Nancy Pelosi to continue to support Genocide.
No military on ground.
Nancy Pelosi to continue to support Genocide.
No military on ground.
On Immigration ‘Reform’ – Requirements we will need to support
Some thoughts on immigration policies put together that must be stated up front about the problems in immigration – people who call for “comprehensive immigration reform” seldom mean it. That goes for both the open borders Left and the Crony Capitalist Chamber of Commerce and cheap labor business cohort.
The last thing a proponent of immigration reform wants is – immigration reform. Remember that paradox, and the insanity at the border makes some sense.
Each day a worried politician or pundit lectures us about the need for “comprehensive immigration reform” to avoid the sort of chaos we are witnessing on the border.
Then a funny thing happens. The speaker never defines the term. If on rare occasions advocates are asked, they fumble around, annoyed that anyone would press them to explain what they mean.
In truth, no one in the open-borders/crony coalition wants anything approaching comprehensive immigration reform. Advocates are embarrassed about the present mess at the border not because thousands of foreign nationals, many of them unescorted children and teens, from Latin America, without skills or education, are flocking illegally across the border after largely taking the amnesty cue from Barack Obama, but because they are doing so in such dramatic fashion that the influx has awakened the sleeping
Giant that is the American people and exposed illegal immigration to be a callous enterprise, promoted by a coalition of self-interested political operatives, commercial concerns, and ethnic con artists.
So, if reform could be done, what should be included in this immigration reform?
Such legislation would first have to make border security the top priority. And that would entail several unpalatable requisites.
1. The first step would be the completion of the fence. Fences do work. That is why, for example, former mayor of Los Angeles and open-borders advocate Antonio Villaraigosa (“We don’t need to build walls, we need to build bridges”) became the first mayor in Los Angeles history to insist on a six-foot-high security fence around his official mayoral residence in Windsor Square, or why the White House, the homes of Silicon Valley billionaires, and the vacation homes of the elite on Martha’s Vineyard all have security fences. How odd that we are lectured about the Neanderthal nature of secure borders by elites who are about the only ones in America who demand them around their own estates. Perhaps ask Mr. Zuckerberg of Facebook about this. He has purchased all the surrounding homes around his….so others may not encroach on him.
2. Second, the Border Patrol would have to turn back all who crossed illegally and then let that be known. Border “Patrolling” is not what they are currently doing. A more accurate term for the present agency would be “Border Ushers” who simply direct these illegals to their appointed seats at OUR table.
3. Third, until deterrence is established, more guards would have to patrol the entire border area. And the more the border was made sacrosanct, the more underworked operatives in the interior could be redeployed to the border.
4. Massive INTERIOR Enforcement will be required via E-Verify and or national ID that is Verifiable. The E-Verify system should be adjusted to not just be used for employment verification, but also for any contract, home purchase, and auto purchase, or other as seen needed by individual states. The border will likely never be closed and interior enforcement will have to be made strong at the business level.
5. Employer/businesses must be held accountable for hiring illegals. First offence – 10,000 fines per employee, Second offense – 100,000 per employee and Third offence will automatically result in seizure of entire business and all assets sold off and shut down, then criminal charges brought against owner/CEO/Board of Directors. This is to get the attention of Chamber of Commerce and other low wage cronies.
6. Due to possibilities of Presidential Executive Orders undermining future enforcements, these enforcements must be tied together to any “goodies” in any bill. Example being if any enforcement is E.O.’d out….then H1b visa’s will be cut in half automatically etc. One must automatically be tied to the other.
7. Entry-Exit Visa tracking and enforcement
8. Allow States to act on enforcement and experiment with various options according to THEIR own needs/wants.
9. Tax on remittances to Mexico/other countries to lessen their participation in pushing their poor illiterate citizens to migrate. Stop the monies-stop the push.
10. Move to Needs based and cease familial and random lottery visa based immigration. Only immediate family can be attached. No extended families. Otherwise you have a never ending inflow. Need based is priority.
11. A very hard and serious discussion needs to be had on Birthright Citizenship. Illegal entry to the US should not infer them being “…subject to the jurisdiction of…” of the 14th amendment and not therefore be automatic citizens. Most other countries have done away with this in their countries due to the high level of movement available with today’s travel technologies. Stop birthright tourism industry.
12. Another hard discussion needs to be had on – is there a real need for ANY immigration? The so called shortage of STEM workers is and has always been bogus. There are 5 million STEM workers either out of work or working in areas not in their STEM fields. We needed immigration 80 years ago to fill out manual labor and farm needs….that is no longer the case and has not been for some time. We have 98 million folks OUT of the labor pool. Every study has found no need for Tech worker immigration. The only reason found has been – LOWER WAGES. And that is not a valid reason. Some of the most fabled names in the tech business (Apple, Facebook etc.) have conspired to fix the wages of their highly qualified engineers by forming illegal non-competitive hiring pacts, so it’s hard to tell just how pressing the demand for engineering talent really is.
13. Do not fall for the oft heard phrase “we are nation founded by immigrants”. That is not true. When the Europeans came here, there was NO Country in existence to “immigrate” to. And those who came here were Explorers and Conquerors. Not immigrants.
If enforcement is not mandatory this will all have to be done again….as it has every time before. Non enforcement has been followed up after legalization or amnesties.
