Gingrich Slams Obama Administration as ‘Pro-Islamic’

WSJ ^ | February 28, 2012 | Danny Yadron

[kabar]

I used the word “Pyramid” on purpose. The Government is running a giant Pyramid Scheme with Entitlements. It REQUIRES the massive immigration and growth numbers you cite to keep the money coming in ahead (or now within borrowing distance) of money going out. I don’t think the people in charge care at all about its long-term survivability. They just don’t want to get caught short, now. When the immigrants get old, they’ll just move the football somewhere else.

The median age of immigrants is now older than native Americans. The decade ending in 2010 was the largest in our history--13.9 million even though during the same period we lost a net of 400,000 jobs. There is no correlation between immigration and job needs. And people without jobs don't pay SS taxes. Instead they are on welfare. Milton Friedman said that, “You cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state.” We have both.

SS has been running in the red since 2010 and Medicare since 2008. They will continue to do so until they run out of IOUs in the trust funds and then by law, must cut benefits. This despite the fact that we had the highest number of immigrants enter this country during the past decade in our history. Moreover, one in 8 in this country is foreign born compared to one in 21 in 1970. So how can increasing the number of immigrants each year help us when our history over the past 40 years shows just the opposite? And we have declining and depressed wages during that period.

FYI: The SS Disability Fund goes broke in 2016, which means that payments must be reduced. What is going to happen is that Congress will authorize SS to shift IOUs from the SSTF to the SS Disability Trust Fund to keep on paper at least, SS disability solvent enough to pay full benefits. In the process, it will reduce the time SS will exhaust its IOUs-now around 2036. Oh, and Obamacare kicks in in 2014, which will no doubt increase USG subsidies to both legal and illegal immigrants.

50% to 60% of the illegal aliens lack even a high school degree. How will an amnesty help us increase revenue? And 25% of the adult legal immigrants who enter annually lack a high school degree. We are importing hundreds of thousands of high school dropouts annually and you are telling me this helps our economy?

[kabar]

How are we propping up the regime in Saudi Arabia? Whom do you think will replace the current royal family? I can tell you it won’t be Jeffersonian democrats. More than likely, it will be radical religious extremists who hate the West.

[Empire_of_Liberty]

O.K. You’re taxing my interest in this, though I would like to understand.

What do YOU think the near-universal drive to bring in immigrants both here in the US and in Europe is a result of?

I don’t think the elderly are immigrating. I think it’s the young, so the median age data doesn’t make your case, it makes mine. Even more have to come in to make up for the elderly.

It doesn’t matter what work is done as long as there is work done. More productive (higher paying) work would be better, but a population consisting of nothing but elderly “takers” is a total bust, so anything else has to be an improvement, right?

Globally, governments are doing this. It’s not just the US. I think what these countries have, with closed boarders would be where Greece is already or beyond. The people running things know this, and I think massive imigration is their “answer”. You have lots of data to the contrary, at least long term, but I don’t think that they’re too bright, or thinking too much about the future.

What are your thoughts? Please, no more graphs:-) Why the push for immigration, if not to prop-up a broken system, as I speculate?

[GOPJ]

My local paper didn’t us the term ‘Muslim’ until the jump... then it was mixed with other possibilities. Liberal elites under Obama are getting weirder every day.

[caww]

Gingrich has described Sharia (Islamic law) as a “mortal threat” and called for federal legislation that would ban its use throughout the United States.

In a speech on July 29, 2010, at the American Enterprise Institute, he stated:

“The fight against sharia and the maddrassas and mosques which teach hatred and fanaticism is the heart of the enemy movement from which the terrorists spring forth. ... One of the things I am going to suggest today is a federal law which says no court anywhere in the United States under any circumstance is allowed to consider Sharia as a replacement for American law.”

In response to the Park51 controversy, Gingrich opposed the center and stated:

“There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia. The time for double standards that allow Islamists to behave aggressively toward us while they demand our weakness and submission is over.”

He also said,

“We as Americans don’t have to tolerate people who are supportive of violence against us, building something at the site of the violence.”

[caww]

and another:

“The next time it will be a germ agent or gas or a nuclear weapon, we must plan for a coercive, not a consensual, campaign. There are only two teams on the planet for this war. There is the team that represents civilization, and there is the team that represents terrorism. Just tell us which. There are no neutrals.” -Newt-

[onyx]

You’re absolutely right.
GOOD to see you dearest one.

[JohnPDuncan]

I think it’s more to do with the Iraq war than the response to 9/11. Most of them would have supported taking out OBL and responding to 9/11.

The reversal is down to Iraq war and heated rhetoric on our side.

