He is not my representative, but he does know this issue very well and has been among the earliest voices on what was happening to our country with this invasion of not only illegals but the problems associated with our legal immigration policies. I could care less about his policy vis a vis Israel. It has nothing to do with the immigration issue.
In your own link provided, he laments the loss of the American culture. I can also recall many a time where he lambastes the hispanic influence.
Buchanan is not the only one who understands the dangers of the Balkanization of our country along cultural and linguistic lines. The Hispanic Challenge by Samuel Huntington
I have no issue with legal immigrants coming from whereever they may come from, I certainly support the removal of gov’t translation funding, but I also have no problem with stores set up in a non English language, which he does have a problem with.
I do have a problem with our current legal immigration policies. Approximately 60% of our immigrants now come from Latin America, making our immigrants the least diverse in history due to chain migration. We are not bringing in the people we need to make our economy competitive in the global econonmy. And we don't need the numbers of legal immigrants that are entering today. We are now taking in over a million people a year compared to the 178,000 a year we took in prior to 1965. The annual numbers continue to grow because of chain migration, i.e., family unification. One immigrant actually sponsored 83 other family members.
Any government involvement will only make it harder for trade to happen. If consumers want to boycott, that’s great. It was very effective when consumers boycotted products from France. Why create a coercive structure?
How do we make the playing field level if China, the EU, and OPEC aren't playing fair in subsidizing their businesses, artificially fixing the rates of their currencies and products, not abiding by environmental rules, etc.?
Kennedy: we’re going to pass this bill because it’s tough, fair and practical.
Steffie, of course, lets him filibuster.
Okay, you agree with him on immigration. I don’t like the current immigration policies either and I’d pointed out that it would be a really good idea to approach this problem from another angle, by cutting off government funding and completing welfare reform for real. Welfare is a disaster and now would be the time that we could do it.
I don’t have a problem with immigrants who follow the legal process correctly coming from wherever. What you miss is the free health care and benefits. Would there be as many if it were sink or swim, figuratively speaking? I think the numbers would be vastly different and we’d get people who wanted to work and who wanted to be Americans.
I do disagree with you on Balkanization, but if the government continues to pay people not to work and get free health care then we will get more of it.
But instead we fight an old battle and expect different results.
Amnesty fails. Border enforcement does too. Even if the President would pursue capture aggressively, a president cannot make the courts follow the law and the states will continue to bend over backwards to give benefits to illegals if they are available to US citizens.
I find Buchanan abhorrent on Israel and I am not the only conservative who sees him that way.
As for your last comment about level playing field, shouldn’t the focus be how much businesses are taxed in the US and what unreasonable laws and restraints are placed on them? The EU, China and Russia will continue to trade with each other and some may or may not trade with North Korea and/or Iran. This is not the same environment in which containment could work. How does the US stop France from trade with a rogue regime, other than to call up Sarkozy and arrange for a meeting?
I don’t believe that government creates a level playing field, even when it wants to.