Ultimate explanation for George Bush's immigration & amnesty push - by John Derbyshire

National Review ^ | July 2, 2007 2:20 PM | John Derbyshire

[dennisw]

What a Waste. Steve Sailer said it all.

[L]et's stop and think about what an enormous waste of six years it has been for the President, aided and abetted by the almost the entire American Establishment, to pursue his delusion of imposing his immigration obsession on the citizenry. Even leaving aside how much better the immigration situation would be if Bush had followed his oath and simply enforced the damn laws, imagine what he would have been able to accomplish legislatively in other areas without wasting time, energy, and political capital on a losing proposition like this.

Well, why did he? Why did the president push this appalling bill with such passion and such arrogance? A number of theories are current. On a realist-to-romantic, or prose-to-poetry, spectrum, they are:

Machiavelli. Bush has been persuaded, probably by Karl Rove, of the following theorem: Hispanics are now a large proportion of the electorate, and are destined, via differential birthrates, to become a larger one. It’s important for the Republican party to win over these voters by doing Hispanic-friendly things. As a rough first approximation, Immigrant=Hispanic, so that a kind’n’gentle policy on immigration should be pleasing to Hispanics.

Bicycle. Someone — perhaps a visitor from the Wall Street Journal editorial page — has persuaded Bush that the U.S. economy would come to a juddering halt and fall over if not fed by a steady stream of unskilled immigrants working for below-minimum wages.

Pauline Kael. Bush has never in his life mixed socially with any person whose job or neighborhood quality is threatened by mass unskilled immigration. To the people he does mix with socially, unskilled immigrants are a good source of servant labor, or a way to “socialize the costs, privatize the profits” of enterprises they own or invest in. This puts us in somewhat the same zone as Pauline Kael’s famous bafflement on hearing that Nixon had been elected president: “How is that possible? I don’t know anyone who voted for him.” Can elite Americans really be that out of touch with reality? Believe me, gentle reader, they can.

Noblesse oblige. Bush’s childhood experience of friendly, deferential Mexican servants and employees, and of his Dad’s elite Mexican friends in the oil business, disposed him so kindly towards Mexicans in general, he is keen to do anything to (a) please the Mexican authorities, and (b) avoid any appearance of unkindness or lack of generosity towards Mexicans in general (e.g. by apprehending illegal Mexican immigrants). The first approximation here is even rougher than the Rovian one: Immigrant=Mexican.

Evangelical. The president is known to cleave to a generous and universalist (if you like it), or naive and sappy (if you don’t) style of evangelical Christianity. He sees himself, in his own mind, holding out his arms, murmuring: “Suffer the little immigrants to come unto me.” While by no means despicable as a personal lifestyle choice, this may not be a good foundation for national policy.

My guess is that there is some combination of all these at work, but with the center of gravity down in the romantic zone. W is an intelligent man, but he’s a feeler more than a thinker, consulting his heart before his head, and sometimes forgetting to consult his head at all. This can be an endearing trait under some circumstances. The forming of national policy is not one of those circumstances.

[AmericanInTokyo]

One thing is sure I can say on this Fourth of July in the spirit of Citizen Activism.

We will get to the bottom of it yet. They cannot keep it a secret forever. Every man has his price. A close associate of Bush's, after 2009, in awe of the figures a possible book deal would bring, will break with Bush and will spill the beans (or in this case, the frijoles) as to why this man went against the will of 90% of the American people on illegal amnesty, and with an insatiable dedication at that.

[nicmarlo]

I thought this worthy of consideration for a puzzle piece also. Mexico need industry - a lot of it and they have ports and ChiCom deals with no easy access to consumer based nations, like America and Canada - hmmmmmmmm

Most definitely worth consideration; I've read about that theory before and believe it is very likely a plausible explanation. As to the other....the ports deal will help continue to ruin America and ship out American jobs to Mexico....

The North America's Superhighway Coalition (NASCO) (the corridor), connecting Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, as well as the planned Punta Colonet Project, which will likely shut down American ports in Long Beach/Los Angeles area, and possibly the Washington port:

NASCO/NAIPN

Formed in 1997 [when Bush was Gov. of Texas], NASCO is a partnership of businesses and state and provincial governments in the U.S., Canada and Mexico focused on developing the international trade corridor based on I-35 from Laredo, Texas to Kansas City, Missouri and I-35, I-29 and I-80/I-94 north of Kansas City to the Canadian border.