I’m trying to argue for a toning down and trying to reach this community before we lose another voting block to the enemy for decades to come.

[JohnPDuncan]

Newt is using the language here... there are various blogs on the internet that claim to be “conservative” that infest our movement and CPAC and are anti-Islamic. You know who i’m talking about and i’m not going to get personal but these people are destroying our outreach efforts to win back this community.

RE: changing demographics. This is a vote we OWNED 12 years ago and has completely flipped. Not because of new citizens of a lax immigration policy because they were all Bush voters who now vote Obama and Democrat. This disgusts me and it’s not down to 9/11 or the War in Afghanistan which most of them would have supported but down to the heated rhetoric and the Iraq war which was a seriously bad policy move by Bush and the GOP 10 years ago.

[Artcore]

Newt is an imbecile! Tomorrow he'll be coming out praising Obama for something. Just go away Newt...please!

[cookcounty]

Dr. Newt may not have been the ideal candidate for Prez in 2012, but he's definitely the ideal professor at the Stop Eating Democrat Crap University.

All Conservative candidates should be required to get 16 credit hours in Newtonic Argumentation. On second look at last year's field, make it 60 hours of remedial work, and then a full year of internship with the Master.

Hopefully that will help them overcome their eating disorder so we won't have to spend so much time throwing up..

[JohnPDuncan]

A point if I may about the changing demographics which I think you have done some excellent research on:

The kids of these immigrants are citizens anyway. Anchor babies means amnesty basically every year forever and it’s not going to change. They’re turning up and having babies who are natural born citizens.

There is no way we’re going to be able to change the constitution and this silly interpretation...

So what happens? These kids grow up in illegal immigrant communities and they’re citizens! They can vote! Who do they vote for ? they’re going to vote Democrat because they’re the ones who are perceived to be pro-immigration.

If a child of an illegal immigrant perceives a bias against their mother or father (however much they have broken the law and are in the wrong) then they’re not going to give a party a second look who are telling them to ‘self-deport’ (thanks Romney!)

This is another suicidal mistake by the GOP and by anyone who rejects ALL forms of normalization which is actually most of the House Republicans who are in safe districts and do not care whether we win another national election again as they’ll be in congress for 30-40 years whatever happens before they retire and head off to K street to make millions a year.

I support normalizing them but denying them welfare and as long as the border can be secured with a fence or whatever other metric. I want the border states to have more of a say and to let them do it rather than corrupt administrations and the Fed government.

I would rather have Perry or Brewer in charge than Napolitano. I do NOT support the Feds nulifying the laws in those states. If AZ wants to take action against illegal immigration i’m all for it. Good on them and let them get on with it. Feds be damned.

Now here’s the problem: We’re not going to deport all these people and their citizen/voting children are we? Realistically it’s not going to happen. Groups of people are not going to be rounded up and mass deported no matter how much we scream for it.

We now have the marxist demogoguing the issue at every opportunity and exploiting it for political gain. He will keep screaming the GOP hates immigrants and the Democrats will keep winning that hispanic voting block forever like they have blacks making us the minority.

It doesn’t have to be that way. We can put ourselves outfront and turn the tables on the lying Marxist and become the pro-sensible immigration party. The pro-we support hard working immigrants party who want a better life not mooch off the hard work of other people. The pro-teach them the constitution party and the value of hard work and self-improvement. The PRO-AMERICAN party.

Why not? I’m not going to cede to this Marxist any vote of any citizen whether they’re the children of illegal immigrants or a Muslim.

The bill he’s produced of course is terrible and I do not support it and wish for a different policy and administration but we have to deal with what we’ve got.

I support the House GOP trying to make this horrible bill better and ensuring we have border security by delegating it to the border states in some fashion and denying them welfare/entitlements or whatever.

I really don’t know it’s a tough issue but it must be confronted and stragegized. Simply screaming deport them all is not going to work. Screaming for existing law to be enforced is not going to work. The Marxist has power and will for the next 4 years and who knows who will be in after that.

Our current posture ensures our own demise.

[kabar]

O.K. You’re taxing my interest in this, though I would like to understand.

Too much information for you or is the information running counter to your knowledge of the subject? I have been working full time on this issue for over 6 years as part of a grassroots organization that lobbies on the Hill and in Richmond. I have had one on one meetings with some prominent Reps in Congress on this issue. Personally, I believe immigration is the defining issue of our time and it affects every major existential challenge facing this nation. I also believe that an amnesty will destroy this country with the stroke of a pen.

What do YOU think the near-universal drive to bring in immigrants both here in the US and in Europe is a result of?

