GLOBALISTS DESTROYING AMERICA

In the next century, nations as we know [them] will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all. – Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's deputy secretary of state, as quoted in Time, July 20, l992

The Washington Post reported on Dec. 19, 2003: "Lobbyists working with the White House said Bush is developing a plan that would allow immigrants to cross the border legally if jobs are waiting for them. The sources said the administration also wants to provide a way for some undocumented workers in the United States to move toward legal status.

Furthermore, Bush said at his year-end news conference last week that he was preparing to send Congress recommendations for an "immigration policy that helps match any willing employer with any willing employee." He said he is "firmly against blanket amnesty" or a mass legalization.

An estimated 8 million undocumented people live in the United States. At least half of them are Mexican, authorities have said.

The blanket amnesty is based on the notion that this will "help" immigrants, the economy and our relations with Mexico. It will allow Mexican workers to come and go across the border so they will not feel they must either stay in the U.S. forever lest they be caught and sent back.

The Bush administration points to how "well" the bracero worker program operated in the '40s, '50s and early '60s. In fact, it did not work well at all.

To burst that particular establishment bubble, one need only refer to the study that appeared in the November/December 2001 issue of Foreign Affairs magazine. A very complete summary of the "guest worker" programs of the past was compiled by Philip Martin, University California-Davis, and Michael Teitelbaum of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and was titled "The Mirage of Mexican Guest Workers." (80 Foreign Affairs No. 6 at 117) In that effort certain administration and ruling establishment myths are exploded.

Martin and Teitelbaum take a hard look at the last official U.S. guest-worker program for Mexicans, the bracero program of 1942-1964, which is being used as the basis for the current effort to legalize illegal resident "workers" in the U.S. In every way that matters the bracero worker program was a flop. It did nothing to curb illegal immigration, nor did it force the market to work better – and it did not force the society or economic situation of Mexico to improve. It also did not force productivity gains for U.S. agriculture, which would have been forced to mechanize and modernize as have the agriculture sectors of Australia and New Zealand.

In fact, when mechanization was attempted in tomato fields, California labor groups and activists such as Cesar Chavez fought it. For the most part those who came stayed, and they did not return to Mexico until the big roundup during the Eisenhower administration forced them to return.

Journalist Howard Sutherland, who keeps up on these pesky details that irk the cheap-labor lobby and the ruling establishment, writes: "Mechanical lettuce harvesters were under development in the 1960s. That work was stopped. Today, lettuce is still harvested by hand in the field."

The bracero program also skewed the "free" market. It did nothing to allow business interests to adjust to paying higher wages or becoming more productive through mechanization. Instead it encouraged unrestricted, massive, illegal immigration, which flooded the market with more people at the expense of American workers, productivity gains through innovation, and the advancement of the nation and economy in general.

According to Sutherland, the Sloane study also reveals: "In 1960 some 45,000 farm workers (mostly braceros) had harvested 2.2 million tons of processing tomatoes. By 1999, it took only 5,000 workers to operate machinery that harvested some 12 million tons. Thanks to the efficiency gains from mechanization, the real price of processing tomatoes declined 54 percent while per capita consumption rose 23 percent."

In fact, during the bracero program, which ran from 1942 to 1964, the number of illegals crossing the border expanded in the same proportion as the number of "legal" or authorized or permitted workers. Illegal immigration accelerated after the program and skewed the "free" market by tipping the balance in favor of cheap labor advocates and capital. Meanwhile, the outlet offered by the United States disallowed much-needed economic and social change and reform down Mexico way.

The problem with skewing the "free" market in favor of our new unhappy sweatshop lords is that mass immigration – or, rather, migration – has acted to depress U.S. wages and benefits of the lower class, particularly minority groups on welfare, and previous influx of immigrants. (George Borjas, http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/gborjas)

A Harvard labor economist and an immigrant himself, George Borjas writes in a recent paper:

"The relative entry wage of successive immigrant cohorts declined by 9 percent in the 1970s, and by an additional 6 percent in the 1980s. Although the relative wage of immigrants grows by 10 percent during the first two decades after arrival, the relative wage of post-1970 immigrants will remain 15 to 20 percent below those of natives throughout much of their working lives."

Don’t forget that the last time there was immigration “reform,” in 1986, illegals were granted amnesty, the floodgates did not close, and immigrant and lower-class wages did not rise in comparison with those of other groups of Americans.

If that is not manipulation of the "free" market, nothing is. Nonetheless, "free" market outfits and think tanks like Cato and Heritage promote amnesty and open borders, seemingly unconcerned for the impact that has on national stability, cohesion and maintenance of the Republic.