NorthAmerican Inland Port Network (NAIPN) [founded in 2003 by NASCO members in Canada, US and Mexico] is a sub-committee of the North America's SuperCorridor Coalition (NASCO). NAIPN advocates the interests of Inland Ports along the International Mid-Continent Trade and Transportation Corridor (IMCTTC) and supports NASCO's mission to strengthen the Secure, Multi-Modal Trade and Transportation System.

2006 Texas Republican Party Platform

On Saturday, June 3, 2006, the Republican Party of Texas adopted their 2006 State Republican Party Platform. Under the first section of their platform, titled Preserving American Freedom, is a plank specific to the Trans-Texas Corridor. It reads:

"Trans-Texas Corridor — Because there are issues of confiscation of private land [i.e., KELO, State and National sovereignty and other similar concerns, we urge the repeal of the Trans-Texas Corridor legislation." [page P-4]

The NAFTA Corridors: Offshoring U.S. Transportation Jobs to Mexico

U.S. workers, who have seen so many lucrative manufacturing jobs moved overseas, assumed that import transportation and distribution jobs could not be offshored and were, therefore, relatively secure.

Current transportation trends are proving labor’s assumption to be dead wrong. Sparked by organized resistance and wildcat actions by workers against falling wages and deteriorating working conditions at America’s ports and on the nation’s highways, the flow of container traffic is being shifted to a south-north orientation. By leveraging both the U.S. and Mexican governments and taking advantage of the terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), big capital is developing container terminals in Mexico and using that country as a land bridge and labor pool to deliver shipping containers to destinations in the United States at discount prices.

* * *

Chart 1 signals the beginning of the assault on labor in the north, which could eventually result in the offshoring of hundreds of thousands of transportation jobs to the south and undermine the working class on both sides of the border significantly. The success of this offshoring scheme rests on the development of vast transportation corridors in the United States and Mexico and the extensive exploitation of Mexican labor to both construct and operate the system. The recently established NAFTA Railway (Transportación Ferroviaria Mexicana, Texas Mexican Railway, and Kansas City Southern Railway, merged under control of the latter), which began operations in the Lazaro Cardenas–Kansas City Transportation Corridor in 2003, offers a preview of capital’s offshoring plan in action.

Mexico plans an alternative to the jammed docks in L.A., Long Beach

By Diane Lindquist
Union-Tribune Staff Writer | August 14, 2005

As cargo clogs West Coast ports again this summer, Mexican officials and global shipping executives are getting ready to transform a remote bay 150 miles south of the border into a megaport to help relieve the Asian import glut.

The sleepy, sweeping inlet of Punta Colonet in Baja California will be transformed into a multibillion-dollar container port, one of the biggest maritime transportation centers on the West Coast of North America, under a plan by Mexico's government.

Mexico plans a multibillion-dollar project to remake Punta Colonet, a desolate, sparsely inhabited inlet two hours beyond Ensenada, into a major container port on the scale of those at Los Angeles and Long Beach.

The new port in Mexico will require major road construction for connections to the Superhighway corridor. I can only presume where funding for that will come from (and it won't be from Mexicans or Mexico).

I know what will happen to all the American jobs at the San Diego/Los Angeles ports when the Mexican port opens, the size of which will equal the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports. Just imagine what will happen to the communities and surrounding areas which currently depend upon the income generated by those ports and the union workers (illegals cannot be part of American unions) of those ports. I do wonder just where will all the young entry level workers go to find work when so many jobs will likely be "outsourced"? How many non-union businesses will be forced to close their doors because there's no longer a workforce (or families) to support their businesses, such restaurants, grocery stores, hardware stores, and clothing stores, to name just a few?

When this happens, will we continue to hear the same mantra that those were just "jobs Americans wouldn't do" so they're being shipped out to Mexico?

To add insult to injury, there's yet another upgrade to another port, closer to Mexico City, as stated in the following article (which is also referred to in the NASCO/NAIFN website: Strategic Agreements with Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas, Ports on the West Coast of Mexico):

Hutchison Ports Holdings to construct terminal at Mexican port
5/24/2006 | Intermodal

Hutchison Ports Holdings Group plans to spend $200 million to build a container terminal at the Port of Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico — a project that could mean more intermodal traffic for Kansas City Southern de México S.A. de C.V. and its parent, Kansas City Southern. [KCS' North American rail holdings and strategic alliances are primary components of a NAFTA Railway system, linking the commercial and industrial centers of the U.S., Canada and Mexico.]

The terminal is designed to handle 2 million containers annually. Hutchinson Ports expects the facility to handle 450,000 containers annually after the company completes the project’s first phase next year. The terminal’s second and third phases will increase annual capacity to 850,000 containers and 1.7 million containers, respectively.

