Liberal immigration adds to U.S. woes

Boston Herald ^ | 2/18/02 | Don Feder

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

Someone forgot to tell Jorge Bush that he is not the president of Mexico. The leader of this nation is expected to protect our interests - not those of our neighbor to the south.

When Bush goes to Mexico on Thursday to meet with President Vicente Fox, he brings with him the gift of a House vote in favor of amnesty for tens of thousands of Fox's countrymen living here illegally.

Last week, the House voted 275-137 to allow illegals who are qualified - through marriage or employment - to apply for visas without going home. (Why should lawbreakers be inconvenienced?) It's estimated that 200,000 could take advantage of this get-into-the-country-legally card.

``This bill sends a message to the world that our country will be a beacon to all who love freedom and the opportunity to live, work and raise a family,'' House Republican leader Dick Armey of Texas proclaimed. Even if they thrash our laws to do so?

The latest amnesty sends an unmistakable message to hungry hordes huddled on our borders: ``America is a country of saps, whose leaders will trade national sovereignty for a little Latin lovin' at the polls. If you can make it past the Border Patrol and hang on for a few years, you too can be amnestied. Then you can send for the rest of your extended family.''

Why not just tear down barriers, build a one-way highway from Tijuana and have the Border Patrol hand out fruit baskets?

As it is, the Border Patrol annually apprehends 1.2 million people trying to infiltrate the country. It's estimated that there are between 6 million and 11 million illegal aliens within our borders. Each year, their number swells by 125,000.

But illegal immigration is only one facet of the problem. The foreign-born hover around 29 million - as a percentage of the population, double what they were in 1970.

The Census Bureau estimates that over the next 50 years, U.S. population will increase from 248 million to 400 million, with two-thirds of that growth attributable to immigration. We are importing poverty, ignorance and disunity.

The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that among immigrants who've been here 10 to 20 years, 34 percent lack a high school diploma, compared to 10 percent of the native-born. The former are 50 percent more likely to exist in or near poverty than the latter. It's reasonable to suppose that illegals are even less educated and more poverty-prone than long-time legal immigrants.

Americans never voted in favor of open borders. There was never a plebiscite on our becoming the welcome wagon of the world. No one ever said to us: ``How would you like to take in over half of the world's immigrants? You can educate their children, provide them with welfare benefits, lose your language, and watch as your national identity slowly fades away.''

In Texas last month, two Democratic Senate candidates debated in Spanish. Tony Sanchez, who won the nomination, said he was ``proud to be bilingual and bicultural.'' Does his divided loyalty extend beyond culture?

But a funny thing happened on the way to the latest amnesty. A majority of the president's party balked at the latest move toward balkanization. Republicans voted against the green-card giveaway by 123-92. It passed only with overwhelming Democratic support.

Except for Rep. John Sununu of New Hampshire, all of the House Republicans now running for Senate opposed the bill. While Bush does his Mexican hat dance, they march to a popular beat.

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a leader of the GOP's nationhood wing, was scathing: ``Sept. 11th brought home in the sharpest way possible that we have no control over our borders. The White House is convinced this type of pandering will actually result in a higher percentage of votes from minority communities. I adamantly disagree with them.''

A former Democratic congresswoman, the late Barbara Jordan of Texas (who chaired a presidential immigration commission in the 1990s), put the matter in the proper context: ``Immigration is not a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution to everyone and anyone in the world who wishes to come to the United States. It is a privilege granted by the people of the United States to those whom we choose to admit.''

It's time for the American people to reassert their democratic right to control their fate. Immigration policy is national destiny.

[Dick Bachert]

At the time of his approach to Red China, Richard Nixon (a REPUBLICAN for those of you from Rio Linda) was approached by an internationalist businessman who was literally salivating over the prospect of access to the BILLIONS of potential Chinese slave laborers and “customers” (although this rocket scientist had apparently not yet concluded that the Chinese people would be hard pressed to buy his stuff without MONEY!!!!).

This businessman was concerned that Nixon had been SAYING that he was cooling to the idea of an opening to Red China to quell the uprising within the then very much more America-First rank and file Republican Party.

As reported years later, Nixon told the businessman
“DON’T LISTEN TO WHAT WE SAY: WATCH WHAT WE DO!"

It is my strong memory of THAT event which prompts me to post this graphic!

AS YOU READ THIS, IT APPEARS THAT BUSH, DASCHLE AND OTHERS ARE WELL DOWN THE ROAD TO USING THIS PAGE FROM THE NIXON PLAYBOOK!

Look, America – the IDEA not the PLACE – can only continue to exist if we heed the advice of the founding fathers (paraphrased here in the current vernacular for residents of Rio Linda), to wit:
“The Founding Fathers have determined that failure to WATCH politicians – ALL POLITICIANS (even those you may worship!) – is dangerous to the security of this nation and to the freedoms we paid such a heavy price to TRY to leave you and your children.”

“Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is FORCE. And, like fire, it is a DANGEROUS SERVANT AND A FEARSOME MASTER.”
That from that notorious tinfoil hat wearing, radical wing-nut, George Washington.