It is really comparing apples to oranges in terms of immigration in the US and Europe. In Europe, there are two kinds of immigration: one internally within the EU as part of the Maastricht Treaty and subsequent agreements that allow the free flow of labor within the EU. The other has to do with immigration from other non-EU countries--mostly from the Third World. This immigration is influenced by former colonial status and refugees. It is the latter form that is causing the most problems in Europe and these numbers are being reduced significantly by Europe. These Third World immigrants are not assimilating and they are disproportionately on welfare. They also commit more crimes.

Europe has demographic problems with almost all of the countries having birthrates below replacement level. They need workers to fill jobs, but they also want to keep their culture and language. It is why Cameron, Merkel, and Sarkozy have said that multiculturalism is dead. It is also why political parties, primarily on the right are attracting more political support due to their demands that immigration be reduced significantly. Their influence is growing.

In the US, motivated by parochial self-interest, the pro-mass immigration, open borders, amnesty advocates have formed a powerful coalition including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, labor union leaders, the Catholic Church, ethnic and racial groups, “moderate” Republicans, and the Democrat Party. The common thread that unites these groups is power, money, and the prospect of increased constituencies, even at the expense of our long-term national interests and survival.

Business wants an unending supply of cheap, exploitable labor that increases profits and depresses wages. In many cases, the illegal workers are more attractive since they can be paid off the books and not incur federal taxes or regulations. They can't complain given their status. These are mostly unskilled labor. Business privatizes the profits and socializes the costs with communities picking up educational, health care, and penal costs.

The labor unions want more members, the Catholic church more parishioners, ethnic and racial groups more political power, and the Dems more voters. And they have been successful in achieving their objectives.

I don’t think the elderly are immigrating. I think it’s the young, so the median age data doesn’t make your case, it makes mine. Even more have to come in to make up for the elderly.

LOL. Why don't you think that the elderly are not immigrating? Do you understand that under our immigration policies, immigrants thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification, immigrants can bring in their aged parents, siblings, uncles, aunts, etc.? Most of the 1.2 million legal immigrants who come here annually do so via kinship, not merit. About 10% come here due to merit. One Nigerian immigrant brought in 83 of his relatives.

The median age of immigrants in 2010 was 41.4 compared to 35.9 for natives. We have 40 million foreign born in this country. They also get old. But many are old when they come here.

It doesn’t matter what work is done as long as there is work done. More productive (higher paying) work would be better, but a population consisting of nothing but elderly “takers” is a total bust, so anything else has to be an improvement, right?

I don't want to tax your ability to comprehend charts and graphs, but the purpose of the one graph was to demonstrate that there is no correlation between the number of legal immigrants admitted to the US and our job needs. And we could double our current intake of immigrants and it would have almost no effect on our aging society. That said, the fertility rate in the US is almost at replacement level, 2.06 (2013) The US will add about 130 million people over the next 40 years or equivalent to the current populations of Canada and Mexico combined with 75% due to immigration. We have added about 35 million people since 2000. The median age is 37.1 (2012). In Germany it is 45.3; in the UK it is 40.2; and in Italy it is 43.8.

Globally, governments are doing this. It’s not just the US. I think what these countries have, with closed boarders would be where Greece is already or beyond. The people running things know this, and I think massive imigration is their “answer”. You have lots of data to the contrary, at least long term, but I don’t think that they’re too bright, or thinking too much about the future.

The US takes in more immigrants than the rest of the world combined. In the developed world, the trend is less immigrants, not more. We are importing poverty. Again, I don't want to tax you too much, but Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation has done a tremendous job documenting all of this. And Professor George Borjas of Harvard has done lots of work showing how immigration has depressed US wages. Why do you think our labor participation rates are at 40 year lows? If there is a shortage of labor, why are wages going down?

What are your thoughts? Please, no more graphs:-) Why the push for immigration, if not to prop-up a broken system, as I speculate?

I provided the reasons why the push and where it is coming from. Our immigration system needs to be changed to a merit based one and we should reduce legal immigration to 300,000 or less depending on our needs for skilled labor to be competitive in the global economy. Immigrants are not units of labor. They bring in their own culture and world view. There has been less assimilation and many of the new immigrants don't embrace the vision of our Founders. As we make this transition from a predominantly white European culture to a non-white majority with third world roots, will our country remain wedded to the Constitution and our history and culture? No country I have ever known has ever made a demographic transition in such a relative short period of time and remained the same.

[3catsanadog]

On March 8, ISNA President Mohamed Magid joined 10 other religious leaders in a 90-minute conversation with President Obama about immigration reform

The Muslims got 90 minutes. So far this year the Republicans got a few short minutes to discuss sequestration.

