Political Hay
Amnesty Again
Despite Obama’s cautious words, his early actions and appointments suggest he won’t put immigration enforcement first.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Barack Obama and his immigration-policy team are ready to give amnesty another chance.
This month, President Obama begins his push for “comprehensive immigration reform,” an effort at which both his predecessor and his 2008 general election opponent failed repeatedly. Despite the support of liberals like Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), George W. Bush and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) both saw their efforts founder on the questions of border security and what to do with the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants already in the United States.
Try as they might, neither Bush nor McCain were ever able to convince the American people that they were willing to do what it takes to secure the country’s porous borders. Whenever Bush or McCain said “immigration reform,” the voters heard “amnesty now, enforcement never.” Much as happened when the first major bipartisan amnesty, the Immigration Reform and Control Act, was passed in 1986.
For this reason, Obama has tread carefully. Although Democrats control both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue and the enforcement-first Republicans who defeated two Bush-era immigration bills have been reduced to an ineffectual rump, the immigration issue is fraught with political peril — especially for Democrats representing historically Republican congressional districts, many of whom were recruited by White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel himself in his past role as Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman.
Emanuel’s skepticism about the political appeal of the Bush-McCain-Kennedy approach to illegal immigration was thought to relegate the issue to the backburner until Obama is safely re-elected. But in April, the Wall Street Journal reported that Emanuel had emerged as an “unexpected ally” of comprehensive reformers and a “backer of immigration action.”
Yet the president seems mindful of Emanuel’s concerns about immigration politics and is proceeding cautiously — so much so that one reporter pronounced him a convert to the enforcement-first position. The Washington Times noted that Obama’s budget “calls for extra money to build an employee-verification system and to pay for more personnel and equipment to patrol the border.”
“If the American people don’t feel like you can secure the borders,” Obama acknowledged at a press conference, “then it’s hard to strike a deal that would get people out of the shadows and on a pathway to citizenship who are already here, because the attitude of the average American is going to be, ‘Well, you’re just going to have hundreds of thousands of more coming in each year.’ ”
So has Obama abandoned all hope of an immigration amnesty and embraced the pro-enforcement position? Don’t count on it. One of the few programs on the chopping block in the president’s round of paltry budget cuts — $17 billion in the context of a $3.4 trillion budget — was the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program (SCAAP). SCAAP reimburses state governments for the cost of incarcerating convicts and criminals awaiting trial who are in the country illegally.
When President Bush tried to scrap SCAAP, Democrats in Congress and from border states protested. Congressman John Spratt (D-S.C.), now chairman of the House Budget Committee, protested that “the need [for this program] cannot be overstated.” Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.), who had to beat a Republican immigration hawk to get to Congress, complained that SCAAP “has been consistently underfunded.” Gov. Janet Napolitano of Arizona, now Obama’s secretary of homeland security, penned a Wall Street Journal op-ed demanding that the funds be restored.
But the biggest sign that amnesty remains in Obama’s plans is the appointment of Esther Olavarria as deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security. After years spent working for immigrant advocacy groups in Florida, she came to Washington, D.C. to work for Ted Kennedy as counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s immigration subcommittee — where some credit her with writing the McCain-Kennedy immigration plan.
“She wrote the bill,” Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies flatly told the Miami Herald. “She was Kennedy’s main immigration person. She was really driving that bus.” Although that bus went over a cliff to political defeat, people on the other side of the debate agree. Cheryl Little co-founded the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center with Olvarria and argues that her colleague will “fight tooth and nail” for more liberal immigration laws.
Whatever her role in drafting McCain-Kennedy, Olvarria clearly prefers it to other alternatives. Speaking at a meeting of Irish immigration activists, the Irish Voice quoted her as describing a bill by Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) as “heavy on enforcement” and legislation by Sen. Arlen Specter (then-R-Pa.) as containing “the worst solutions for the undocumented.”
It is worth nothing that both of the above bills were widely regarded as amnesties in their own right, albeit with more conditions and stronger enforcement provisions. But such provisions were not popular with Olvarria’s audience. The Irish Voice reported that illegal immigrants present complained that it was becoming too difficult to get driver’s licenses and people were starting to go home.
“Here you have someone who has spent her entire career looking at immigration issues entirely from the perspective of the immigrant,” Don Todd, research director of Americans for Limited Government, told TAS. “She is not going to start looking at them from a pro-enforcement perspective now that she is working on these issues at DHS.”
