Posted on 05/01/2006 11:34:36 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
It was billed as "A Day Without Immigrants."
According to its propagandists, official and media, the purpose of the May Day walkout from schools and jobs and boycott of shops and stores was to show how much immigrants contribute and how they deserve appreciation and respect, and not to be treated like criminals.
But if this was all it was about, there would have been no need to go on strike. Americans have always welcomed immigrants. They are better treated here than anywhere on earth. While most Americans believe we now need a timeout to assimilate the 36 million here and their children -- like the moratorium we had in the Roosevelt-Truman-Eisenhower-Kennedy years -- no one urges any denial of rights to legal immigrants.
What, then, was May Day really all about?
May Day was a strike against America. It was a show of force, a demonstration of raw street power to force the government of the United States into granting to 12 million illegal aliens, who have broken our laws and broken into our country, not only the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, but full citizenship.
It was brazen act of extortion to coerce Congress to grant amnesty now, and not to enforce our immigration laws or secure the Mexican border -- or to be ready for big trouble in the streets.
Congress cannot capitulate. The response of any Congress that calls itself American to such extortion should be a direct one:
"We are not intimidated. There is going to be no amnesty. The border fence goes up this summer. Those are our non-negotiable answers to your non-negotiable demands. Demonstrate all you want. We're not capitulating."
The message that would go out to the world would be electric: Congress will have said, first, that the United States will not be cowed by strikes or boycotts by law-breakers. Second, America intends to re-establish control of her border. Third, the invasion route from Mexico is going to be closed, forever.
Fourth, those who come to America henceforth will be those we invite in. And, as guests, they will behave as guests -- or they will be going back home. As for businesses that cannot get along without illegal foreign labor, if some of their CEOs are prosecuted and put to work in Arizona building that security fence, they will rapidly rediscover how to make a buck without colluding in an invasion of their country for commercial purposes.
We are at a turning point in American history. In July of 1954, President Eisenhower, discovering that illegal aliens were pouring into the Southern United States at a rate of a million a year, put in motion Operation Wetback, which halted the invasion and sent back scores of thousands of illegals to Mexico. Many more returned voluntarily.
Thirty years later, Ronald Reagan declared an amnesty for 3 million illegal aliens, conditioned on sanctions on U.S. businesses that did not cease to hire them. Following that amnesty, the flood began. Now we have 12 million illegals here.
Between 2000 and 2005, 4.5 million were caught at the border. Four million are believed to have gotten in. No one knows exactly how many. Even Bush concedes that, among the illegals, one in 12 has a criminal record. If we have 12 million illegals here now, that means the U.S. government, in dereliction of its duty, has let into this nation in the last 20 years 1 million criminals -- like Beltway sniper John Lee Malvo -- to prey on American citizens.
While almost half of all Mexicans, in a national poll, indicated a desire to move to the United States, the rest of the Third World has gotten the message. One in every 10 citizens of Central America and the Caribbean countries has already arrived. During the War on Terror, the number of those coming into the United States illegally from countries "other than Mexico" (OTM) has tripled.
These OTMs are coming from as far away as China and Iraq.
Fifteen years ago, when this writer ran in the California GOP primary against the first President Bush, calling for a border fence along the crucial 70 miles where illegals were massing and coming in by the thousands every day, there were 3 million to 4 million illegals here.
Nothing was done. There are now 12 million. If these 12 million are amnestied and the border fence is not built along all 2,000 miles, the next amnesty will be for 20 million or 30 million.
During the "Generals' Revolt," when half a dozen senior officers called for the firing of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, President Bush saw a challenge to his authority and had to throw it back. If Congress does not throw back this challenge, if Congress now capitulates to this extortion, America should start shopping for a new Congress in November -- an American Congress.
Congratulations -- you've just experienced what may be the beginning of a new populist movement in the U.S.
"I live in Massachusetts "
Sounds like you have been there long enough to be brainwashed. Run, Run for your life..........
ping
I know of several people who deal drugs to feed their families and have that extra cash so deperately needed to take care of their children and just maintain a status quo, much less buy a beach front condo themselves.
Drug dealing is illegal, so is hiring undocumented workers. Both need to be put out of business otherwise our society breaks down.
Once we get the idea it's ok to break a law with impunity, any law, then we've lost our right to a lawful and ordered society. It's the job of the police to arrest people that have broken the law, it's the jury's job to figure out if there is a problem that needs to be dealt with. We already have a structure in place to deal with the grey areas.
If a company needs to break the law to stay in business, it should NOT be in business. And you can bet it's producing a profit if it's staying in business! How different is that from a business owner who robs the local liquor store to pay his bills and then pockets what's left?
