Skip to comments.Immigration, Reconsidered
Posted on 07/14/2010 7:32:47 AM PDT by kabar
What if instead of granting amnesty in one fell swoop, we did so incrementally, say, to 20 percent of illegals a year for the next five years? That would still have the same ill effects, you say? OK, how about one million illegals a year until the job is done? I can hear it now: "Whoa, Duke, all you're proposing is to trade a knife through the heart for a death by a thousand cuts. A bad idea implemented more slowly is still a bad idea. And illegal means illegal." But wait -- if Congress passed an amnesty plan, it wouldn't be illegal.
You see, a death by a thousand legal cuts is not actually my position. Rather, if you're the average conservative American, it's yours. And what I put forth wasn't actually a proposal. Rather, it was a reality. It's called legal immigration.
Let's look at the facts. For most of American history, we admitted an average of approximately 250,000 immigrants a year. After the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 (Ted Kennedy's baby), however, this figure rose fourfold to approximately one million a year. The result: The rate of immigration started to exceed the rate of assimilation.
But it wasn't just the numbers that changed; it was also the nature. Eighty-five percent of our legal immigrants now hail from the third world and Asia, from non-Western cultures. And many immigrants, such as Islamists, cling to and advance beliefs that are incompatible with -- and destructive to -- our culture.
The proof is in the pudding. Approximately 80 percent of new legal immigrants, once naturalized, vote as our culture-rending leftists do (for leftist Democrats). For a specific example, consider that first-time Hispanic voters cast ballots for Bill Clinton by a ratio of 15 to 1.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
in the past we have always had extensive programs to educate, Americanize and assimilate new immigrants. The difference today is that the people behind this are deliberately trying to Balkanize us.
I don’t care what color they are as long as they are the best and brightest. If they come here to open businesses, (and have the funds) if they are educated, if they contribute, then they are welcome. If they need welfare, and education etc. then they should comprise only 5% of the immigrants.
The U.S. adds one international migrant (net) every 36 seconds. Immigrants account for one >in 8 U.S. residents, the highest level in more than 80 years. In 1970 it was one in 21; in 1980 it was one in 16; and in 1990 it was one in 13. In a decade, it will be one in 7, the highest it has been in our history. And by 2050, one in 5 residents of the U.S. will be foreign-born.
From the article:
The problem with this is that it isn't geography that makes a nation, but people. Replace Americans with Mexicans or Muslims and you no longer have America -- you have Mexico North or Iran West. Thus, if you believe Western culture is an evil force and aim to destroy it, our current immigration scheme perfectly suits your agenda.
Of course, some say this will change when the new arrivals become Americanized, but this is an ostrich pipe dream. For one thing, they aren't being Americanized; America is being balkanized. Second, what does it mean to be Americanized? There are millions of leftists who deliver a message many new immigrants are very sympathetic to: Socialism -- or "statism," if you prefer -- is as American as apple pie.
Also remember that a person's ideology is much like his religion: It involves deep-seated beliefs that the individual lives and breathes. Ideology often gives people's lives meaning; they advocate for it, they sometimes die for it, and, even more frequently, they kill for it.
And our culture is dying because of it. "People get the government they deserve," as Thomas Jefferson said, because one way or another, government tends to reflect the people. This brings us to an important question: Do you want the kind of socialism -- or statism, if you prefer -- that generally prevails from the Rio Grande to Cape Horn? Well, understand that immigrants will vote for the same kind of candidates they supported in their native lands, and this won't magically change because they set foot on American terra firma. Of course, you could try the following appeal: "Ignore the folks offering you handouts and ethnic studies! Embrace our heroes and history, our love of small government and personal responsibility." Good luck with that, amigos.
Numbers matter. We can’t continue to take in 1.2 million legal immigrants a year. We can’t assimilate those kinds of numbers.
It is not just a matter of votes. Once you legalize the status of the illegals and allow them to stay and work here, they can sponsor tens of millions more legal immigrants thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification. Amnesty will destroy this country with the stroke of a pen.
Understood, but truth beknown, amnesty, in some form, is coming because mass deportation or incremental deportation is not going to be an option; therefore, the penalties for being given amnesty should be of focus, as well as having the border verifibly secured first.
I tried to point this big problem out to Republicans many times but never got anywhere. This country had a massive legal immigration invasion under the Bush years (he said we needed all those workers for his growing economy) and most of them ended up voting democrat in 2008. Even now they are sympathetic to Obama and his ideas that he is doing the best anyone can and is disliked for being non-white. Our immigration system that puts relatives to the front of the line is bankrupting this country. As soon as they get in they get benefits and their kids get free college and learn to believe in government handouts. We should reform the system so those that can contribute are put at the front of the line.
Let ‘em in ... let ‘em all in. BUT DON’T ALLOW THEM TO VOTE, EVER. Now, let’s see someone who is “for” illegal immigration swallow that one! This isn’t about illegals, its about votes ... lets prove it!
I don't accept your premise, which is what the Left would like us to believe.
The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that dont reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from experiences in Georgia, Colorado, and Arizona proving that it does.
Oh, I agree which is why I said the best and brightest who can sustain themselves. That will automatically eliminate most of those applying.
If we let them all in, the US will be destroyed. They are not coming here to vote, but to work and take advantage of our social welfare systems.
The huge influx of immigration since the passage of the 1965 Immigration Act has already had a major impact on electoral politics in this nation. Here is an excellent study from Prof James Gimpel of the University of Maryland:
First, be assured I am not a leftist, a Dem, nor am I a proponent of amnesty. Second, again, I can understand your not accepting my premise but despite my conservative inclinations, or the conservative inclinations of the vast majority of us, to agree with a non-amnesty measure(s), the fact remains that amnesty, in some form, is a foregone conclusion...it is a matter of ‘when’ and ‘what form’ than a matter of ‘if’.
We suffer no shortage of qualified applicants. We need to reduce the overall number of legal immigrants to around 300,000 to 500,00 a year and go to a merit based system. We also need to confine legal immigration to the nuclear family and not to the extended family. One immigrant from Nigeria sponsored 83 members of his family to this country. And once they are American citizens, they can sponsor more of their relatives.
The single most effective remedy for illegal immigration is, in a word, DISINCENTIVE.
Clumsy word, but it sure works. If it isn’t worth the trouble, they won’t come.
Put a sign on your lawn saying “Free Food - Open House - Free Tutoring - We’ll Even Pay Your Doctor Bills - And More!” and see if you don’t attract a stampede.
When word gets around that the goodies are withdrawn, what happens? You can get the gate fixed and the front door rehung.
Not rocket science.
Sorry we will agree to disagree. It is not a foregone conclusion and must be fought at every turn. The survival of country is at stake.
Impact of Amnesty: In analyzing the 2007 CIR bill, Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation stated, The main fiscal impact will occur through two mechanisms: (1) the grant of amnesty, with accompanying access to Social Security, Medicare and welfare benefits, to 12 million illegal immigrants who are overwhelmingly low skilled; and (2) a dramatic increase in chain immigration, which will also be predominantly low skilled. The bottom line is that high school dropouts are extremely expensive to U.S. taxpayers. It does not matter whether the dropout comes from Ohio, Tennessee, or Mexico. It does matter that the Senate immigration bill would increase the future flow of poorly educated immigrants into the U.S. and grant amnesty and access to government benefits to millions of poorly educated illegal aliens already here. Such legislation would inevitably impose huge costs on U.S. taxpayers.
Heritage research has concluded that the cost of amnesty alone would be $2.6 trillion. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen. Amnesty is forever.
Right. Who do you believe, Harry Reid or your lyin’ eyes?