The failure to respect the fact that a nation of immigrants can also be a nation of laws has doomed “comprehensive” legislation in the past. Obama, with the help of advisers like Olvarria, is about to put this to the test once again.
About the Author
W. James Antle, III, author of the new book Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped?, is editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation and a senior editor of The American Spectator. You can follow him on Twitter @jimantle.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (121) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by W. James Antle, III
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/05/11/amnesty-again
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- A Nation on the Edge
- The Great Train Robbery
- The End of the Castros?
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
SLG| 5.11.09 @ 7:34AM
Two words in particular really Tick-Me-Off concerning the aforementioned column: the miserable, Politically Correct word "comprehensive" especially. Virtually every time it's used, it becomes an adjective in a most unsavory suggestion or piece of criminal legislation.
Then, the word "undocumented."
People appear too cowardly to use the more proper terms, "illegal" or "lawbreaker."
Thoroughly sickening.
Don L| 5.11.09 @ 7:41AM
They pro-illegal pols haven't the decency to do what they ought - first change the laws if you're openly going to violate them.(Gee, you'd think immigration laws were income tax laws, they are ignored by the political class so easily)
Think of it as plenty of free votes and lots of union dues. Who needs ACORN now?
Tim Norling | 5.11.09 @ 7:44AM
This issue continues to be mishandled by the Republicans. I think most Americans don't want their neighborhoods turned into suburbs of Mexico. That said, why is nothing done? Is it that important to have inexpensive au pairs or roofers or gardeners? I believe these people, contributing nothing to our society except cheap manual labor, will prove to be a burden on our economy as well. A friend, waiting for minor surgery (hernia) in Fort Lauderdale, was the only legal citizen in the room, all the rest being Mexicans. Who was paying for their surgery? You know quite well.
Apart from the important point of maintaining our national identity, being dismissive of illegal immigration is tantamount to treason - it will, ultimately, destroy this country. We are not a nation of functionally illiterate laborers, yet. If you admire Mexico as a great country, continue to allow this illegal immigration. Because, eventually, we will be United States of Mexico.
Sincerely,
Tim Norling
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
Ryan| 5.11.09 @ 7:56AM
My position on immigration essentially starts with the poor system we have to bring LEGAL immigrants in - the laws on that matter need to be changed. The limitations on needed workers to do the labor are far too restrictive.
That being said, there is a need to effectively control the border, and changing the law to allow more in legally is a partial solution, and probably an easier step than all the legal wrangling going on in DC in recent years.
That being said, we HAVE to know who is coming in and we HAVE to make people respect the rule of law in the United States.
Robert Rosencrans| 5.11.09 @ 8:05AM
Since almost all illegal aliens are tax scofflaws, Obama has already sent them a secret signal that they are more then welcome, and one day may seek appointments in his cabinet.
LO| 5.11.09 @ 10:48AM
U. S Citizen for the legalization of the undocumented!!!
New Era| 5.11.09 @ 11:03AM
11th May another 5 Americans Killed in Iraq today, another five family who has lost a father or mother, or wife lost a husband. Or mother who lost a son.
Why did these people lose their lives? Who or what were they protecting?
Everyone in America is an immigrant, America is a huge country, there is enough place for another 300 Million people. The only trouble, there will be no jobs. The people from Mexico are no longer Immigrants, they are a part of America, along with Canada.
America needs to wake up| 5.11.09 @ 11:14AM
When British took over America from the Red Indians. The British was immigrants, now the former immigrants are complaining about new people coming in, I would call it history repeating it's self.
History will read, America once a great country, held hostage by a small out post in the Middle East calling it's self Israel, this small group of people held them hostage with 300 Nuclear missiles pointed at them and Europe, and they falied to tell the population that all the 300 Nuclear Missiles in Israel is pointing not at the people they call sand Niggers But America and all American Citizens and Europe.
How did they aquire 300 Nuclear missiles to use to threaten the west with, and keep it a secret, was by British negilence.
No one is willing to put it on CNN or Fox News.
SLG| 5.11.09 @ 11:28AM
Anyone get a feeling that some wacko, weird and verrry leftist website just instructed its followers to all add their disapproval and try rocking-the-proverbial boat?
Sure appears that way -- folks usually don't show-up simultaneously...
Aryeh| 5.11.09 @ 11:50AM
"11th May another 5 Americans Killed in Iraq today ... Why did these people lose their lives? "
One very troubled and confused soldier killed four others and then himself.