The wellbeing of poor Mexicans has zero to do with any of this. It has a lot to do with manipulating the working place in favor of one interest or another.

Blind to the fact that even after generations, immigrants or ethnic bloc voting continues in many areas of the country, establishment Republicans or Libertarians have never known a failed concept they haven't clung to. Do not confuse them with the facts. Invariably, ethnic voting blocs vote for Democrats, by a standard 70 percent to 30 percent margin, with a few points difference here and there. Funny thing: The Republican who received more Hispanic votes than any other Republican in history was Ronald Reagan.

Ethnic groups vote for Democrats because it is Democrats who promise the most. Democrats offer the most in the form of government programs, minority preferences and perks; thus they get into office in areas of high ethnicity. That has been the case in California, Texas, New Mexico and Florida. It is just as true in old ethnic areas such as northern Minnesota, Central Wisconsin, Buffalo, Chicago or any large urban area where ethnic voting blocs remain.

Oh well, there are none so blind as a Republican or Libertarian stuck in the past hanging onto failed mythology, like a 4-year-old clinging to his Teddy bear.

The BIG argument and myth, of course, is that the illegals take jobs Americans don't want. The current argument is that if 8 million to 14 million illegals are forced to go back to Mexico, the country will fall apart. Horse hockey.

The country will adjust, and so will Mexico. We will have to and so will they and so will our elites. We might even see a resurgence of job creation and higher wages for blue collar and lower class minorities because unrestricted cheap labor will not be available. We might see productivity gains if some industries are forced to mechanize and adapt.

However, this amnesty and jerking us around aren’t about truth, what works, law, national identity or cohesion or the "free market." This is about power brokers doing what they damn well please no matter what the rest of the U.S. wants. They will do what they please for short-term economic or political gain, which in fact acts to destroy us in the process.

After the Cold War, that elite decided "harmonization of economies" and rise of "trading states" was the U.S. policy. By God, whether or not it works or we, the people want it, we are stuck with it. Legalization of illegals, a dumbed-down populace, "resident" status over citizenship, bad court decisions, continued end runs around the Constitution are all part and parcel of "harmonization of economies." It is also part of deconstructing nation-states.

Free-market theory is used and abused by the ruling establishment, and in their hands it has become a load of fertilizer.

When the market is really free, it adjusts. When it is really free, transnational corporations and entrenched insider bureaucrats like Robert Zoellick cannot centrally plan benefit for transnational investment capital over U.S. labor or our economic or political self-interest.

When the market is really free, wages are allowed to rise as the supply of labor becomes scarce or otherwise employed. When the market is FREE, unproductive areas of the economy become productive through mechanization and technology, or they adapt or disappear.

Since World War II, the ruling establishment, the power nexus in New York/D.C. and now Davos/London/Brussels have been allowed to centrally plan economies and call it the "free" market. Out of utopian notions held by the elites, and which evolved out of World War II, came Bretton Woods and Dumbarton Oaks. Utopians all, they stuck us with the U.N., IMF, GATT, the World Bank, the WTO and NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA.

To add to our misery index, since the end of the Cold War and the demise of Soviet-style communism, that same ruling establishment discovered that corporate interests and U.S. political, spiritual, cultural and economic interests are no longer one and the same.

So it is the ruling elite, which manages to get around the U.S. Constitution, Congress and the states, screws with the free market to the disintegration of our society and nation-state.

If keeping wages depressed by changing the rules in favor of those who want cheap labor is the free market, then the ruling establishment, including some Republicans, are doing what the left is so good at: the manipulation and recalculation of the language.

In fact, according to the law of supply and demand, when the market is working freely, there will be no dearth of American workers to take jobs in hotels, restaurants or fields on U.S. farms or at meat-packing plants. At present there is no deficiency of American workers in places like Duluth, Minn., or Pierre, S.D., to staff the Holiday Inn or the Waffle House. The market adjusts when the ruling establishment and government keep their manipulative proboscises out of it.

American "free trade" zealots and George Bush might regard what happened when Australia was forced to deal with an agricultural labor shortage. They had to mechanize. Thus, Australian agriculture increased its productivity in healthy ways. That also allowed Australia to maintain the rule of law, its own borders, who would be allowed into the country and who would not.

That happenstance supports national sovereignty and identity. An entire nation did not have to pay the price of dislocation and deconstruction in order to provide votes or cheap labor for the ruling class.

