President Defies Most Republicans on Immigration

www.townhall.com ^ | May 29, 2006 | Phyllis Schlafly

[cornelis]

As President Bush's poll numbers drop dramatically even among his base, the question most frequently asked by angry Republicans is: Why, oh why, is Bush so stubbornly rejecting the advice of his supporters even though that advice is consistent with the thunderous message from public opinion surveys?

The reliable Rasmussen survey, for example, reports that by a 63 percent to 19 percent margin, voters want legislation that controls the borders before trying to change the status of illegal immigrants.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger encapsuled the typical reaction to Bush's May 15 televised speech: "I have not heard the president say that our objective is to secure the borders no matter what it takes. That's what I want to hear."

Bush's dogmatic statement that we can't stop aliens from illegally entering our country unless legislation is packaged "together" with a guest-worker program is a non sequitur, nonsense, and untrue.

So what gives?

Here are some of the speculations grass-roots Republicans are making in regard to Bush's behavior:

(a) Bush prides himself on being a man of his word and he gave his word to Mexican President Vicente Fox that he would never stop the migration of Mexicans into the United States;

(b) Bush made a Faustian bargain with the big-money guys who raised more political money in 2000 than all other Republicans combined in order to nominate and elect him president;

(c) Bush is a globalist at heart and wants to carry out his father's oft-repeated ambition of a "new world order";

(d) Bush meant what he said, at Waco, Texas, in March 2005, when he announced his plan to convert the United States into a "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America" by erasing our borders with Canada and Mexico.

Bush's guest-worker proposal would turn the United States into a boardinghouse for the world's poor, enable employers to import an unlimited number of "willing workers" at foreign wage levels, and wipe out what's left of the U.S. middle class. Bush lives in a house well protected by a fence and security guards and he associates with rich people who live in gated communities. Yet, for five years, he has refused to protect the property and children of ordinary Arizona citizens from trespassers and criminals.

Much attention has been paid to Bush's proposal to legalize the estimated 10 million to 20 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. Despite his denial of the "A" word, friends and foes alike recognize this as amnesty.

However, amnesty for 10 to 20 million is almost a drop in the bucket compared to the mammoth legalization of immigrants hiding under the deceitful words "temporary" and "guest worker." Those words are lies because the workers are not temporary and not guests.

We are indebted to the Heritage Foundation for its stunning report proving that the so-called 614-page "compromise" bill being debated in the Senate (under the Martinez-Hagel names) is a stealth open-borders bill that would import permanently and put on the path to U.S. citizenship at least 66 million people, with the actual number rising to at least twice that amount when they bring in relatives. Every category of legal immigration will be quadrupled or quintupled, and the racket called "family-chain migration" will be dramatically expanded.

The so-called temporary workers in their fourth year will get the right to remain in the United States permanently if they have learned English OR are enrolled in an English class, and after five years will get the right to become a U.S. citizen who can vote in U.S. elections. At the same time, the guest worker's spouse and children, without any numeric limits, will get legal permanent residence and citizenship.

After the so-called temporaries and their spouses become citizens, they acquire the right to bring in their parents as permanent residents on the path to citizenship. Siblings and adult children and their families will be given preference in future admissions.

In the words of the author of the Heritage report, Robert Rector, this is "the most monumental bill ever considered" and its mind-boggling costs would be the largest ever expansion of taxpayer-paid social benefits. Adding these millions to Medicaid, and adding their parents to Supplemental Security Income benefits, will become staggering entitlement costs.

The Senate bill would make 25 percent of the U.S. population foreign born within 20 years (most of them high school dropouts), and the United States as we know it would cease to exist.

It is impossible in so short a time to assimilate 100 million people whose native culture does not respect the Rule of Law, self-government, private property, or the sanctity of contracts, and where they are accustomed to an economy based on bribery and controlled by a small, rich ruling class that keeps most of the people in dire poverty.

Phyllis Schlafly is the President and Founder of the Eagle Forum.

Copyright © 2006 Copley News Service

[Jeff Head]

Well, the Security and Prosperity Partnership is real enough. Here's a link to the official government site:

Folks can read the info there and make upo their own minds...but I do not go along with it in the least.

Here's the mission staement:

To enhance the competitive position of North American industries in the global marketplace and to provide greater economic opportunity for all of our societies, while maintaining high standards of health and safety for our people, the United States, Mexico, and Canada will work together, and in consultation with stakeholders, to: Improve Productivity, Reduce the Cost of Trade, Enhance the Quality of Life.

Sorry...but "our" people as far as I am concerned are the citizens of the United States. You are not going to "lift" the Mexican population as a part of "our" people, without lowering the whole. They have to "lift" themselves and be willing to spend the resources and make the sacrifices to do that. But the Security portion of the Agenda gives a clue as to how the SPP intends to do it...here's a pertinent security goals:

Further streamline the secure movement of low-risk traffic across our shared borders

Clearly the Senate is on board with this travesty. Thank God the House is not.

I think we are seeing the outward demonstration of a fairly significant internal struggle regarding this critical issue in the two seperate plans/bills from the House and Senate, and the debate going on regarding them.

Domestic enemies are organizing protests that clearly lean in support of plans similar to, or even more radical than what the SPP proposed.

We the people must ensure that the House holds the line, that the Senators voting for their bill are soundly whipped in public opinion and at the polls, and that the Senators who opposed it, and who are pro-American in their other positions, are complimented and supported as a result.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Don't see how you can support open borders, but at least you state your case without name-calling of those of us who oppose illegal immigration and open borders.

I support open borders only in a perfect world, just as I support open doors and windows in neighborhoods. I don't support them in the real world. As someone wisely said, without borders there is no state.

I laid out what I think must be done but I don't think it can be done. Yet, we must support that even as it destroys the Republican Party, else we are untrue to ourselves.

I support closed borders and limited immigration, allowing in those who can make a positive contribution to our society and the American way of life. The days of "Give me your tired, your poor, your downtrodden and hopeless, ..." or whatever the Statue of Liberty says, are long gone.

I reject the idea that Bush is part of some leftwing global conspiracy. That is the basis of my disagreement. However, to the Internet Rambos who demand immediate gratification I do point out that what they want is impossible under current circumstances.

[La Enchiladita]

Saith Lady Liberty: "Give me your tired, your poor, your downtrodden and hopeless, ..." ?

How about, "Give me a break ... please."

[Smartass]

Post #141"in consultation with stakeholders"; and
post #142 "global conspiracy"

Other then the American people, who are these
stakeholders, and conspirators?
That's an easy one...
Passage of S-2611 proves this issue a no brainer:

"that this nation United States of North America, under God The New World Order, The Tri Lateral Commission, The Bohemian Grovers, and The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), shall have a new birth of freedom Socialism -- and that government of the people Globalists, by the people Globalists, for the people Globalists, shall not perish from the earth."

That's my take, and I stick by it!

 

[Altura Ct.]

She nailed it!

[Altura Ct.]

What was it Americans won't do?

Great shot!

[Smartass]

#104, and #135.
Thanks...
   

[JustPiper]

And Clintoon and ChinaGate