Posted on 01/14/2004 5:35:13 AM PST by Theodore R.
Mexamerica, here we come
Posted: January 14, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
Have Americans, one wonders, fully reflected on what the Bush amnesty portends for the country their children will grow up in?
Consider what Bush is saying with this amnesty for 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens and his "guest workers" program to allow employers to go overseas and hire people anywhere in the world for jobs Americans will not, or cannot take at the wages offered.
He is saying: I cannot defend our border. I will not enforce the laws. I will not send illegal aliens back. And as I cannot stop this invasion of the United States, I intend to legalize it.
Bush is not only rewarding millions of law-breakers and gate-crashers, he is erasing the border with Mexico. Mexamerica is our future. The United States is going to become a giant Brazil. Bush is saying there is no way to stop it – therefore, we must embrace it.
Ethnically and racially, this means an America that is no longer a First World country. Third World people of color will be the majority in two decades. Americans whose forefathers came from Europe, 90 percent of the population in 1960, will be a shrinking minority by 2040. For not only are the birth rates of white Americans lower than those of immigrants, the new immigrants will be from the Third World.
Economically, Bush is throwing American workers – white, black, Asian, Hispanic – into a Darwinian survival-of-the-fittest struggle for jobs with foreigners willing to do sweat-shop labor for wages that cannot sustain an American family.
Winners will be the economic elites who will benefit from low prices produced by cheap labor and from having a vast proletariat to do the chores at their homes, country clubs, ski lodges, restaurants, parking garages, vacation spas and yacht basins.
Losers will be American workers who have to compete for jobs with folks for whom $5.15 an hour is pay undreamed of back home in the Caribbean, Nigeria or Mexico.
Politically, our welfare state will explode. The Bush plan will convert America from the middle-class country we grew up in into a nation with a huge proletariat with a rising claim on our tax dollars for more schools, courts, cops, hospitals, parks, roads and prisons.
If you would know America's future, look at California. In the 1990s, for the first time since the Spanish arrived, California saw an out-migration of native-born Americans, white and black, along with a huge influx of immigrants, legal and illegal.
We are endlessly reminded how wonderful the new America will be as she becomes more diverse. Californians, who already live in that new America, apparently don't think so. Every chance they get, they vote to chop welfare and deny drivers licenses to illegal aliens. Now, they are deserting the new California beloved of our elites. If assimilation is working, why are Californians voting with their feet and fleeing to Nevada, Colorado, Arizona and Idaho?
"Who cares where people come from?" comes the retort. "The Melting Pot will make them all Americans, as it did the 18 million who came from Eastern and Southern Europe from 1890 to 1920."
But those were European peoples coming to a country run by descendants of Europeans. They came to a land that enforced assimilation in its schools. They learned and were taught in the same language, read the same books and magazines, went to the same movies, listened to the same radio, went through the Great Depression together and served in the same Army in World War II.
And after the great wave ended in 1920, we had 45 years of low immigration to assimilate and Americanize the children of the immigrants who had come here.
But America's population has doubled since 1945. Instead of the 16 million people of color we had in 1960 – almost all of whom were black Americans immersed for centuries in American culture – there are 80 million people of color here now, from 100 nations.
Instead of assimilation, we live in an age of racial and ethnic resentments and entitlements, where "multiculturalism" is in vogue and it is "racist" to demand immigrants learn the English language.
But if we no longer worship the same God, honor the same heroes, speak the same language, study the same history, love the same literature or even agree about what is right and wrong, how do we remain one nation and one people?
What do we have in common anymore? If Bush's ally-ally-in-free immigration policy is embraced, the old America we knew will be nothing more than a global hiring hall and what Teddy Roosevelt called a "polyglot boarding house for the world."
And if it doesn't work, there is no going back. It is the end of the America we all loved. Why is President Bush taking this risk with our country?
And if it doesn't work, there is no going back. It is the end of the America we all loved. Why is President Bush taking this risk with our country?"