[iacovatx]

So...NRA members devoted to self-protection, safety, and freedom are “liars” but the Pres emphasizes how we must not say anything critical of those who hate, bomb, and threaten us? I am not compatible with that way of thinking.

[Empire_of_Liberty]

Yes. It’s too much information for a “highjack-this-thread” post.

You’ve told me enough. You’ve told me who you are.

BTW your attitude sucks. So if you’re lobbying for something, you might want to switch to arguing for the other side. You might make more progress.

[kabar]

The reversal is down to Iraq war and heated rhetoric on our side.

You have a selective memory that doesn't comport with the facts. There was overwhelming political support for taking down Saddam Hussein and invading.

Here is the Text of Joint Resolution On Iraq Passed By The United States Congress. It was passed 296-133 by the House of Representatives and 77-23 by the Senate on October 10 and 11, 2002

I’m trying to argue for a toning down and trying to reach this community before we lose another voting block to the enemy for decades to come.

I have no idea what you mean by toning down the rhetoric. I do know that Islamic fundamentalists have been trying to kill Americans at home and abroad for over 20 years. Boston is just the latest example of Islamic terrorism. The Times Square bomber, the underwear bomber, Ft. Hood, etc. were carried out by Muslims acting on religious reasons. The current occupant of the WH has tried to keep the word terrorism out of our lexicon and most certainly even acknowledging the Islamic connection. It is delusional and most Americans know it. Political considerations are secondary.

[JohnPDuncan]

Congress rarely represents the people. The public were split on the iraq invasion. I guarantee you Muslims did not like that policy.

I’m well aware of the dangers of radical islam which we should condemn but we must realize that we prop up a regime in SA that basically exports the most extreme version of it and has it as a state religion. Not all Muslims are of that variety and we should avoid painting a broad brush.

[kabar]

The kids of these immigrants are citizens anyway. Anchor babies means amnesty basically every year forever and it’s not going to change. They’re turning up and having babies who are natural born citizens.

The kids born here of illegal aliens--about 300,00 to 400,000 a year--are American citizens thru birthright citizenship. They get food stamps, Medicaid, etc. And of course it can be changed. The US is only one of 33 nations that has birthright citizenship. Ireland was the last European country to have it and they eliminated it thru a constitutional amendment.

There is no way we’re going to be able to change the constitution and this silly interpretation...

Without getting too far into the weeds, every year bills have been introduced to eliminate birthright citizenship. Scholars disagree as to whether Congress can just pass a law and eliminate it or that the 14th amendment would need to be amended. Either way, birthright citizenship can and should be changed.

So what happens? These kids grow up in illegal immigrant communities and they’re citizens! They can vote! Who do they vote for ? they’re going to vote Democrat because they’re the ones who are perceived to be pro-immigration.

Two thirds of legal immigrants vote Dem. They have doing it almost all of the 20th century and now the 21st century. They vote Democrat because it is the party of Big Government who hands out the free stuff. The problem is not so much that immigrants vote Dem, but their sheer numbers do have an electoral impact.

Since the 1965 Immigration Act, our pro-population growth immigration policies have fueled major demographic changes in a very short period of time. In 1970, non-Hispanic whites comprised 89 percent of the population; today they are 66 percent; and by 2042, they will be 50 percent. The Democrats, under the banner of multiculturalism and diversity, have forged a political coalition that depends on individuals coalescing around racial and ethnic identities rather than the issues. The continuing and increasing flow of minority immigrants, mostly poor and uneducated, provides a natural constituency for the Democrats, which see them as their principal source of political power.

87 percent of the 1.2 million legal immigrants entering annually are minorities as defined by the U.S. Government and almost all of the illegal aliens are minorities. By 2019 half of the children 18 and under in the U.S. will be classified as minorities and by 2042, half of the residents of this country will be minorities. Generally, immigrants and minorities vote predominantly for the Democrat Party. Hence, Democrats view immigration as a never-ending source of voters that will make them the permanent majority party.

Immigration, Political Realignment, and the Demise of Republican Political Prospects

I support normalizing them but denying them welfare and as long as the border can be secured with a fence or whatever other metric. I want the border states to have more of a say and to let them do it rather than corrupt administrations and the Fed government.

The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Arizona proving that it does.

Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay and work here is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty would be $2.6 trillion just for increased entitlement program costs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.

How are you going to stop these lawbreakers, once legalized, from receiving SS, Medicare, and Obamacare? They are paying into these systems. And their American born children are already receiving all the benefits.

Here is one of the most chilling videos you will ever see on how the left views amnesty. The speaker is Eliseo Medina, Executive Director of SEIU, in 2009 Could it be more clear as to what these bastards what to do with what you call "normalization." The Reps are committing political suicide.