CatotheElder| 5.11.09 @ 12:07PM
One of the most "transparent" aspects of the Obama administration is its relentless pursuit of political advantage. We were treated to this "citizenship" angle by the Repubs until the vociferous objections by grass roots defeated it. Yet bad ideas and political fantasies live on and we'll have to deal with this once again, hopefully with the same results.
The true objective of this push for open borders is to create a voting bloc. The unexamined assumption is that illegals want citizenship. Aren't they here for jobs? Who assumes they want to become citizens? I live in Missouri and work in Illinois, yet I feel no tug to become a resident of Illinois. Rove, McCain and Bush all thought there would be political capital in extending the franchise to the illegals, because they would be Repubs. Well, McCain found out differently. Rove has been right many times, but he was foolish to pimp for citizenship of a group which has a difficult time in casting 1/3 of its vote for Repubs. If 2/3 go Democrat, I fail to see the advantage for Repubs.
At least the Democrats have a coherent strategy in extending citizenship, which, if achieved, would forever doom the Repubs to minority status, given the demographics and above-stated voting trends.
Colin | 5.11.09 @ 12:12PM
For those not already in the tank for open borders, and still a bit merky on the differences between Amnesty and Hispanic Reconquista, see if there's a source somewhere that might provide you with a working definition of the liberals current taking point - "comprehensive immigration." It's probably not in your basic Webster's or standard Funk And Wagnell's - but I'm pretty confident that with a little searching, you might find it listed somewhere under the keyword phrases of - "same old pig and/or different makeup."
Then again, if you're employed by the Associated Press, the assorted Times newspaper outlets or La Raza the actual answer might be found somewhere up your ... bias.
I know it's dark up there - but keep lookin'.
Oguz| 5.11.09 @ 12:56PM
Hey guys,
I have been reading and reading about this CIR all over the place and my question is:
Is there anybody, ANYBODY out there that actually could come up with an actual plan what to do with all the 12-20 million illegals here???
I mean it is easy to say throw them out, deport them...but seriously, what can we do???
I understand that you can't go house to house, work to work and check everyone's status and then put them all on a train and get them out of here..
Yes, anybody that can give a good answer would be appreciated.
Aryeh| 5.11.09 @ 1:30PM
"Is there anybody, ANYBODY out there that actually could come up with an actual plan what to do with all the 12-20 million illegals here???"
Sure, basically, the idea is to have them pay back taxes, and then get in line. For most this would mean somewhere between 5-11 years as "documented aliens" in process to becoming U.S. citizens. Of course, any with a criminal record would lose any place in line and be sent back to where they originated from. Part of becoming a U.S. citizen would entail these "documented aliens" learning to read and write English and acquiring some sense of what it means to be a civic minded American citizen.
Under no circumstances would a previously "undocumented alien" reach citizenship faster than had he chosen to follow a completely legal path.
And while this 11 year process is ongoing, the border should be policed so well that the illegal stream is shut off.
Patrick Dougan | 5.11.09 @ 1:47PM
The only reason the Government doesn't go after the Illegal Aliens is they are paying taxes under Fraugelant ID cards and can't ever get any benifits from this so they can pocket more of the money for themselves
Patrick Dougan | 5.11.09 @ 1:51PM
Aryeh| 5.11.09 @ 1:30PM
Yes it would save Billions of dollars to just deport them over keeping them on welfare and medicade not to mention they take up about 98% of all federal housing and millions of jobs away from Americans and we are losing hundreds of thousands of jobs weekly now we need those jobs for people that want to be Americans not use Americans
Robbie Ramsey| 5.11.09 @ 3:08PM
I have no problem with folks wanting to live in the US as long as they follow the rules to get thier citizenship. Most of these illegal aliens seem to be here just to get something for nothing. Why is that they can get health care for free, but not be a citizen that has worked and paid taxes all thier lives. How do they get a drivers license with no birth certificate or something showing that they are here legally? When people move to other countires you never hear about those governments demanding that everything be in three or four different languages, why should we? learn to speak english. If you came to the US illegally you should be deported no matter how long you have been here, you were in the wrong from the begining. I am tired of these people demanding that we loosen our requirements and grant amnesty to lawbreakers. If you don't like the way we do things, pack your s@#% and go back home. I served my country and I'm tired of being treated like I am the illegal alien. This goes beyond political part lines, WE THE PEOPLE, need to force our elected officials to get off their behinds and crush this wave of lawbreakers coming in to our homeland
IlegalsGoHome| 5.11.09 @ 3:21PM
I am sick and tired of people who can't seem to make the distinction between immigration and illegal 'immigration'. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! Just ask anyone who has come to this country legally. They filed their papers, paid their fees and waited their turn. They didn't hide in the wheel well of a van or the back of a truck. They didn't crawl across our border in the dead of night. They didn't scale a fence that was meant to keep them out. Calling an illegal an 'undocumented worker' is like calling a home invader an uninvited house guest! We have borders for a reason and anyone who disrespects those borders should be severely punished!
