Michelle Malkin on C-SPAN Booknotes

TV Guide ^ | 02-21-04 | TV Guide

[NewRomeTacitus]

CSPAN2 Basic Cable Saturday 2/21/2004 6:00 PM CST, 1 hr

Encore Booknotes

Michelle Malkin: Invasion: How America Still Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores

[NewRomeTacitus]

This may be a repeat but the subject is more relevent than ever. Few authors combine research with a passion for her subject like Ms. Malkin. I've read this book myself and can't recommend it enough.

[NewRomeTacitus]

Heads up. We don't usually see a viewpoint favoring crackdown given by someone other than slovenly Bubba's the press dredges up.
Which is why I avoid them.

[janetgreen]

Thanks! I'll tune in. Michelle's great.

[OXENinFLA]

Michelle Malkin's "Invasion" C-span2 @ 7pm tonight

[Poundstone]

Guess this will be an unpopular post, but I feel compelled to point out that Michelle Malkin, however brilliant she may be, is nevertheless symptomatic of the "hidden crisis" this country faces in immigration: the staggering consequences of LEGAL immigration. That's right: legal, not illegal, immigration. Because of the insane nature of our immigration law, just one legal immigrant who comes here can initiate a never-ending chain of subsequent immigration from his or her relatives -- all completely legally. This legal immigration is not a "ticking time bomb" that threatens our society in the future; it's ALREADY EXPLODED and continues to explode each year.

Why does Michelle Malkin symbolize this crisis? It's not just because she's an immigrant herself (or so I believe; if I'm wrong, I ask that Freepers correct me). It's because I'm willing to bet she herself has petitioned for her foreign relatives to immigrate to this country -- completely legally. Now, that's an assertion I would love to have confirmed or denied by someone who actually knows the facts.

[NewRomeTacitus]

No ma'am. Ms. Malkin's came here from the Phillipine's and went through the legal proccess for citizenship back in the 1960's or '70s. She is hard on this subject due to her parents constantly stressing the importance of legal U.S. citizenship. They way she goes on I suspect they'd rather shoot any incoming relatives than harbor illegals.

Your point is valid, though. Until illegal immigration is controlled legal immigration should be slowed to a trickle. Legal means little while illegal is not only tolerated but rewarded by likes of a certain senatorial swine from Massachusetts.

[Poundstone]

Pardon me, but I think you overlooked my point. Yes, I'm perfectly willing to believe that Michelle Malkin, her parents, and anyone else in her family would never, ever, come to the U.S. illegally. But the point is: they will (or have) come here LEGALLY. And the many millions like them who come here each year LEGALLY are changing the face of America, without the consent of a majority of Americans.

[NewRomeTacitus]

The assimilation issue. One has to blame the Democrats directly for pushing diversity over unity, victimization over self-reliance and protected status over homogenization. The immigrants who settled and pioneered this nation could not afford the delusions peddled to their modern prototypes by pandering politicians.
Now any attempts to correct the situation are automatically met with knee-jerk accusations of racism and intolerance, pushed by the worst sort of race-pimps who would lose power, influence and income if their constituents rejected those agendas and sought success in the same manner of their forebears.

[cyborg]

Thanks. I'll tell my family to go back where they came from and I'll move to an island far away from people like you.

[Poundstone]

(sigh) Your attitude is precisely the problem I'm talking about. See the previous poster. Yes, those of us who point out the devastating damage being done to our country by LEGAL immigration are often labeled "racists" or "flat-earth believers," or some such term. But that's simply not the case. I urge you to take a calm, reasoned look at the social implications of legal immigration.

[cyborg]

Not everyone who is posting in FR, is a 'mayflower American' thanks. I'd not call you a racist, just ignorant. My family came here and were productive members of society, as are most legal immigrants. My mother works harder than a lot of people who were born here who are lazy and collecting welfare. My ex boyfriend came from South Africa and works very hard as a scientist in California. Why don't you go and educate yourself on how hard immigrants worked to build this country instead of saying their presence is a 'devastating damage'?

[WilliamofCarmichael]

I think that Ms Malkin is a national asset.