[4Freedom]

A former Democratic congresswoman, the late Barbara Jordan of Texas (who chaired a presidential immigration commission in the 1990's), put the matter in the proper context: "Immigration is not a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution to everyone and anyone in the world who wishes to come to the United States. It is a PRIVILEGE granted by the people of the United States to those we choose to admit."

Now that's suitable for framing.

Great post, TC. It's hard to believe that Bush is to the left of Barbara Jordan on illegal immigration.

[Lil'freeper]

Wow! This came from a Boston newspaper?

[4Freedom]

Ping your 'ping' lists, this article's pretty good.

There may be hope for Boston, yet. Is this the same Boston that's in the Kennedy clan's Massachusetts?

LOL.

[Dane]

Wow! This came from a Boston newspaper?

Yup the Boston paper that is dwarfed in circulation by the much more liberal Boston Globe.

But that is neither here nor there. Mr. Feder is known for his red meat articles and he will find his audience on this thread, IMHO.

[4Freedom]

"...he will find his audience on this thread."

You say that like it's not a good thing, Dane. :-)

[Tancredo Fan]

Thanks for the bump. Good commentary. Feder is right on the money. The Dems are praising the administration for this 245(i) scam. Tancredo for President - 2004!

[Howlin]

When Bush goes to Mexico on Thursday to meet with President Vicente Fox, he brings with him the gift of a House vote in favor of amnesty for tens of thousands of Fox's countrymen living here illegally.

*Sigh* A demonstrable lie.

[Sabertooth]

*Sigh* A demonstrable lie.

A demonstrable fact...

Section 245 of the Act allows an alien to apply for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident (LPR) while in the United States if certain conditions are met. The alien must have been inspected and admitted or paroled, be eligible for an immigrant visa and admissible for permanent residence, and, with some exceptions, have maintained lawful nonimmigrant status. The alien must also not have engaged in unauthorized employment. Section 245(i) of the Act allows an alien to apply to adjust status under section 245 notwithstanding the fact that he or she entered without inspection, overstayed, or worked without authorization.
LINK.

Last week's 245(i) extension was specifically about illegals.

Letting Illegals stay = Amnesty for those Illegals.

[Howlin]

I personally know that the facts have been posted to you specifically more than once, so I won't bother to get into an argument with you, but I will say once more it's NOT tens of thousands.

But if you need that inaccurate argument to make your case or further your cause, carry on; most of us out here KNOW the facts and seeing you continue to post the same distortions repeatedly does nothing except make you look like specious poster.

Regardless of what position you take on this issue, the very least you can do to show respect for your fellow forum members is to attempt to appear to be using the facts as they are, not as you need them to be.

[Sabertooth]

A former Democratic congresswoman, the late Barbara Jordan of Texas (who chaired a presidential immigration commission in the 1990s), put the matter in the proper context: ``Immigration is not a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution to everyone and anyone in the world who wishes to come to the United States. It is a privilege granted by the people of the United States to those whom we choose to admit.''

It's time for the American people to reassert their democratic right to control their fate.

Thanks for the ping, TF.

[timestax]

bump !

[Sabertooth]

I personally know that the facts have been posted to you specifically more than once, so I won't bother to get into an argument with you, but I will say once more it's NOT tens of thousands.

I've seen distortions and misunderstandings in this regard, but no facts. You've posted several times "you know better" types of remarks to me, but if you ever supported them yourself, I missed it.

The 200,000 number came from proponents of the bill. I've seen you refer to it yourself. Are you saying you have new information on this?

But if you need that inaccurate argument to make your case or further your cause, carry on; most of us out here KNOW the facts and seeing you continue to post the same distortions repeatedly does nothing except make you look like specious poster.

Why don't you speak to my point? Show me and everyone my "distortion."

Section 245 applies to foreign nationals who entered legally, and encountered a paperwork snafu. I've no problem with these folks.

Section 245(i) applies to Illegals.

That's not specious, that's to the point.

Regardless of what position you take on this issue, the very least you can do to show respect for your fellow forum members is to attempt to appear to be using the facts as they are, not as you need them to be.

I presented facts to you, and that's disrespect?

[BOBTHENAILER]

A demonstrable fact

Please read today's Wall Street Journal for a dissenting opinion. Article entitled Immigrants & Terrorists, page A18, editorial section.

I know that many think they know exactly what 245i does, but apparently those IDIOTS at the journal don't concur.

[Sabertooth]

Please read today's Wall Street Journal for a dissenting opinion. Article entitled Immigrants & Terrorists, page A18, editorial section.

Got a link?

[BOBTHENAILER]

Hate to expose my lack of expertise, but I'll have to wait until my secretary gets back. Sometime after 1:00 EST

[Sabertooth]

Hate to expose my lack of expertise, but I'll have to wait until my secretary gets back. Sometime after 1:00 EST

Fair enough. Flag me.

[harpseal]

BTT

We are losing on this issue but maybe it will change if it is not already too late.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[Brownie74]

Thanks for the pings. I just finished reading this on American Patrol. Barbara Jordan got it right. I think I will copy her words and frame them.