of immigrants were receiving welfare compared to 13.3% for the population as a whole. Likewise, a nationwide study by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics found that 12.8% of immigrants were receiving welfare benefits, compared to 13.9% of the general population. Some recent studies indicate that the rate of welfare usage may now be equalizing between immigrants and native-born Americans, but, clearly, most immigrants are not on welfare.

The impact of immigrants on taxes is more equivocal. Most immigrants pay more in taxes than they receive in government benefits. However, the majority of immigrant taxes are paid to the federal government, while immigrants tend to use mostly state and local services. This can place a burden on states and localities in high immigration areas.

However, the answer to this problem lies not in cutting off immigration, but in cutting the services that immigrants consume. The right to immigrate does not imply a right to welfare -- or any other government service. Moreover, this is not simply a matter of saving tax money. The Libertarian Party believes that most government welfare programs are destructive to the recipients themselves. Thus, immigrants would actually be better off without access to these programs. As Edward Crane, President of the Cato Institute, has put it:

"Suppose we increased the level of immigration, but the rule would be that immigrants and their descendants would have no access to government social services, including welfare, Social Security, health care, business subsidies, and the public schools. I would argue, first, that there would be no lack of takers for that proposition. Second, within a generation, we would see those immigrants' children going to better and cheaper schools than the average citizen; there would be less poverty, a better work ethic, and proportionately more entrepreneurs than in the rest of U.S. society; and virtually everyone in that group would have inexpensive high-deductible catastrophic health insurance, while the 'truly needy' would be cared for by an immigrant culture that gave proportionately more to charity."

Finally, any discussion of immigration must include a warning about the threat to civil liberties posed by many of the proposals to limit immigration. Recent legislation to restrict immigration has included calls for a national identity card for all Americans. Senator Diane Feinstein (CA-D) has suggested that such an ID card should contain an individual's photograph, fingerprints, and even retina scans. Representative Lamar Smith (R-TX) has proposed legislation that would require employers to consult a national registry of workers before hiring anyone, effectively giving the U.S. government control over every hiring decision by every business in America.

Other legislation has contained provisions penalizing people who fail to "inform" on people they "suspect" might be illegal immigrants. Such Orwellian nightmares have no place in a free society, but are the natural outgrowth of an obsession with restricting immigration.

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.