Marc Jeric| 5.11.09 @ 3:24PM
When I escaped from a communist country in 1957, I was given political asylum in France. There I waited 5 years for an immigrant visa to the US - a hopeless task because the immigrant quota from my former country was so small that my waiting period was exactly 928 years. Then a special immigration law was introduced by Eisenhower and finall signed by Kennedy, permitting genuine political refugees from communist countries to immigrate under a special "refugee-parolee" status valid for 2 years; this status would be reviewed then to see if the refugee had not committed any crimes and was not relying on welfare. There was also a requirement that such a refugee-parolee had to possess a profession that was needed in the US. But that was then - now we have not 12 but more accurately 20 million illegal aliens here, mostly illiterate Mexican Indians, who will, after the next amnesty, bring another 20 million such as their close relatives. Many of those relatives will be their elderly parents who will immediately apply for Supplemental Social Security payments, Medicare/Medicaid, and other welfare programs. But who cares - they will all vote for the Democrats!
Julie Boxley| 5.11.09 @ 3:54PM
To Oguz: What to do with the illegals? Exactly nothing. No jobs, no welfare, nop free healthcare, no anhor babies. Leave them alone and they will go home, much like Little Bo Peep's sheep. When there is nothing here for them, they'll leave. Felons should be sent home after incarceration.
Elizabeth Gaines| 5.11.09 @ 4:19PM
Start enforcing the 14th amendment correctly!
Negroes, who were slaves during the Civil War...
(after the war, to include them in our nation).
It is complicated but do know it applied to Negroes ONLY and not to all
these illegals coming here today & having dozens of children and use the children as an anchor to
to provide citizenship for the whole gang to get citizenship for: cousins, uncles, aunts , etc.
For Negro slaves:
Being born under our Constitution and laws, no naturalization is required, as one of foreign birth, to make him a citizen. The most general and appropriate definition of the term citizen is 'a freeman.' Being a freeman, and having his domicil in a State different from that of the defendant, he is a citizen within the act of Congress, and the courts of the Union are open to him.
With the ratification of the 14th Amendment, the citizens of the states of the Union agreed to give Congress a hitherto unpossessed power; the power to grant a form of federal citizenship to those "persons" who had been born in any state of the Union, who'd been held in slavery, and under the Constitution of that state could not become a citizen thereof. The states also agreed to consider this new form of citizen as a citizen of a state if the person were to reside within a state. Americans
need to read and understand the case: Dred Scott
v. Sandford!!
Miami Guy| 5.11.09 @ 4:29PM
Actually pretty cool from the viewpoint of the pro illegal crowd. Look, there is a long waiting list of people wanting to come to U.S. legally. These people wait in their native countries. The illegals already here when amnesty comes, they are already here ready for legalization. Either way, the poor shnooks in line still wait in line. In the meantime, the U.S. Govt seems to only go to deporting illegals who try to avail themselves of the system, the border crossers from Mexico just ignore the law, and wait for legalization.
TOBY| 5.11.09 @ 4:33PM
I LOVE OBAMA . GO OBAMA GO , FIX THE BROKEN SYSTEM !
One world order| 5.11.09 @ 7:16PM
Don't worry the Swine flu may put many of you out of your mysery, thus reducing the population.
There is plenty of work to do, keeping the debt growing.
S.L. Toddard| 5.11.09 @ 8:28PM
"Despite Obama's cautious words, his early actions and appointments suggest he won't put immigration enforcement first."
You people can't be serious. After 8 years of a Republican president and ten (I think) of a Republican Congress, how well is our border now sealed? When are you people going to stop falling for this garbage?
