RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

  1. If Amnesty is helpful to Republicans, why are Demoncrats pushing it? Has this occurred to anyone on the Hill?

    Basically, one can attribute anything Demoncrats to malice and anything Republicans do to stupidity and be correct >80% of the time.

    Comment by V the K — January 30, 2013 @ 12:12 pm - January 30, 2013

  2. I think many of the Republicans on the Hill have yet to figure that out, hence the Charlie Brown video.

    Comment by Kurt — January 30, 2013 @ 12:28 pm - January 30, 2013

  3. Democrats are playing with fire. Hispanics are the future of the GOP.

    Comment by Ignatius — January 30, 2013 @ 1:12 pm - January 30, 2013

  4. I don´t buy it Ignatius. When President Reagan signed the amnesty, I clearly expected the GOP to reap benefits in appreciation for their legalization. They went Democrat. The Democrats stand to reap a windfall out of this whenmaking the GOP an insignificant minority. I wish it weren´t so. The majority of the illegals are Mexicans. Forget family values and entrepreneurship. They are used to the tortilla subsidy, and universal healthcare all courtesy of 70 years of the socialist PRI (Partido Revolucianal Institucional). The 12 years of the slightly right party PAN (Partido Accion Nacional) failed to eliminate. Vicente Fox was content to keep sending his poor, as he told GW Bush, rather than ask for help to improve the economy and keep his people at home. Central Americans are a divided lot, If they supported the government during the civil wars or at least opposed the communists, they will be the Republicans those who claimed exile fearing their beloved left was going to lose, are and will be Democrats.

    Domincans also will be Democrats, The government is a partner or client of Venezuela in Petro Caribe and welcomed overthrown ex-President Manuel Zelaya in their midst.

    Comment by Roberto — January 30, 2013 @ 1:40 pm - January 30, 2013

  5. Roberto, it’s my prediction.

    Comment by Ignatius — January 30, 2013 @ 2:04 pm - January 30, 2013

  6. Rubio’s proposal is OK except I would never grant the illegals citizenship. Instead, I would give them permanent green cards when they go to the back of the line. That is a sane compromise.

    Comment by davinci — January 30, 2013 @ 2:23 pm - January 30, 2013

  7. Davinci writes: I would give them permanent green cards when they go to the back of the line. That is a sane compromise.

    I think it sounds like a sane compromise at first, but as Professor Jacobson wisely asks here, where, exactly IS the back of the line?

    Aren’t we dealing with a finite number of Green Cards, so if we put people here in line immediately behind those who have applied, we’re simply putting people who broke the law ahead of future applicants who did not break the law. And, many of those future applicants are not present applicants only because the limits currently imposed prevented them from applying.

    I guess we simply could say we keep the same number of Green Cards for future applicants who did not break our laws, but create additional numbers for those here illegally. But that still is a preference as applied to people living here illegally by creating new slots for them but not others.

    When you try to define the terms, what sounds like a “fair” and “sane” compromise has a lot of problems, as well.

    Comment by Kurt — January 30, 2013 @ 2:38 pm - January 30, 2013

  8. Ignatius, on what do you base your prediction? I consulted my crystal ball before writing my comment. Hispanicsare not a monolithic group, so the GOP outreach has to be varied, One size does not fit all.

    Comment by Roberto — January 30, 2013 @ 6:10 pm - January 30, 2013

  9. Hispanics are the part of the future of the GOP.

    You can tell what the demonizing-rats fear most by how hard they try to pimp a group while demonizing the GOP.

    The Republicans must back off any language that can fuel the demagoguing specialists lying in wait on the “Progressive” side.

    However, “code words” can certainly be used against the “Progressives.” Colin Powell argued that “lazy” should never be used in connection with blacks. Not true. It would be perfectly useful for a Republican to say that “Progressives” are lazy in producing positive results for blacks due to their plantation attitude that blacks are too simple to know when they are being scammed.

    The immigration issue was ceded when Republicans failed to aggressively challenge the “undocumented alien” renaming. From there, it was a short step for “Progressives” to paint the Republicans as “anti-immigrant.”

    In his work, Propaganda, Edward Bernays wrote:

    “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

    The Obama crowd has employed rather crude techniques of the Bernays type of propaganda to defeat the Republicans.

    However, if the Republicans were to learn from Bernays and keep the “Progressives” from scoring by turning their offensive plays against them, it would allow the Republicans to move ahead.

    Obama has cultivated the low-information voters and won as a consequence. Fine. Time to fight fire with fire. Raise doubt in the minds of the low-information voter and he will sit it out or become more informed. But don’t insult him or play into the hands of the demonizing-rats.

    Comment by heliotrope — January 30, 2013 @ 6:40 pm - January 30, 2013

  10. Our current “broken” immigration dates to 1965. Prior to the 1965 immigration act, there were long periods of near-zero immigration. There was a time when immigration policy was set (for the most part) for the nation’s interests, not the interests of various Latin American governments, businesses pining for cheap labor, and bureaucracies that exist to “help” the needy (the way a drug pushers “help” addicts).