I am sure somewhere in her writings there are reports on this "hidden" problem. Here are some links to the problems that led up to the 1996 reforms. NORMAN MATLOFF'S IMMIGRATION FORUM Immigration articles and studies

http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/pub/Immigration/Index.html

I have sponsored immigrants. It's been two decades and back then you had health and background checks as well as financial responsibilities.

As the articles point out there are ways around the financial aspect and there are time limits to it. Many abuse the system. Even liberals voted for reform though some like Diane "I was embarrassed to wear the American Flag pin" Feinsten have helped undo some of the reforms they voted for.

It has been / still is a problem -- but only if the system is abused IMO. There is also the refugee program. Hundreds of thousands of them. Perhaps some confuse these folks with legal sponsored immigrants?

[cyborg]

exactly you make some good points... the abuse of the refugee/asylum program as well as the genius 'wet-foot/dry-foot' policy is an issue.

[greggpvc]

Michelle Malkin is a US citizen born in the good ole USA. Her parents were immigrants. Simple to look up before you opine.

[Poundstone]

(double sigh) Sometimes I despair over the inability -- or unwillingness -- of many persons of intelligence and goodwill to "get" what the problem is in legal immigration.

Perhaps I can best illustrate it this way: suppose the US opened the gates to immigration. That's right: just opened 'em up, without restriction.

What would you expect to happen?

Well, aside from spectacular skyrocketing population growth, you'd probably see a Hispanic majority in the US within one generation. And probably an incredible proportion of Africans (but it'd be more difficult for them to get a majority, given the distance and difficulty in transportation). We'd probably also get a fairly good number of Muslims. Not that many Europeans, though, since most of them are essentially content to be in Europe. Ditto for most Asians (though many Indians would flood in, I expect).

What would that do to the US that we know?

Well... we'd see English replaced with a polyglot of languages, led by Spanish. Respect for Protestant Christianity as one of the most important founding philosphies of our republic? Fuggetaboutit. What about the princple of the rule of law? I think you'd see a vast increase in "family," "social," and "tribal" ways of handling issues that today are handled by law. Would the US continue to stand by our traditional European allies, such as the UK? No, I don't think so; I think our foreign policy would most resemble South Africa's, i.e., the US as a friend of Third Worlders, the UN, and every misbegotten minority out there in the world.

How about policies that favor free-enterprise capitalism? Huh? Take a look at how countries in Africa, the Middle East, and much of Latin America handle that. Not a pretty picture.

Any of these hypothetical consequences sound vaguely familiar? Uh huh, that's right: they're happening (not all, but most) right now, in slow motion, across America. And one of the major causes, I firmly believe, is the vast flood of legal immigration this country receives EVERY YEAR. And remember, it's not just the "initial" legal immigrants we're talking about, it's the large numbers of family members and relatives they're able to bring in, legally, once they become permanent residents and citizens. It's that particular feature that holds so much disaster for the U.S.

Now, you may think I'm a crackpot, but that's probably because you're so fiercely proud to be an immigrant. Which is fine. I'm telling you, however, that legal immigration, multiplied by the millions of such cases every year (the vast majority of whom are from dissimilar lands in Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, and Asia), is a steadily unfolding social disaster for America. And it's not just me who believes that. Check out such reputable organizations as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), and you'll begin, I hope, to get an accurate picture of the consequences of our current immigration system.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

I should have included (above) all the various ways of getting here legally such as on your own and that includes as a refugee or similar category.

The problems arise when there is abuse and IMO there is lots of that. I cannot cite the writings and I did not google but I am sure Ms Malkin has written about the abuse.

One of my favorites recently is a San Francisco newspaper article about some subsidized housing for the elderly. The government wanted to move the elderly tenants to a safer apartment complex. It had to be delayed. None of the elderly spoke English and the government was busy trying to find interpreters to explain what was going on. Naturally the PC employee of the newspaper was oblivious to the questions elderly? don't speak English? subsidized housing? how did they get here? did the children sponsor them? where are the children (at least they could interpret, the three-year financial reponsibility had expired and now the taxpayers are responsible)?

[cyborg]

Newbie you have a lot to learn.

[cyborg]

welcome to FR... ignore the woefully ignorant and you'll be fine with your blood pressure intact

[avenir]

Well said, totally agree.