There is ONE way to seal our border with Mexico: a border wall. PERIOD. And before anyone tries: It Can Easily Be Done. We have sent a man to the moon, we can build a wall. Believe me, there are walls all over the place where I live. Practically every house has at least four. But guess what - Liberals don't want a wall because they believe, through some sick twist of malignant illogic, that it is somehow a human rights violation to adhere to our own laws, enacted in Congress through our representatives. The Republicans won't do it because they don't have the stones, and because they are bought-and-paid-for by the massive corporations that benefit from cheap illegal labor.
You have two choices:
1. You can quit pretending to care about the immigration problem and vote Republican in good conscience
2. You can vote for a candidate who pledges (and who will vigorously promote) a border wall (this will likely mean either voting Third Party, or supporting a pro-border-wall candidate in a primary and then writing his name in even if he loses)
3. You can continue to voice your "cares" over immigration while voting Republican, a party which is anti-immigration in rhetoric but in practice *always* and unfailingly *open-border* and reveal yourself as a hypocrite
The GOP has had all the time and all the means and done nothing - NOTHING to stem the millions who cross our borders illegally. A vote for the GOP is a vote for open borders, just as a vote for the GOP is a vote for irresponsible spending, for the growth of the size of the federal government, and for an expansion of the federal welfare state. These things are simply inarguable - the record is crystal clear.
S.L. Toddard| 5.11.09 @ 8:29PM
Three!
Haha
Michael Tomlinson| 5.11.09 @ 8:30PM
Unfortunately, those who fell for the myth that blue-dog Democrats were conservatives have again shown how willing they are to swallow Democrat BS. Like the two-faced blue-dogs BO will say anything to appear "moderate." He has never been and will never be a friend of protecting this nation (his loyalty is elsewhere). Whether it is border control or national security BO will do whatever he can to make America a target. He cannot help himself. His hatred of the Constitution, traditional American values and the ideals that made America great is too deep.
Those conservatives who were instrumental in the 2005 crack-up of the conservative movement that has led to our time in the political wilderness need to learn a simple lesson if they ever hope to see our values and ideas succeed - Democrats cannot be trusted.
One lionized conservative Obama will use to promote amnesty and citizenship is Ronald Reagan. The man who started all this in the 1980's when he granted blanket amnesty and citizenship to millions of illegal aliens. The same man who inspired President Bush and Senator McCain to work for comprehensive immigration reform.
S.L. Toddard| 5.11.09 @ 8:35PM
"Those conservatives who were instrumental in the 2005 crack-up of the conservative movement that has led to our time in the political wilderness need to learn a simple lesson if they ever hope to see our values and ideas succeed - Democrats cannot be trusted."
Republicans can? Tell me, if you would, how much has illegal immigration decreased after a decade of Republican controlled Congress and eight years of a Republican president?
And why doesn't the answer to that question disabuse you of the absurd notion that Republicans are pro-border security? They controlled Washington for AN AGE and did NOTHING. Stop fooling yourself. They are a Big Government, anti-Consitution, open-borders party, period.
Alan Brooks| 5.11.09 @ 9:39PM
agreed.
aside from Tancredo, there are few willing to even discuss the 'border'.
janice| 5.11.09 @ 10:25PM
Our officials are a joke, they are not representing the U.S. citizen, they are more worried about every other person climbing over or under the fence, we need to get rid of the majority of our officials, from the top down, we are well on our way to being a third world county.
American Patriot Hero | 5.12.09 @ 1:30AM
If you didn't say (read) at the end of your synopsis I probably would have just skipped the whole fucking thing! You guys rule.
Joel Wischkaemper| 5.12.09 @ 2:22AM
The key to the whole problem is snuggled up in the article. Congress is looking at the problem from the view point of the illegal aliens... not the American People. Not, either, from the view point that their are laws to enforced, and that the Congress has an oath of office to be obeyed.
Alan Brooks| 5.12.09 @ 2:40AM
I want to fuck the american people. The male ones anways. YES!
KBB| 5.12.09 @ 2:58AM
RE:Robbie Ramsey:"...How do they get a drivers license with no birth certificate or something showing that they are here legally?..."------Robbie, how indeed! What can we expect when BO can be PRESIDENTwithout showing HIS birth certificate!
Pingback| 5.12.09 @ 5:03AM
Immigration Amnesty, Obama Style | Politics News links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Susan C| 5.12.09 @ 6:52AM
LO said:
"U. S Citizen for the legalization of the undocumented!!!"
----------------------------------------------------
Reward illegal alien lawbreakers? Stupidest idea I've heard in a long time. No more amnesties!