    I think zero-immigration is a bad policy if it denies the US the benefit of good people. But with the labor markets in the shape they are, our first duty is to the citizens and legal immigrants already here. We already add around 100,000 immigrant per month to the labor pool – yet we’re losing jobs.

    I like Rubio but he’s dead wrong on this. He’s spoken about some sort of “trigger” that would make legal status of immigrants dependent of enforcement. Right. Does he really think that, in a couple of years, Janet Incompitano is going to have the border secured? When it’s not, does anyone believe they’re going to tell millions of people that their permits are void? And even if they did void the permits, it doesn’t seem fair to penalize the amnestied immigrants for government incompetence.

    As a BTW, we don’t need more H1B visas. STEM pay is flat and lots of people are unemployed. When unemployment falls and salaries start to rise then a case can be made for H1Bs.

    First, our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually…Secondly, the ethnic mix of this country will not be upset. – Ted Kennedy, 1965, Senate debate.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — January 30, 2013 @ 6:48 pm - January 30, 2013

  11. I would add that Canada’s guest worker is worth a look. It addresses shortages, provides for fair treatment of the guest worker, and puts employers on the hook for keeping the workers off of welfare.

    Comment by SoCalRobert — January 30, 2013 @ 6:51 pm - January 30, 2013

  12. SoCalRobert–that quote from Kennedy is quite a stunner, indeed. It makes me wonder about the level of blatant prevarication employed by the Democrats over the last fifty years.

    With regard to the question of Hispanics voting for Republicans, I posted an update above that people might have overlooked, so I thought I’d mention some of the points in a comment, as well. My view that they are not likely to–regardless of what happens on immigration–was influenced largely by some articles I read after the election that analyzed the voting habits of different ethnic groups.  Many of the relevant points are summarized in this piece entitled “Five reasons Republicans won’t win Latino voters with immigration reform.”  Here are two brief passages that are among the highlights:

    About 50% said the economy was the most important issue to their vote. By a 75% to 19% margin, Latinos are more likely to believe in a bigger government, with more services, to a smaller one. President Obama got 75% of the Latino vote in the LD election eve poll – a perfect match.
    The reason is that Latinos are 9pt more likely to say they are liberal than the general population. Most of that has to do with the economy, but even on social issues, Latinos, especially second- and third-generation, are no more conservative than the general population. In fact, second- and third-generation Latinos are more likely to believe abortion should be legal and homosexuality accepted by society than the general population.

    Comment by Kurt — January 31, 2013 @ 2:27 am - January 31, 2013

  13. Rubio is far more right than he is wrong.

    This is an issue on which Republicans are going to lose unless they get onboard with some form of immigration reform.

    Not only that but once again Republicans are playing stupid and doing it quite well.

    The Democrats have drawn us into this argument and too many Republicans are doing exactly what Democrats want us to do. Fighting what eventually is a fait accompli and looking like out-of-touch dolts doing it.

    This is a no win situation unless Republicans can figure out some way to provide illegal immigrants the means to become citizens.

    The intransigence of some Republicans on immigration reform is letting Democrats prolong the argument and diverting the attention from real issues like the economy.

    And will Hispanics vote Republican? Yes. If Republicans stop pushing them into the Democrat’s corner.

    Comment by David — January 31, 2013 @ 7:25 am - January 31, 2013

  14. This is a no win situation unless Republicans can figure out some way to provide illegal immigrants the means to become citizens.

    We already have a method by which people from outside the United States can become citizens.

    Illegal immigrants chose to ignore it.

    Since they chose to break our laws already, why is there any reason whatsoever to give them citizenship across the board?

    The intransigence of some Republicans on immigration reform is letting Democrats prolong the argument and diverting the attention from real issues like the economy.

    One, that assumes that there aren’t nineteen additional issues waiting in the wings for the Obama Party to demagogue.

    Two, there is zero reason for the United States to grant amnesty to ten million lawbreakers when its own taxpaying citizens are unable to get jobs.

    And will Hispanics vote Republican? Yes. If Republicans stop pushing them into the Democrat’s corner.

    Comment by David — January 31, 2013 @ 7:25 am – January 31, 2013

    Not likely. The people fleeing Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, and the majority of Latin America have grown up since birth being indoctrinated with hatred of the rich, socialist/leftist government, and blaming other people for your problems.

    As we see here in California, nothing changes. They simply start ignoring laws about vandalism and required car insurance, start blaming whitey, and demanding that the government give them unlimited welfare.

    If you want to make improvements, start insisting that people who followed the LEGAL process be immediately accelerated forward. If it is so important to have ten million more immigrants, I’m sure there are that many waiting in the LEGAL immigration system; accelerate their processing instead, and enforce the laws against ILLEGAL immigration.