How can we in good concience give amnesty to 11 million criminals so they can keep working when we have almost as many good citizens who could step in and do those jobs? Would you ever even consider giving amnesty to the inmates of your local state prison simply so that they are no longer a burden on society? Why is it ok to give amnesty to someone who premdiated their crime then executed it deliberately when they came here and repeat the crime on a daily basis, yet not to the criminal who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and tried to profit from the situation (as many criminals in state prision end up being)?
SAD BUT SEEMS TRUE. "A person who wants do something, finds a way. A person, who does not finds an excuse." SOCIALISM IS AN EXCUSE to me.
I agree with you that illegal immigration is wrong. It's also dangerous for all concerned for a whole host of reasons. The immigrants are vulnerable to abuse by unemployers. Those who patronize businesses, such as restaurants, etc. that hire illegals are putting their patrons at risk because they may be sick and fearful of seeking medical attention.
Ya know, there's a whole bunch of reasons why it's wrong and dangerous.
But at the same time I think they're appearance on the employment scene is a symptom of larger phenoms. Mexico's economy took a dive partly because its manufacturing base split for China. American businesses seeking or requiring greater efficiencies needed cheap labor. And, of course, the demise of the unions opened at least some of the doors.
I believe -- now this is just me spouting off -- that the next step for illegals will be to unionize. That will make them less attractive to companies. Also, a lot of native born Americans with limited or very basic skill sets will start competing for those low salary jobs.
You make a good point, but the place to send messages to Republicans who will not toe the line is during the primaries, not the general election as some people think.
Bad enough that the boat is drifting downstream toward the waterfall, without changing the crew to one who will row toward it.
An important lesson for me was during the downsizing that ripped thru the defense industry and the corporate world in the early 1990's. To see a guy I worked for as a consultant who made in the $70k range salary take a Jack in the Box job so he could keep his house and feed his family (his wife survived, but they just missed their budget on her salary alone, even trimmed back to the basics - lot of nice cars went for pennies during that time!).
I was shocked and saddened as this guy was a great person and very, very good at what he did and how he treated his employees.
A man who needs work will take what ever work he can to make ends meet.
In the Depression era, California boomed as so many people came out here to find work. A man will do what he needs to do to find work.
That's why we have a problem with illegals in the first place! People WANT to work. The entitlement mentality is trained in, it's not man's nature!!
Illegals, if rewarded, will do it again and again...and with esclating violence.
I agree. People want to work. But they also weigh cost/benefits and risk. If I'm on welfare and living in public housing, etc. I can continue to do what I'm doing --mostly nothing or take a job. If I take a job suited to my no doubt limited skill set, I'll probably end up with less money in my pocket at the end of the month once all the taxes are deducted etc. and, I may lose the free medical, which is another worry.
In short, if I'm on welfare I pretty much have the basics covered and they'll remain covered. If I take a job, then there's a large risk factor.
I've seen a couple guys go from welfare to earning close to a $100k in under a decade, but not many.
All that said, I think that if we added workfare to welfare we'd eliminate a lot of that fear of risk.
Doubtful. Seems like in my lifetime, 40 years, every "populist" movement was a whole lotta hot air. People like to talk about populism, but in the end they like their TV too much to do anything more than huff and puff. They're kinda like those militia guys who wear bowling trophies on their heads and call themselves "General" whatever.
Nope, I stay here and eat libs and commies fer breakfast.
But come November, there is no way--NO WAY--I am voting for Democrats and their gun-grabbin', welfare-lovin', WOT-ending, tax-raisin', liberal SCOTUS ways.
Send a message in the primaries. Election day is too important to let the dems take over.
I see signs against Bush (the one who supports them). This is an anti-american anti-conservative protest masking as...well...it's Wellstone all over again.
http://jednet207.tripod.com/PoliticalLinks.html
Great piece by Pat. Right on the money except for the number of illegals already here. Pat says 12 million, but it's double that and before long we'll see riots and burned cars ala France no matter what.
I supported Bush's original "guestworker program" which was for and ONLY for those who are still in their own country and I only supported it if we we able to deport anyone who overstays that program.
But now it seems Bush is talking about this guestworker program to include these illegals.
I will NOT support that at all.
That's AMNESTY
http://jednet207.tripod.com/PoliticalLinks.html
Yes, exactly. In no time they'll demand socialized medicine, fulltime employment/education through college/welfare from cradle to grave paid for by God only knows. Socialism/communism is behind that Mexican flag, and Hillary is all set to be their standard bearer. Her candidacy was all but dead...they just dug her up.
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.