Susan C| 5.12.09 @ 7:05AM
New Era said:
"Everyone in America is an immigrant, America is a huge country, there is enough place for another 300 Million people. The only trouble, there will be no jobs. The people from Mexico are no longer Immigrants, they are a part of America, along with Canada."
NO, everybody in this country is NOT an immigrant. Do you even know what an immigrant is? An immigrant is a foreigner who legally moves from his home country to this country to live and work. The majority of Americans were born in this country so they were never immigrants. Mexicans are citizens of the country of Mexico. Mexicans are not citizens of the United States. Canadians are also not citizens of the United States. They are citizens of Canada.
S.L. Toddard| 5.12.09 @ 7:54AM
"aside from Tancredo, there are few willing to even discuss the 'border'."
Then why not abandon this party that would turn America into Mexico if it means maximizing the profits of companies that bankroll their campaigns? Is it worth it to aid and abet that transformation - and this invasion - merely to be able to say you voted for the slightly-lesser of two evils? You know, Mr. Brooks, that not one conservative principle was served by the GOP since Reagan left office. That party is simply not Conservative. Why not vote Third Party? And if you're going to vote GOP, why not vote for only for Real Conservatives, and if they do not make it past the primary, write in their names or leave it blank?
The philosophy of the GOP is indistinguishable from that of LBJ - they are free-spending, Big Government, social-program-loving, open-border hawks. That has been proven beyond a doubt by the last Republican president and congress.
The only way to get them to change is to hold them responsible, and the only way to do that is to NEVER vote for the lesser of two evils, and to ONLY vote for conservatives. If the GOP runs a liberal - as they did in the last three presidential elections - do NOT give them your vote.
Otherwise, aren't you (and I don't mean you specifically, Mr. Brooks, I mean it in the editorial sense) part of the problem? Doesn't that make one party to the liberalization of America? If one votes for an open-borders party or an open-borders candidate, then one is supporting that policy, period.
S.L. Toddard| 5.12.09 @ 10:21AM
How (real) Conservatism can save the GOP:
"The Specter flap has also shown that the debate over the Republican future is largely taking place between two camps. One group says that Republicans should imitate the Democrats’ success by imitating Democratic positions, with the non-negotiable exceptions of raising the top marginal income tax rate and pulling out of Iraq. Do whatever needs to be done to keep Arlen Specter and Lincoln Chafee happily affiliated with the GOP so that we can hang on to enough seats to maybe block a Democratic-sponsored bill someday. Such bold strategic thinking.
On the other side of this debate is a group that in effect maintains that there is nothing wrong with the Republican Party that a 2012 Sarah Palin/Joe the Plumber ticket couldn’t fix. If George W. Bush and the Republican Congress hadn’t spent so much money, especially on those blasted earmarks, conservatives would still be in power. The way back to the Promised Land is to say what Bush said in 2004 even louder and to recruit candidates proficient in Beltway conservative think-tank white papers—especially in the blue states.
Pat Toomey is a smart man who capably represented a swing district in Pennsylvania for four terms. But he and many of the candidates supported by the Club for Growth when he was its president agree with the second assessment of the Republican Party’s fortunes. Arlen Specter is the dream candidate of those who prefer the first: an economic and social liberal who is only reliably Republican on issues pertaining to war and civil liberties. That Toomey is considered the underdog and Specter is reduced to desperation moves to keep a Senate seat he’s held for five terms should tell us something about these two approaches.
Fortunately, there is a third option. There is a flavor of conservatism that has not been discredited by the events of the past eight years. If anything, its criticisms of loose monetary policies, overconsumption, reckless private and public borrowing, uncontrolled immigration, and foreign adventurism now seem prescient. It is a conservatism unburdened by the Iraq War, the “heckuva job” response to Hurricane Katrina, and the financial meltdown, which are really the biggest contributors to the GOP’s decline. Most of all, it is a conservatism that does not need to rehabilitate the Bush legacy since its leading exponents were never full-time Bush apologists."
read the rest here:
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/may/18/00026/
AndiMedi| 5.12.09 @ 4:48PM
Anyone who still thinks many, most, or all of the 12,000,000 immigrants here illegaly (and their families) are leaving, will be driven out, or deported is delusional. They are here, they are staying. What is your plan B to get them in the system paying their full share of taxes?