[nicmarlo]

Oh, I see. You guys have been busy.

huh? Don't know what you're referring to?

[nicmarlo]

thanks....glad our county had the 4th yesterday...as it’s rained all day today....all day.

[puroresu]

Good points. He has indeed been pushing this issue since his earliest days in office.

The North American Union would be a disaster for America.

[puroresu]

I’ve seen AmRen a few times and it’s definitely a racially-based white nationalist site. I can understand it being forbidden here.

V-DARE, though, carries some excellent conservative writers, including (as you noted) Michelle Malkin. They even carry columns by “liberals” if they’re opposed to illegal and/or mass immigration. For instance, they’ve run articles by environmentalists who worry about the huge growth of urban sprawl in the western states.

They also carry the moonbat Paul Craig Roberts columns, apparently because he’s friends with the guy who runs V-DARE, even though his columns only rarely deal with immigration.

As I understand it, V-DARE has carried a few columns by white nationalists. They did so on the grounds that black nationalists and Latino nationalists are permitted, under the rules of Political Correctness, to hold their views without earning condemnation. La Raza, an explicitly racist organization, is just one example of a racial supremacist group that’s given mainstream respectability by the media and both political parties. So V-DARE’s reasoning is that white nationalists shouldn’t be banned from the public debate on racial issues if other racially-driven groups are permitted to have their say. I don’t know if carrying occasional columns by white nationalists is a good idea, but their reasoning for doing it is logically consistent.

[dennisw]

I agree with you on all counts about Vdare and AmRen differences. The Vdare blog is worth going to every day

[dennisw]

Other well known conservatives have said this (dead bill) is primarily amnesty for the larger employers of illegals. This bill would have negated the increasing number of local laws that make things tough for the employers of cheap labor

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

"huh? Don't know what you're referring to?"

Busy posting good info on this thread - I had thought the thread dead until your response :)

Lots of info and links I have and lots I don't.

Thanks again for the ping.

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

Another little piece of Diplomacy is CAFTA. As you know, this "agreements" will be a continuation of NAFTA. LINK

This is also troubling to me in that some of the agreements have been implemented without much fanfare - the Dominica agreements come to mind.

[Razz Barry]

As my brother’s sister would say, “It just gets worser and worser.”

[nicmarlo]

This is also troubling to me in that some of the agreements have been implemented without much fanfare

The media seems to be complicit....

[nicmarlo]

Indeed, it surely does!

[nicmarlo]

you’re quite welcome. : )

[Lloyd227]

How is that the author of this piece (as well as at least the first 10 posts I scrolled down through) see no reason to list, AT LEAST AS A REMOTE POSSIBILITY that this immigration / open border fiasco could be remotely related to the 4 or 5 other events that all require free movement of people and exchange between the US, Canada and Mexico?

I know I'm typically the one wearing the tin-foil hat around here, but come on people - sometimes it really is that obvious.

[WorkerbeeCitizen]

Another little pain in my patriotic warm fuzzy is this little "non-existent" organization

[nicmarlo]

I don’t recall knowing about that one......thanks for bringing it to my attention. As soon as I’m able, I will have to check that out more thoroughly.

ping to post #156

[dennisw]

Another little piece of Diplomacy is CAFTA. As you know, this "agreements" will be a continuation of NAFTA. LINK

Notice how NAFTA came right after the collapse of USSR.
The energy of our elites that had been devoted to anti USSR proxy wars was now devoted to "free trade" with Mexico

This mass illegal immigration was a consequence of NAFTA. It brought lots of Mexicans right to our border where the maqilladora factories are located. These became staging areas for illegals to jump our border. Once they got so close to the border many migrating Mexicans decided to crash our border. 
NAFTA also sent our cheap Mid West corn to Mexico where it under priced Mexican corn. This threw millions of Mexican peasants off the land, they also came here and settled in our rural areas. These country bumpkins love living out in the sticks in our Southern states such as Georgia and the Carolinas

[dennisw]

How is that the author of this piece (as well as at least the first 10 posts I scrolled down through) see no reason to list, AT LEAST AS A REMOTE POSSIBILITY that this immigration / open border fiasco could be remotely related to the 4 or 5 other events that all require free movement of people and exchange between the US, Canada and Mexico?

Please clarify. What other events?

[nicmarlo]

You’re absolutely right about all of that. Also, the wages and jobs in Mexico have gotten MUCH WORSE after NAFTA than it was beforehand.

I’ve read Mexican reports about this, have a pdf file on it....it’s a bit dated, but it’s unbelievable how detrimental NAFTA has been, yet they continue to push it and CAFTA....with consequences so bad as this, it could only be intentional.