The current situation may benefit the cheap-labor lobby, Democrats OR Republicans who only see a voting bloc, but it is a terrible way to run a country.

It is destructive of societal cohesion and growth; it is expanded government that has allowed another victim or dependent class to remain in poverty and at the mercy of employers, the criminal class, lawyers and the state.

Furthermore, contrary to propagandists of the left, right and libertarian, the nature of immigration is not the same as that of the era from 1885-1920. The current situation largely benefits immigration lawyers and judges, who make big bucks from it. It expands government welfare programs and special education programs and adds immensely to the tax burden. It gives power to large urban areas over rural areas. Rotten boroughs are the result and loss of power to the several states is a foregone conclusion.

Dozens of studies also indicate that illegal and legal immigration have added to the tax burden and pile on to the infrastructure nationally, particularly in border states like California, Texas, Arizona, New Mexico – and, increasingly, Georgia, Illinois and the Carolinas.

In California, the burden of illegal immigration added at least $1,700 in taxes, fees or costs for each legal citizen.

If we really wanted to learn from history, we would acknowledge that the black market and the migration of Mexicans north would continue regardless of legalization of illegals in 2004. That was the case after the last great immigration "reform" in 1986 and it will be so now. The Bush administration can continue to live in its dream world, but the rest of America cannot afford that luxury. That is, if we want to remain an advanced economy and civilization.

Trouble is the powers that be, Democrats and establishment Republicans, don't like it when wages and benefits must rise to accommodate labor. Democrats prefer more government programs, adding bureaucracies and reasons to get elected.

Meanwhile, establishment Republicans prefer to mess with the "free" market and accommodate transnational or the cheap-labor lobby for jobs on the lower end of the economic scale. In the last few years, that cheap-labor lobby has expanded its control to high-tech jobs through misuse of the H-1B and L-1 visas. The visa system as a whole is a subsidy for transnational corporate interests, which further skew the “free” market.

Together, the new central plan from establishment Democrats and Republicans is a borderless world, the growth of the state, mass migration of people, cheap labor, and power in the hands of unelected elites and bureaucracies and an end to the nation-state. That is their tragedy and ours.

On Dec. 4, 2003, President George Bush decided to acquiesce to the World Trade Organization. His administration gave in to the subsidized mercantilists of the European Union and Japan, China and the WTO on steel tariffs. President Bush claims he just wanted to avoid a trade war and live up to our trade agreements. These agreements, of course, were cobbled together by central planners called globalists. As a great joke on all of us, some of them also incorrectly call themselves "free traders."

In 1992, former Citicorp chairman Walter Wriston published "The Twilight of Sovereignty." It was a foreshadowing of things to come for the United States. He claimed: "A truly global economy will require ... compromises of national sovereignty. ... There is no escaping the system."

On July 18, 1993, globalist Henry Kissinger said in the Los Angeles Times, concerning NAFTA: "What Congress will have before it is not a conventional trade agreement but the architecture of a new international system ... a first step toward a new world order."

Whatever they call themselves, in 1994 this particular branch of our feckless ruling establishment moved heaven and earth to get around the U.S. Constitution. It did so when it climbed over the dying body that is the power of Congress to make treaties, including treaties on issues of money and trade.

Nonetheless, the globalist duo of Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, along with complicit Republicans and Democrats, rammed the World Trade Organization agreement through a lame duck Democratic Congress. Like NAFTA before it, the powers that be gave away the national store. They gave it away to an unaccountable, unelected supranational body, the World Trade Organization.

That same faithless establishment forgot to remember that only Congress has the power to make treaties, raise taxes, print money and more or less promote the best interests of the economic and monetary system of the United States. In effect, they rewrote the U.S. Constitution.

The current trading czar, Robert Zoellick, is part of that feckless establishment. Like a thousand guys before, he is the quintessential insider. As a member of the Bush I State Department, Zoellick along with his mentor James Baker III, are either dumb, stuck in dogma or know exactly what they are doing. I prefer the latter explanation; it makes more sense.

After the Cold War, they were part and parcel of the crew that sought to advance foreign policy and trade policy in the post-World War II world for benefit of the elites. On occasion, their benefit and that of the rest of us coincided.