S.L. Toddard| 5.12.09 @ 7:24PM
"Anyone who still thinks many, most, or all of the 12,000,000 immigrants here illegaly (and their families) are leaving, will be driven out, or deported is delusional. They are here, they are staying."
They are a secondary concern. What's important is that we halt this mass migration now, where it stands. Build the fence/wall. Then heavily penalize businesses for using illegal labor.
"What is your plan B to get them in the system paying their full share of taxes?"
The vast majority of illegals are dirt poor - far too poor to pay income tax if they were made citizens. Once we erect the border wall we should deport whichever illegals pop up in the criminal justice system. The rest can either leave of their own volition or take their chances in what will, hopefully, be a place of shrinking opportunity for foreign illegals.
What is clear and inarguable is that it is not a great idea to import and entire lower class from a foreign, underdeveloped country. Is anyone arguing that the percentage of poor, undereducated people in this country should be higher? Thanks to globalism and free trade we no longer have a massive industrial base that needs that influx of labor, and as America continues its downward slide (as it inevitably will) our "service industry" will find its services needed less and less. Americans will need their roofing, landscaping etc jobs. And the market will have to adjust, in that these companies now exploiting illegal labor will have to begin paying a lawful wage that will be high enough to entice Americans to earn it.
The bottom line is that the people of America have enacted, through their representatives in Congress, laws that govern who may and may not enter and/or live in America. We have the moral right - the moral *duty* - to enforce those laws.
Build a wall, repeal the Immigration Act of 1965 and re-establish something similar to the one we had previously, that favors the nations who are the most culturally similar to us. The illegals that are here now are not a priority.
David from Boston| 5.14.09 @ 3:16PM
I know this is a right-leaning site, but I just want people to know that I'm not the only Massachusetts liberal to oppose mass immigration and illegal immigration. I don't like hearing "for English, press 1..." any more than you do, and I think that another 140 million in this country by 2050 (Pew Research Center and Census projection, 82% of that due to mass immigration according to Pew) is going to wreck the environment and the quality of life. Try imagining three people in the US for every two that are here now, especially the next time you are on the road.
Edina Stone | 5.30.09 @ 11:01AM
I wanted to comment about the statement that au pairs are illegals. They are not. They must apply for a visa to come into this country and their stay is limited to 1-2 years only. Then, they must return home. They are screened and must submit to both a criminal and psychological background checks. However, parents must apply to one of the 12 agencies that are designated by the State Dept., if they do not, and find an au pair online through a non-government issued agency, then they are skating on thin ice, and yes, au pairs may come to the country on a legal visa, but then they leave the host family and stay here illegally. It is very important to do your homework and be responsible about how and who you bring over. If you are in doubt, check out the list of the 12 agencies on our website: www.aupairclearinghouse.com. Stay within the legal limits and keep our country safe and protected.
TL Winslow | 6.6.09 @ 8:02AM
The age-old pesky U.S.-Mexico border problem has taxed the resources of both countries, led to long lists of injustices, and appears to be heading only for worse troubles in the future. Guess what? The border problem can never be solved. Why? Because the border IS the problem! It's time for a paradigm change.
Never fear, a satisfying, comprehensive solution is within reach: the Megamerge Dissolution Solution. Simply dissolve the border along with the failed Mexican government, and megamerge the two countries under U.S. law, with mass free 2-way migration eventually equalizing the development and opportunities permanently, with justice and without racism.
Click the url above to read full details before commenting.
Jim O'Brien| 6.21.09 @ 9:04AM
Obama has an excellent solution to the illegal immigrant problem: he's killing jobs and converting the U.S. to a socialist regime so fast that enterprising Mexicans won't want to come here, or stay here.
But despite all the rhetoric about how amnesty is wrong, it is probably the only solution. What are we going to do, put millions of immigrants in boxcars and herd them back home? Not likely. It would make more sense to officially adopt and welcome them -- maximize their productivity, personal wealth, and ability to pay taxes to the U.S. Treasury. Let's make Mexico a close friend and ally, not a hostile country on our southern border.