Merit based immigration — is equally an anathema to those who call for it in the abstract. If legal immigration were to be ethnically blind, and based on merit rather than proximity to the southern border, the ethnic con artist industry would rise in revolt.
Racist groups such as La Raza affiliates do not believe in true diversity, racial or otherwise. They do not want legal immigration to be based on skills or college degrees, which might result in a million Kenyan doctors, Czech engineers, Chilean nurses, Mexican architects, Punjabi programmers, or Korean dentists entering the United States.
Think of all the ramifications of ethnically blind criteria that would drive liberals crazy. The ethnic con artists might see the end of huge influxes of poor and uneducated Central Americans and Mexicans. Without such a large and continually replenished pool, assimilation, integration, and intermarriage — the now-hated melting pot — would occur and make “Latinos” in a generation or two the equivalent of Italian Americans.
In other words, ethnic heritage would be incidental, not essential to one’s American identity, a fact that would mean to the Latino elite an eventual end to affirmative action, Chicano Studies, and the bilingual industry.
There are no Italian-language mega media conglomerates, no La Razza type pressure groups, and no affirmative action for those surnamed Giuliani or Cuomo. Seeing people as individuals is exactly what the Chicano grievance industry does not wish. Yet the end of grievance politics is what would occur if we did not have a million Latinos crossing illegally each year into the U.S. but rather a manageable number, legally and in accordance with the ethnically blind criteria applied to any other immigrants.
Nor would the liberal or the chamber of commerce elite in general like such merit-based immigration. They are happy to have cheap unskilled labor for janitorial work, landscaping, nannying, field labor, and construction, with such a pool driving down the wages of others. But skilled professionals in law, medicine, business, and other professions would compete with the native elite. Paying a high wage for an American citizen to do housework while competing for a job with a foreign-born stockbroker, professor, reporter, or lawyer may not be what proponents of comprehensive immigration reform had in mind.
A legislative compromise always seems within reach. There is a vast DC lobbying/media complex that depends for its survival on “comprehensive” reform always seeming within reach — to keep the corporate clients paying the bills, to keep the grant makers granting, to keep reporters on their beats writing easy denunciations of DC dysfunction, to keep the whole capital consensus from unnecessary introspection (in which Republicans might have to rethink parts of their platform other than the immigration plank, while Democrats might have to consider what low-skilled migration, expanded in the service of cheap ethnic politics, is doing to their former working class base).
Many Americans would support giving aliens who came here years ago, who have always been working and paying taxes, and who have been crime-free a chance at a green card. With mastery of English, the payment of a penalty for their illegal residence, and certification of self-support, many would be eligible for a pathway to citizenship. However, the open-borders alliance wishes no deportation of anyone. Business leaders who might support deportation do not wish to be called racists. Ethnic activists do not wish to lose any constituents, especially those currently deeply dependent on government social services. And liberal politicians want poor illiterates as future constituents regardless of their particular circumstances.
The next time a politician drones on about “comprehensive immigration reform,” a few questions have to be asked: How is the border made secure first? Is it desirable that legal immigration be merit based and ethnically diverse? And does anyone get deported, and if so who exactly?
Silence will follow — or, if not silence, a long string of invective nonsense. It’s no longer possible to say our grandparents made it, despite their apparent disadvantages.
They were different people, and that was a different country and different time.
Nor can one rely on “education” or “assimilation” — what if the immigrants simply conclude that their views are just better than the domestic majority’s? I think many of the current residents may rightly say “We have nothing against immigrants; but we don’t want our rights changed by the arrival of people who have a different perspective on the world than we do.”
Letting in immigrants means letting in your future rulers.
If today’s immigrant wave were likely to vote Republican, all right-thinking people would be demanding deportations and a mile-wide belt of barbed wire and minefields along the border. But they won’t be voting Republican so they will be let in.
The UK has just caught on to immigration frailties….and announced:
David Cameron announces immigration crackdown
Benefits for EU migrants will be cut off after three months, says PM, as he promises Coalition changes will ‘put Britain first’
Are we being invaded by massive unfettered illegal immigration.
If your country is being invaded some hard questions need be asked:
1. Should they be killed?
The ability to destroy legal industries through secret actions to deprive them of banking services has obvious political consequences. . . . In principle, of course, the logic of Operation Choke Point could be extended to groups not currently targeted. Notably absent from the FDIC’s hit list, for example, are abortion clinics, radical environmental groups, or, well, marijuana shops, for that matter. Something similar was done to cut off credit-card payments to support the operation of WikiLeaks .
Personally, I don’t think that regulators should be able to abuse their discretion — and this certainly looks abusive to me — in order to pressure banks to shut down the accounts of legal businesses. (As Sen. David Vitter, R-La., noted in March, the Justice Department has no statutory authority to do this). And while abortion clinics and environmental groups are probably safe under the Obama administration, if this sort of thing stands, they will be vulnerable to the same tactics if a different administration adopts this same thuggish approach toward the businesses that it dislikes. And why wouldn’t it, if the Justice Department gets away with this?
Congress, and the courts, and the press, need to bring the Justice Department to heel. And, in fact, I think that the officials involved should be named, shamed, and disciplined. Because what’s going on here doesn’t look much like justice at all.
Democratic Senators Block VA Accountability Bill
cant upset public employees