    The reason the Obama Party wants to legalize illegal immigrants while blocking legal ones is simple; legal ones tend to have education and capital, while illegal ones tend to have neither. The latter are far easier to control and purchase with government checks, especially since the former will actually pay taxes and ask questions.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 31, 2013 @ 11:25 am - January 31, 2013

  15. Our whole approach to dealing with “illegal” immigration is baloney. And the truth is that no matter how thick or thin you slice baloney, it is still baloney.

    Why should we tolerate any “illegal” immigration whatsoever? Well, I can answer my own question. We don’t have any choice when arresting and deporting the “illegals” is nearly impossible. That is why Reagan “compromised” and it is why we will “compromise” again. You can’t squeeze blood out of a turnip and you can’t unscramble eggs.

    Our “system” is so broken that the President of the United States in June 2012 announced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) programs.

    DACA ends deportation of illegal immigrants younger than 31 who are veterans, students or recent high school graduates. They can work in the United States if they arrived when they were younger than 16, have been here for the preceding five years, have no major criminal convictions and pay a fee of $465 which lasts for two years. They must reapply after the two years expires. 53,000 applicants have been approved, 250,000 more applications are in the works and the Migration Policy Institute estimates as many as 1.76 million are eligible.

    Call ICE and tell them about an “illegal” immigrant and then count the years during which they will not respond. Watch a judge order an “illegal” immigrant to self-depart as he walks out of the door into the passing crowd.

    We have three problems to address. 1.) Should we have any immigration policy whatsoever? 2.) Should we enforce our immigration policy? 3.) Should we control our borders?

    If we drop all immigration standards and policies, our problems are solved. If we should enforce immigration policy, what should the policy be and how do we enforce it? If we control our borders, do we control all borders equally, or just the borders where the major problems occur?

    We conservatives need to be very clear about our objectives and to understand that the impact on the Burmese population is vastly different from the impact on the peoples of Mexico and Central America, in particular.

    It is inconsistent with common sense that we support our unemployed with wealth redistribution payments while turning a blind eye to “illegal” immigrants at the same time.

    The service economy does not produce anything that expands the economy. All we do in a service economy is to buy a limited amount of attention and skill for our consumption. The service economy is important up to a point, but then it becomes redundant or obsolete. Think Newsweek, Time and the daily newspaper. Who cares if they tank? Just the employees who will no longer be paid for a service they are not asked to provide. They have gone the way of whale harpoon makers.

    I am not praising Rubio or damning him. Like Paul Ryan, he is trying to address a clear problem with suggested solutions. He may be on the wrong track or not. I really have not seen the broad, intelligent discussion to begin to understand the scope of the problem or the unintended consequences of proposed solutions.

    Comment by heliotrope — January 31, 2013 @ 12:57 pm - January 31, 2013

  16. I think it is pollyannish to think that the Republican Party will reap any appreciable increase for its role in immigration reform. When President Ronald Reagan signed the amnesty bill in 1986, I expected to see a rush to the Republican Party in appreciation for having given them legal status. It didn´t happen. And it won´t now for reasons I indicated in my comment #4. There will be a few, but they will still be a minority just as African American Republicans represent about 8% of the black community. General Colin Powell instead of helping the Republican Party to increase its numbers among African Americans, he´s giving them justification for remaining Democrats. The majority of hispanics in the Republican Party are Cubans, and Cuban descent. Even there Republicans are beginning to lose them. With the influx of Hondurians and Nicaraguans, Miami Dade County ain´t what it used to be.

    Living in El Salvador, I can attest to some of the observations made by NDT. Ignoring the law especially traffic laws and rusles of the road is common place. They do it in front of the police, who do nothing. Some don´t even have a drivers license. As for hatred of the rich, there is probably some but it is not confined to Latin America. It´s worldwide. Here it might be manifested in kidnapping and demanding a ransom. Usually the victim has family in the U.S so the malefactors think the family is swimming in money. Money from the U.S. props up the economy. Many days I have to wait an hour to do my banking because of the long lines as people use the banks to pay their utility bills. After, they form long lines in front of Pizza Hut and Pollo Campero. It seems like every day is payday.

    Comment by Roberto — January 31, 2013 @ 2:03 pm - January 31, 2013

  17. An additional comment. To get a real perspective on the immigration issue I recommend reading Pat Buchanan´s book, State Of Emergency. The subtitle is: The Third World Invasion And Conquest Of America. I hope that many of our elected represntatives have read it. Signing the Amnesty Bill in 1986 turned out to be one of President Reagan´s regrets. They lied to him. The border never got secured. And as Charles Krauthammer noted that if they don´t secure the border this time will be in twenty years we´ll be talking about amnesty for twenty million illegals.

    Comment by Roberto — January 31, 2013 @ 2:59 pm - January 31, 2013

  18. [...] Gay Patriot [...]

    Pingback by FMJRA 2.0: Free Bird : The Other McCain — February 3, 2013 @ 1:16 pm - February 3, 2013

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**

Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.108 Powered by Wordpress