Pingback| 1.4.10 @ 10:47PM
One Old Vet » Immigration News 05.12.09 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
vouchercodes | 1.6.11 @ 8:45AM
I totally agree
fiance visa| 10.18.11 @ 11:47AM
If I were currently a high school student, I would be very upset to know that I’d be getting the same diploma that she’s getting in a month for a fraction of the work.
actos lawsuit
balcuizar62| 10.13.11 @ 2:38AM
Thanks for sharing this useful information! Hope that you will continue with the kind of stuff you are doing.
yaz class action
ruth| 10.17.11 @ 3:18PM
,It's quietly interesting and valuable information for me.I also bookmark your site and visit it in future for more info.
mesothelioma lawsuit
fiance visa| 10.18.11 @ 3:19AM
I am joyful to discover so many helpful information at this point within the post, we need expand additional approaches inside this regard, thanks for sharing.
fiance visa
creamer| 10.20.11 @ 1:40AM
I found this page! Well thanks for a great read it is very informative and interesting one. I enjoyed it a lot. Thanks for sharing!
Actos Attorney
abominable putridity| 11.5.11 @ 11:12AM
I found that to be more helpful well let me know how it turns out! I love your blog.
L Tod Schlosser
HAPPY| 11.8.11 @ 8:20PM
I like to read this post because I met so many new facts about it actually. It's really great that I noticed this post.
filipina women
wow| 11.13.11 @ 8:41PM
Good post. Your blogging,content,example,research are always rich. Your tremendous writing has helped me to become a good writer.
paxil lawsuit
bogol| 11.16.11 @ 1:51PM
I really enjoy the post. I check your blog on a regular basis and love the fact its popular and has frequent visitors Excellent blog thanks for sharing
Actos Lawyer
bogol| 11.30.11 @ 1:59PM
Hello! Would you mind if I share your blog with my twitter group? There's a lot of people that I think would really enjoy your content.Please let me know. Cheers
Effexor Lawyer
bogol| 12.1.11 @ 10:53AM
Very effectively written information. Will probably be invaluable to anybody who usess it, including myself. Sustain the good work – for sure i'll take a look at extra posts.
mesothelioma attorney
inah0911| 12.5.11 @ 3:18PM
I notice really quite a number of blogs that look interesting and really worth a read. There’s nothing worse than browsing through limitless blah blah blogs simply to locate a couple which keep your interest. Thanks. Good job!
san diego personal injury attorney
inah0911| 12.6.11 @ 11:43AM
Excellent read, I just passed this onto a colleague who was doing a little research on that. And he actually bought me lunch because I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that:
san diego bankruptcy attorney
IMYI| 12.15.11 @ 10:12PM
I am an avid reader of your blog but I finally wanted to make a comment telling you that this blog article was the best one yet and I really liked the subject matter that you have included here.Many thanks
Medtronic Infuse Lawsuit
lorina| 7.1.12 @ 10:11PM
I like your internet-site! did you create this yourself or did you outsource it? Im looking for a blog design thats similar so thats the only reason I’m asking. In any event . maintain the excellent work I became impressed together with your content really.
pradaxa lawsuit
lorina| 7.4.12 @ 1:39AM
This article weighs in as a heavy weight hitter in my opinion. The content is informative, but it’s also clear. This is right on point as far as I’m concerned.
vaginal mesh lawsuit
hany| 7.12.12 @ 8:35PM
I am happy to find your distinguished way of writing the post. Now you make it easy for me to understand and implement the concept. Thank you for the post.
seo software reviews
hany| 7.17.12 @ 2:59AM
Thanks a lot for discussing this matter. I concur with your conclusions.The point that the data stated are all first hand on actual experiences even help more.
drug rehab texas
hany| 7.19.12 @ 9:11PM
You're truly kept informed and very wise. You authored something which people may realize generating the topic interesting for everybody.
orange county family law attorney
hany| 7.19.12 @ 10:04PM
I applied to follow you on twitter and haven't been approved. How about a link for the fruit menu beta. I've done without it for way too long. As a paid user, I'm not happy
divorce lawyers orange county
hany| 7.22.12 @ 9:36PM
Always good to see, this was a brilliant post. In theory I would like to write like this too. You need time to creat that interesting and additionally real effort to make such a good article
Lexapro Lawyer
hany| 7.25.12 @ 8:51PM
This site appears to get a great deal of visitors. How do you promote it? It offers a nice unique twist on things. I guess having something useful or substantial to talk about is the most important thing.
estate plan
hany| 7.25.12 @ 10:03PM
Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a amusement account it. Look advanced to far added agreeable from you! By the way, how could we communicate?
estate planning basics
hany| 7.25.12 @ 10:04PM
It is a nice article.This site has lots of advantage. I found many interesting things from this site. It helps me many away. So many many thanks for sharing this information.
estate planning basics