Among the international geopolitical/economic wheelers and dealers, Zoellick was a top dog in NAFTA negotiations. He helped design and carry out United States policy on German reunification a decade ago. He also helped start NAFTA negotiations from his post in the State Department. ("Bush Seeking to Overhaul Policy Making," by Joseph Kahn and Frank Bruni, New York Times, 1/6/2001, p. B14)

He is also a board member of the German Marshall Fund of the United States. Nice, considering that German interests now own half the publishing houses in the U.S. and increasing amounts of the electronic media. The fact is if our feckless elites continue down this road, at some point membership in the WTO, for instance, will coerce and censor what is and is not allowed in the media. Since the WTO, for instance, the FCC has established that WTO membership and "the public interest" are the primary criteria for evaluating purchases of American telecommunications

Thanks to this untrustworthy elite, we now have two screwy cadres and faceless bureaucracies to worry about: national and international. The entire cabal continues to centrally plan our economic, political, social and philosophical future. Trouble is, it is making us a less independent, less advanced, less innovative, less cohesive, less creative nation, which at some point will shut up dissident voices that point all this out.

Lucky for us, there was a time in the post-World War II era that the ruling establishment was forced to take into account the best interests of the entire nation.

After the Cold War, however, that same elite decided to re-create the United States and its people and the Western Hemisphere into a collective global player. The rise of "trading states" and regions was to be the wave of the future. In the name of "harmonizing" economies we get an economic central plan, along with NAFTA, CAFTA and the WTO – in other words, an economic central plan with a smiley face. Therefore, it is easier to say we can’t control our borders and offer amnesty than to prevent "harmonization of economies" and loss of national sovereignty.

What should blow our minds and indicate where this feckless elite is coming from is that in December of 2003, two weeks after caving in to WTO demands on steel tariffs, free marketer George Bush sent the world another message. Very correctly, he informed the whining WTO and European Union that as far as their economic interests in Iraq go, they could take a flying leap. In his words, "I will talk to my lawyers about it."

In that instance, George Bush acted the way the president of an independent nation should act. Whenever he informs supranational busybodies like the WTO or the UN. that American blood, treasure and sweat will benefit the United States, he is a U.S. president. When he includes supportive allies, business and trade interests in any dealings or benefits that might come out of rebuilding Iraq, he acts responsibly. In those moments, George Bush becomes the leader of the United States, a sovereign nation dealing with other sovereign nations. He wisely puts aside the elitist notion, which is simply a pale re-creation of the role as a corporate head or CEO of a "trading state."

We need a president, a leader and a protector of the Constitution, of our security and, most of all, our interests as a sovereign state. We absolutely do not need another bank president, corporate head, lawyer and Third Way game player like Bill Clinton or Newt Gingrich or Robert Zoellick.

We are suicidal if we continue to turn over our liberty, power and advancement to an elitist club of global political and financial powerbrokers as we have been doing, particularly since the early '90s.

One might also remind the faithless game players and globalists that Sept. 11, 2001, was a shot across the American bow. It was a reminder to the central planners that man proposes, God disposes, and the best-laid elitist plans of mice and men go oft astray.

Isn't it amazing how often history and human nature throw the ideas and agenda of central planners, utopians and globalists – our own Napoleons – into the ash heap of history where they belong. God is good.

As it is, our faithless establishment needs to be reminded that only Congress has the power to make treaties, raise taxes, print money and raise funds. It is not the job of the ruling elite to scam the system or the citizenry or find loopholes in the U.S. Constitution to achieve their ends. That is true in "trade agreements" or immigration policy or on a host of other issues.

That same establishment also needs to dispossess itself of the notion that it can create its own constitutional system, apart from the one we have. It is doing so through the judicial oligarchy and through rewriting the U.S. Constitution one court decision at a time.

Unless that ruling establishment wants a revolution on its hands, it needs to get its elitist head out of its own dark orifices. Otherwise do us a favor: Get the passports and plane tickets and climb aboard the next flights out to Davis or Brussels or the Bahamas. Run the world elsewhere and stop destroying ours.

Our nation was bought at the price of blood, sacrifice, sweat and tears and not for the benefit of unelected or ELECTED elites. It was formed by good men, using good ideas and fine instincts, in a hot room in Philadelphia in 1776.

Although they won't tell the truth about what they are doing, nonetheless our current ruling establishment is deconstructing us one immigration policy, one bad education idea, one court decision, one economic or trade agreement at a time.

They simply call it free trade, free market, the visa system, amnesty for illegals, multiculturalism, judicial review, diversity or "international cooperation." Meanwhile, they betray the philosophical, social, spiritual and cultural necessities of the nation-state called America. That is accurate whether they call themselves Republicans or Democrats.

We could all be hopeful for the future if the Bushites got religion and actually absorbed the absolute necessity for the U.S. to remain a cohesive nation in the face of international barbarity, stupidity, ignorance, tyranny and economic double dealing.