This is another suicidal mistake by the GOP and by anyone who rejects ALL forms of normalization which is actually most of the House Republicans who are in safe districts and do not care whether we win another national election again as they’ll be in congress for 30-40 years whatever happens before they retire and head off to K street to make millions a year.

Why should we reward lawbreakers with the object of their crime? Conferring rights and privileges upon illegal aliens has a corrosive effect on the Rule of Law, the very foundation of our Republic. It is also a slap in the face to legal immigrants who have followed the rules and obeyed the laws. There are millions of immigrants waiting their turn overseas to enter the U.S. legally and approximately 40 million immigrants living in the U.S., most of whom followed the law. There are over 4 million legal intending immigrants waiting overseas for their turn to enter. They have completed all of the paperwork, background checks, physicals, etc.

Now here’s the problem: We’re not going to deport all these people and their citizen/voting children are we? Realistically it’s not going to happen. Groups of people are not going to be rounded up and mass deported no matter how much we scream for it.

No one is calling for mass deportation. You are creating a phony strawman. As mentioned above, attrition thru enforcement is a viable strategy.

We now have the marxist demogoguing the issue at every opportunity and exploiting it for political gain. He will keep screaming the GOP hates immigrants and the Democrats will keep winning that hispanic voting block forever like they have blacks making us the minority.

This strategy has been in place ever since the 1965 Immigration Act. The idea was to change the demographics of this country to make us look like the world. Unless we reduce the number of legal immigrants entering annually, the Dems will be the permanent majority party. One in 8 in this country is now foreign born--the highest in 90 years--compared to one in 21 in 1970. By 2050 one in 5 in this country will be foreign born. This has electoral consequences. We are being colonized by the Third World.

I really don’t know it’s a tough issue but it must be confronted and stragegized. Simply screaming deport them all is not going to work. Screaming for existing law to be enforced is not going to work. The Marxist has power and will for the next 4 years and who knows who will be in after that.

Here is a real plan for immigration reform:

1. Link immigration to the challenges facing this nation. Republicans need to engage in a national program of education and dialogue on immigration with the American people, linking the impact of mass immigration to the significant challenges facing this nation. Republican political leaders and conservative media must ensure that the impact of immigration is part of the dialogue every time a major issued is discussed whether it is the economy, jobs, the deficit, taxes, the environment, education, energy independence, entitlement programs, or health care. The objective is to inform the electorate and to move away from the highly charged rhetoric that has prevented any real dialogue on immigration and its impact on public policy.

2. Advocate a pro-immigrant policy of low immigration. Republicans need to provide the American people with their own comprehensive immigration reform plan, i.e., give people a reason to vote FOR something rather than just attack the other side’s proposals. Such a plan should contain the following elements:

 Formulate a merit based immigration system that brings in the skills and talents to keep us competitive in the global economy;

 Reduce immigration levels based on need more closely approximating 300,000 a year;

 Eliminate extended chain migration, i.e., family reunification, limiting it to the nuclear family,

 Secure the border;

 Enforce existing immigration laws to reduce the current illegal alien population and limit future illegal immigration, i.e., attrition thru enforcement. Enforcement would include: (1) ending the job magnet; (2) increasing coordination at the federal level by eliminating barriers to information sharing among agencies; (3) leveraging state and local enforcement resources; (4) fully implementing the US-VISIT Program to track and deport visa overstays; and (5) make mandatory and improve such programs as E-Verify and 287 [g] authority to assist employers and law enforcement in identifying illegal aliens;

 Eliminate birthright citizenship and the visa lottery program;

 Ensure that anyone who enters this nation illegally is not rewarded by being permitted to stay and work here; i.e., no amnesty;

 Streamline the processing and adjudication of immigration cases;

 Promote pro-immigrant measures that help newcomers assimilate and embrace the values and principles of our Founders and the Constitution.

Our current posture ensures our own demise.

It is not posture but the status quo that is destroying this nation not just the GOP.

And let's get real about legal immigration. Every ten years we have what amounts to an amnesty. With 1.2 million LEGAL IMMIGRANTS ENTERING ANNUALLY, they will be able to vote eventually and two thirds of them will vote Dem. Illegal immigration is the shiny little bauble that distracts us from the real game changer--legal immigration. The status quo will make the Dems the permanent majority party. Amnesty just hastens the process.

[kabar]

BTW your attitude sucks. So if you’re lobbying for something, you might want to switch to arguing for the other side. You might make more progress.

You are part of the problem--a low information voter who can't handle the truth. The other side is winning and the big loser will be this country.