Posted on 11/10/2006 5:46:28 AM PST by jamesrichards
Supporters of granting citizenship to some or all illegal immigrants say the Democratic takeover of Congress has galvanized their cause and could lead to sweeping changes in immigration law. Democrats will take over leadership of committees in the House and the Senate that could guide new immigration legislation, while President Bush and the presumptive House speaker, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, have cast changes to immigration laws as an opportunity to demonstrate bipartisan bonhomie. We have never had the table set for the possibility of action as we do now, Andrea LaRue, a Democratic political consultant, said in a conference call with reporters.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
It has become time to exercise that option and create 8 more Republican Senate seats.
You mean "illegal crackers"?
How do you prove that if they changed their names?
Third, our newly accepted countrymen have to learn enough basic English within two years to effectively communicate with a typical Anglo.
Racist!
I love their food, I enjoy their music and like their work ethic.
So does GW. He likes it so much it became the cornerstone of his presidency to remake America in their likeness. He wants to call it the "new America".
We are now one of the largest Spanish-speaking nations in the world. We're a major source of Latin music, journalism and culture. Just go to Miami, or San Antonio, Los Angeles, Chicago or West New York, New Jersey ... and close your eyes and listen. You could just as easily be in Santo Domingo or Santiago, or San Miguel de Allende. For years our nation has debated this change -- some have praised it and others have resented it. By nominating me, my party has made a choice to welcome the new America. As I speak, we are celebrating the success of democracy in Mexico. George Bush from a campaign speech in Miami, August 2000. |
Here is an excerpt of a good critique of that speech:
In equating our intimate historic bonds to our mother country and to Canada with our ties to Mexico, W. shows a staggering ignorance of the civilizational facts of life. The reason we are so close to Britain and Canada is that we share with them a common historical culture, language, literature, and legal system, as well as similar standards of behavior, expectations of public officials, and so on. My Bush Epiphany By Lawrence Auster
The Path to National Suicide by Lawrence Auster (1990)
An essay on multi-culturalism and immigration.
How can we account for this remarkable silence? The answer, as I will try to show, is that when the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 was being considered in Congress, the demographic impact of the bill was misunderstood and downplayed by its sponsors. As a result, the subject of population change was never seriously examined. The lawmakers stated intention was that the Act should not radically transform Americas ethnic character; indeed, it was taken for granted by liberals such as Robert Kennedy that it was in the nations interest to avoid such a change. But the dramatic ethnic transformation that has actually occurred as a result of the 1965 Act has insensibly led to acceptance of that transformation in the form of a new, multicultural vision of American society. Dominating the media and the schools, ritualistically echoed by every politician, enforced in every public institution, this orthodoxy now forbids public criticism of the new path the country has taken. We are a nation of immigrants, we tell ourselves and the subject is closed. The consequences of this code of silence are bizarre. One can listen to statesmen and philosophers agonize over the multitudinous causes of our decline, and not hear a single word about the massive immigration from the Third World and the resulting social divisions. Opponents of population growth, whose crusade began in the 1960s out of a concern about the growth rate among resident Americans and its effects on the environment and the quality of life, now studiously ignore the question of immigration, which accounts for fully half of our population growth.
This curious inhibition stems, of course, from a paralyzing fear of the charge of racism. The very manner in which the issue is framedas a matter of equal rights and the blessings of diversity on one side, versus racism on the othertends to cut off all rational discourse on the subject. One can only wonder what would happen if the proponents of open immigration allowed the issue to be discussed, not as a moralistic dichotomy, but in terms of its real consequences. Instead of saying: We believe in the equal and unlimited right of all people to immigrate to the U.S. and enrich our land with their diversity, what if they said: We believe in an immigration policy which must result in a staggering increase in our population, a revolution in our culture and way of life, and the gradual submergence of our current population by Hispanic and Caribbean and Asian peoples. Such frankness would open up an honest debate between those who favor a radical change in Americas ethnic and cultural identity and those who think this nation should preserve its way of life and its predominant, European-American character. That is the actual choiceas distinct from the theoretical choice between equality and racismthat our nation faces. But the tyranny of silence has prevented the American people from freely making that choice.
Just how many WILL learn English and since our government doesn't enforce the law now, what makes you think they will in this area? They won't learn English but they will learn how to claim "earned income credit" Just where does that come from?
They need illegals. Tehy're running out of dependent classes to exploit to keep themselves in power.
Unfortunately, there is little chance of getting another Alito or Roberts on the Supreme Court over the next couple of years, unless Dubya has the backbone to make a series of recess appointments.
Some of us have been telling you for a while that this president, like his Daddy, is a RINO.
You betya, why apply , under demos you will get everything you want without being a citizen. Now is the time to sue cause the lawyers will win every liberla case they can get. Oh well going shopping before my tax cut goes for thr alliens , it will you know.
My grandson just got out of plastic surgery yesterday, with half his face cut to ribbons by the window glass. The driver of the construction van tried to drive away but after a tire went flat, he got out and started running down the road. A good citizen that saw it all stopped the guy.
Why was he running away while my grandson lay there bleeding? Because he had no documents, no drivers license or insurance and did not speak English.
We are going to have a financial talk with the Georgia construction company who hired the guy.
GWB has lost his backbone and now is trying to find a way to cut and run from Iraq, give amnesty to illegals, and wants to pass a minimum wage. Without the Republicans in Congress to block him, and the Rats supporting him, he can do it. That is why he fired Rumsfield.
The Democrat leadership did not make amnesty a campaign "issue, because they knew it would lose them the middle. Many conservative Democrats, inc. Webb and McGaskill in addition to many incumbents campaigned AGAINST amnesty. It's not a winning issue - that's why Democrats nationally avoided campaigning on it. They knew it would alienate the middle they already had on their side via Iraq.
I don't think amnesty's the slam-dunk many are assuming it is. ""
You got it right. it is not a slam-dunk. Democrats have to worry about maintain their majority, which is slim. Most of those district who voted democrats are red districts. I dont think liberalize immigration would work their favors..
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.