We got close to finding our souls again after Sept. 11, 2001. Since then we are slipping faster and faster into adoption and acceptance of various worldwide unaccountable bureaucracies and faceless bureaucrats of the "New World Order."

Economic warfare against the United States will continue as long as mercantilist, protectionist nations can still sell to us, hang onto markets, erode any edge we have in technology, steal what they can't buy, and suck U.S. investment money for their advancement. As long as the ruling establishment negotiates bad trade agreements and joins supranational collectives we will decline economically and politically.

Economic warfare will go on with no end in sight unless our ruling establishment gets a grip and soon. If we continue to operate through guys like Robert Zoellnik or the U.S. State and Commerce departments, we are doomed. If the FCC thinks nothing of allowing foreign ownership of media, just wait for a WTO decision to silence that media.

John Blair, former chief economist for the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Anti-Trust and Monopoly, stated the situation fairly well: "To ignore the pivotal role played by particular individuals who are in positions of power is to do violence to historical accuracy. A recognition that the course of economic events can be influenced by individuals who have the imagination and the power to take advantage of prevailing conditions does not constitute acceptance of a 'conspiracy' theory of history." The ruling establishment; left, right and libertarian, have forgotten the words of Teddy Roosevelt:

"Great corporations exist only because they are created and safeguarded by our institutions; and it is therefore our right and our duty to see that they work in harmony with those institutions. (T. Roosevelt, 1901, first annual message to Congress)

It is also tragic that we no longer produce a great noble class of American elites. Their arrogance and globalist insanity goes back to the late 19th century and continues to impact all of us today.

They have become more venal and self-serving in recent years. Having given over our institutions to cultural Marxists in the '60s, almost as readily they hand over our economic and political future to supranational unelected bureaucracies today.

Don't look for another Teddy Roosevelt, Ronald Reagan or JFK to stem the tide. Forget the honesty of a Truman or Eisenhower to call a spade a spade. Our current crop of elite are a mediocre blend of the deaf, dumb and blind.

Christian poet G.K. Chesterton called them what they are: "The New Unhappy Lords."

They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords, Lords without anger and honour, who dare not carry their swords.

Next time: Globalists then, globalists now. The utopian central planning of Bretton Woods, Dumbarton Oaks, GATT, World Bank, IMF, NAFTA et al. Corporate and political betrayal of the Republic prior to, during and after the WTO, MFN. Redux in the post-Cold War: After the Wall fell: Remaking the U.S. into a "trading state."

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg	Freepers/Avg	Monthlies
24	South Carolina	332.50	14	23.75	201	1.65	68.50	8

YUP!

I prefer to think that President Bush is doing the best he can and still stay alive to try to do more to stem the tide and rush to a global government. I can't believe people I trust and believe that he's knowingly complicit without severe duress.

I suspect he's been made several offers he can't refuse.

I believe he's doing his level best to preserve as much of our way of life as he can as long as he can.

I believe he knows Biblically on the one hand and from a myriad of elite connections and intel on the other--that the race to globalism is pressing faster and faster forward with greater and greater inexorable strength. I believe he's buying as much time as he can. I believe he's doing what he can to blunt the eventual roles of Russia and China et al.

I could, as some hereon believe is chronically true, be off the wall. I may be alone in my assumptions of the above. But, for me, it's at least as viable a hypothesis as some others.

I don't believe as some Christians assert that President Bush is near as complicit as his Dad in such matters. I don't believe he's a knowing, agreeable evil tool of the AC. That would be Shrillery et al.

I believe the crisis he felt compelled toward helping our nation and world with is more than the Iraq war and terrorism. I believe it is the larger rush to globalism. Whether he knows that, or not.

In any case, he warrants our persistent prayers for Holy Spirit to protect him and GUIDE HIM precisely and comprehensively.

"drywall to be hung"

Not knowing how old you are I ask when you were younger, say fifteen years ago, did you ever see a Mexican hanging drywall who wasn't an American citizen. The ones I knew spoke perfect English, removed their hardhats when a funeral procession went by and would stomp your butt in the ground if you didn't stand with no talking as the American flag went by in a parade.

These are the Mexicans I want in America. Not this slimely bunch Bush is welcoming with open arms!

"The only reason I'm not more angry at the Bush proposal is because I know that these people are here to stay no matter what,"

I have no idea how old you are but look back about twenty years and tell me if you knew very many drywall hangers who were Mexicans. The ones I knew took their hardhats off when a funeral procession went by. They stood tall when the American flag went by during parades and would stomp your butt into the ground if you tried talking during those moments. Every one of them spoke perfect English and ridiculed foreigners who couldn't.

