Posted on 03/16/2002 12:50:08 PM PST by Tancredo Fan
Edited on 04/14/2004 10:05:07 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
That is an unbelievable growth rate, and it's inevitable that they will have to expand their living space. It's probably the biggest dilemma the US will ever face in it's lifetime as a nation. It's obvious that we are being used as a safety valve for Mexico's elite, and politicians here who accept and encourage it. The future does not portend well for future Americans if what's happening isn't halted completely, and the border closed. And Mexico is going to have to slow down their birth rate. Like it or not, we're stuck with this nation, and we'll have do something to help it. Anything however but the status-quo.
My relatives in Bisbee tell me border incursions are a trickle nowadays compared to 1-2 years ago. Many of those at the time were from Central America, not Mexico, after the hurricane devastated the area.
I think the Mexican leadership regards the high birth rate as an asset. I believe that it serves their purpose: They know that desperation will drive people north into gringolandia. Which of course means, eventually, political power here, and cash remittances to there. They are DESPERATE to keep their people HERE. It is EXACTLY what they want. ALL of their efforts are aimed at that, which is why immigration supposedly being off the table at the summit has to be a big blow to them.
It postpones the long term plan for population driven political hegemony in the U.S.
So I don't see them trying to solve this anytime soon. In fact, I'm sure that they will encourage more big families, and then literally drive them over the border, where their fellow travelers and consular officials will work night and day to keep them here.
Tancredo said in a quote the other day that he thought it "bizarre" that the president of another country would be trying so hard to get rid of his own people. But it's not bizarre from their point of view (the Mexican leadership). It's quite rational. Helps them achieve their goal.
I'm familiar with the BBaTC south of Ensenada and have visited it back in 85 or 86. I met a lady who was building a home on the beach there and went out to see the construction. The homes were incredible for what the were paying for them. Marble floors, countertops, and baths. And you could step right out onto the beach. Too bad, looks like another Mexican swindle of the gringos. As a neighbor in Mulege Baja Sur once said to me, "Mexico would be a beautiful country if it weren't for the Mexicans."
Maybe that's ejido? That has to do with the weird collective land ownership in Mexico. But dividing the ejidos seems to do no good either because then the peasants sell their portion and end up landless.
He does but shouldn't dictate the terms of the relationship with the US. I even believe helping Fox (but on our terms) because of the mess the Clinton administration made of things with Mexico. They have a whooping drug cartel problem and partly because the drug cartels got so enormous in the 90s and much had to do with how poorly the Clinton adminstration handled our INS.
When it comes to most politicians, I have very little trust. I hope I'm wrong, but the powers that be in Washington like Bush could be just appeasing the American population at the moment, and Fox understands that. The Chinese once said that they can wait forever if they have to, but eventually Communism would win the day. For the Mexicans, it's one step back, two steps forward, only for them it's the hegemony of US territory.
Our only hope right now is with the few politicians like Tancredo. I believe him to be sincere in his desire to get immigration under control. He is a rising star in the Republican Party. And with immigration quickly becoming THE defining issue in the country in the coming years, he may have Presidential possibilities. But the Bill Bennetts will crawl out of the woodwork to try and discredit him. In fact, I'm suprised they haven't already.
Not a word was said by our government about this, and the newspeople here in the states did not mention it. This happened about three years ago.
I take this as a good sign. Things have gotten so bad in America with the unchecked invasion from the south that the Bennett, Kemp, Gigot open borders crowd are having a hard time defending their positions for more of the same. Their arguments do not sell as is so evident on FR because the associated problems of mass illegal immigration are out in the open and can't be swept under the rug anymore. We can expect that the neo-con air head wing of the republican party will again try to reassert their unlimited any-kind of immigration is good nonsense but this time around it is going to be meet with huge resistance from many quarters. And pulling the tattered old race card trick that they learned from the socialists isn't going to work. This is the silver lining of 9/11.
The Bush's of the world are all in agreement: borders are anachronistic. They see the intermingling of the populations as a good thing (you'll hear them talking about "integration of the economies" "our deep ties" etc); it's just an ongoing process which is encouraged, if not deliberately facilitated (I'd believe that, at this point).
To the extent that we resist, they will back off. But aided by the aggressiveness which is characteristic of the Mexican hispanic hierarchy, and the empty greed of American business, the process will continue. They only go as far as they think they can push us this year, but next year is not that far away.
Tancredo will gain supporters. But his biggest nemesis, unfortunately, lives in the White House right now. And that means that in the end, unless we are far more insistent than we are now (and could we be any louder than the last few days?), the globalists will succeed in obliterating the border and any notions of ethnic solidarity or sense of American nationhood.
Sorry to sound so dour. It's just what I see coming. Sept. 11th? A little way point on the road. That's what Powell called it. 3000 people dead, and it's a goddamn "diversion". On the way to what, Colin?
Well if the Senate passes 245I this week Bush will still have that little present for Fox to cheer him up. I agree. I've seen enough of Jorge Bush II and the past history of his family to know that he will keep on pushing this open borders insanity however he can, where he can, no matter what the costs. Bush cannot be trusted to protect our borders and to enforce our immigration laws. He made that clear a few days ago when he all but said that he will do nothing to deport illegal aliens in this country. In fact, he seems to have a burning desire to help illegal aliens find jobs here.
We got one serious problem with this Frat Boy heir of the Bush Royalty. He may be a one-termer but Bush can do a heck of a lot of damage to America in the next 3 years.
...and with the "war on terror" as an ongoing distraction, we do have a rather big problem, don't we. How can the country fend off the threat of more mayhem from within if we have to rely on an INS run by a trainee the likes of Ziglar, and a Homeland Security chief the likes of Ridge? Neither have a lick of experience. They are political appointees, not professionals.
Yep, all part of the design I'm afraid. That Bush picked an open borders libertarian like Ziglar who openly admits he doesn't like to enforce our immigration laws tells it all. Yes, with the distraction of the war Bush can get away with a lot questionable policy decisions and it all gets lost in the shuffle.
The only good thing I see is that more people are finally speaking up about our reckless immigration policies and putting the heat on our elected officials for reform. But I don't think the point on immigration will be driven home until many of our politicians have their careers shortened because of their pro, anything goes position on immigration.
As it stands the republicans think that while the majority of Americans want immigration reform they don't make this a big issue in their voting. So far, they are right.
In an odd way, given Bush's open borders agenda, he is less of a threat to the long term sovereignty of America when his popularity is low. I never thought I'd say this about a Republican president. Wait, no, I said the very same thing when George Bush I was in office.
Nice post Regulator. Yes, it is difficult to be optimistic given the dynamics in place.
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.