Pat Buchanan makes the assumption that this hasn't already happened. I think it has. Actually, I think that Pat knows this but isn't ready to concede the point.
Twenty years ago a high school drop out could get a job in construction, trucking, or manufacturing, and still do pretty well for himself. Well enough to own a car and afford some type of housing, by the age of twenty.
One by one these jobs have been outsourced, or filled by a wage suppressing immigrant, lowering the expectation and living standard of many Americans. Such is not suppose to be the case. In raising the boat of third world nations we have sunk the boats of many average Americans. Meanwhile those that stick it out through college are finding their jobs outsourced and their options limited.
You are merely parroting the propaganda of the enemy like a good little public school student. There are not that many white collar jobs and in fact all jobs have been artificially manipulated out of the country, or by immigrants in country all due to deadly socialist government policies and freedom robbing Free Trade.
52 posted on 01/14/2004 5:15:38 AM PST by MissAmericanPie
I agree.
This needs to be repeated and repeated. As I've said before this may very well be Bush's (and our) undoing. Let one of those "guest" (barf) workers commit a violent crime and we'll have Dean in the WH.
The first step is to identify those illegal immigrants who just want to make some money and go back home. Identify them and offer some monetary incentive for them to return to their country of origin at the end of some period, say three years. In addition, insure that they are paid minimum wages and receive benefits equal to the benefits received by American workers. What this would do is reduce the difference in cost between illegal and American workers and therefore reduce the incentive for business to hire illegal workers. Sounds like Bush’s plan to me. However, this is only the first step.
The second step is targeting those illegal immigrants who are criminals. The deportation process must be streamlined with more judges, lawyers, holding cells, and INS workers. Instead of taking ten years to deport a criminal, it should take only a few months. Lock them up until the deportation process is complete, then put them on an airplane back to their country of origin. We haven’t been able to do this yet because of the pressure from businesses that need cheap labor and the social activities who think all immigrants will be targeted. Most of that pressure will have been eliminated by step one.
Step three is to eliminate welfare benefits for illegal immigrants. We haven’t been able to do this yet because of all the pressure from social activists who think that all immigrants will be targeted. These social activists are usually folks that are employing an illegal immigrant as a domestic servant and since step one makes that servant “legal” much of this pressure will be eliminated.
The first three steps would eliminate the majority of our illegal immigration problem. Those folks who want to stay here permanently might be induced into the temporary worker status if there was a mechanism to eventually obtain citizenship. I am not opposed to eventual citizenship for temporary workers provided that the requirements for citizenship are strengthened, including an English language requirement.
Step four involves the sensitive question of “anchor babies.” If a person is born in the U.S., they are an American citizen regardless of whom or what their parents are. Although I don’t think we can or should change the constitution on this issue, how much of an “anchor” the baby is can be changed by immigration policy.
Far from offering amnesty to illegal immigrants, I think Bush’s plan would be a good first step in solving our very real illegal immigration problem.
My brother-in-law graduated from high school on the city's east side in 1979. About two-thirds of his graduating class had non-Hispanic surnames. By 1997, the same school had a large Hispanic majority. Two decades ago, the church (Presbyterian, USA) that my in-laws attend had over 100 attendees on a given Sunday and an active children's and youth Sunday school program. Average Sunday attendance has dropped to 40, many of whom are retired servicemen and their wives, and there are no children's or youth activities simply because there are no children or teenagers to minister to.
Trends like this go usually unnoticed in the local media, much less in the national press. We may not like it, but as long as the Feds are unwilling and/or unable to enforce immigration laws, such trends will continue.
The other point was there is no specific provision in the constitution allowing an illegal, or any other temporary visitor, to have an anchor baby. Rather, its a contemporary interpretation of the 14th amendment, though IMO not an accurate one. All it would take to remove this misinterpretation is some clarification by congress, which again would be supported by the vast percentage of the population.
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.