Does defeat come easy to you? Looking at your profile page I am presuming not, why are you accepting defeat now? Because it was a Republican Presidents idea?

We didn't gain our rights by laying down our weapons, did we? How about continuing to fight for your grandkids rights, they'll appreciate it more than ypou'll ever know.

A very fine article but I am afraid the author doesn't get it. :>)

They are watching out for us. It's classic economics.

Look to David Ricardo to 'splain it all. Globalization: It really is "for the consumers." So says Hillary Classic Economist. Globalization gives us both "value" and "riches."

You see, when the 150,000 dollar-a-year skilled American professional loses his job to a 5,000 dollar-a-year skilled professional "over there" he gains by enjoying lower consumer prices. So that thingy that used to cost $100 now cost $5 while the American's new job(s) would garner $15,000 a year (jobs is jobs), for example; a whopping 10-to-1 advantage over 20-to-1. Get it? And everyone would enjoy the $5 price! "It's for the consumers."

Now, of course, "over there" has new wealth given our purchases from them and they invest here -- that spurs the economy here (good) and drives up wages (bad). Enter the lowly "undocumented" worker to fight wage inflation (good). The economy is saved.

One additional advange for all to globalization is expressed by an economist. "Above all, every branch of science, technology, invention, and business innovation would be pursued by a far larger number of highly intelligent and motivated individuals than is now the case. The result must be far more rapid economic progress across the entire globe, raising the living standards of all far above the living standards of today's most advanced countries."

Hmmm. If they are so damn smart where have they been for the past hundreds of years? Just asking. No offense.

You talk big, but you don't say what you plan to do about it. Are you aware that the House and Senate Republican leaders have already said that they support the President's plan? What one thing do you really believe can be done, not only to defeat this plan, but to send all the illegals back to wherever they came from?

Those people are already here, all 12 million of them. It would take all the power of the government to send them back, but our government is doing the opposite. It's opening the floodgates as wide as possible. This war is lost. You might as well try to fight the Civil War all over again, for all the good it'll do you.

If the President or Tom Ridge would announce that in six months they will be paying a $50 per head bounty for each illegal alien on American soil there would be a mad rush to the borders.

A policeman in a car costs the average city about $200 an hour. If we could get illegal aliens to turn each other in attempting to become wealthy, we would save billions in law enforcement, welfare programs and schools.

Just announce that we will be dividing the country up into various sized quadrants depending on population per square mile.

3 Any employer who has employed an illegal alien five months from XX/XX/XXXX will be fined $5000 per employee. One month later enforcement begins. This will give employers 5 months to shed the illegals and hire legally papered actual citizens.

Then on the announced date start in a state such as Oklahoma. Well centered, not overly populated and clean the state out. This would give Homeland, INS and Border Patrol time to install their agents in various court houses around the country to verify a persons paperwork, ie. birth certificates, hospital records, etc.

The result would be every foreign national who is not in America legally would forfeit their belongings and be shipped out within 24 hours.

Go state to state from the epicenter sweeping out the criminals who have successfully avoided suspicion. They already had 5 months to get out, hanging around to test the system carries a SEVERE penalty.

Imagine the number of Chinese who would be taking the ship home with everything in the house, new cars, you name it would be on those ships.

This would apply to every country in the world, not just Mexico.

How many schools could be closed? How many hospitals and state paid housing tracts?

Oh yes, it would be an economic shocker in the amount of taxes that could be reduced or used to qctually improve something necessary for American citizens, instead of illegal foreignors.

Want an approximate number of the population drop? Try 50 million with the majority over 30.

Your suggestions are good - in dreamland. You know darn well that nothing like that is going to happen. Too many have a vested interest in continuing and increasing immigration, both legal and illegal.

Even if such laws where passed the courts would strike them down. Heck, they can't even cut off welfare for illegal immigrants. Remember what happened to Prop. 187?

Our nation has decided and it doesn't matter if you or me don't like it. It's done. Tell me I'm wrong. Tell me that somehow President Bush is going to change his mind and order all the illegal aliens out of the country. It's not going to happen. Are you aware that a lot of his relatives are Mexicans? He doesn't see them as invaders. He sees them as decent people just trying to make a living, and he's on their side. So are the Democrats, so who's going to do all that stuff that you suggested? Nobody, that's who.

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.