Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oil for Illegals? Mexico, and the Democrats, have a fit over House vote
National Review ^ | May 14, 2003 | Mark Krikorian

Posted on 05/14/2003 3:59:29 PM PDT by madfly

May 14, 2003, 9:30 a.m.
Oil for Illegals?
Mexico, and the Democrats, have a fit over House vote.

By Mark Krikorian

Last Thursday, the House International Relations Committee narrowly passed a resolution introduced by Rep. Cass Ballenger of North Carolina (R.) requiring that any amnesty deal for the five million Mexican illegal aliens in the United States be linked to an opening of Mexico's state-controlled oil industry to investment by U.S. companies.

Then the fun started.The Mexican press exploded in outrage. "Blackmail!" cried the archbishop of Mexico City. "Stupidity!" said a representative of the oil workers' union. A plot to "annex Latin America," intoned Nobel peace-prize winner Adolfo Pérez Esquivel. An example of U.S. lawmakers' "ignorance," "arrogance," and "imperial vision," according to a Mexican senator. The head of the leftist PRD called on President Vicente Fox to "put on his pants" — act like a man — and oppose the proposal. Fox finally joined the tsunami of criticism on Sunday and categorically rejected any privatization of Pemex, Mexico's state oil monopoly.

None of this should come as a surprise. Mexico's seizure of foreign oil companies' assets in 1938 is central to modern Mexican nationalism; state control of the oil industry is actually written into the constitution. What's more, there are midterm elections for the lower house of Mexico's Congress coming up in July. Embracing privatization of Pemex would not be a vote getter, to say the least. And according to William and Mary political scientist George Grayson, author of Oil and Mexican Foreign Policy, "unless the PAN makes notable strides in these contests, the beleaguered Fox will find himself a lame duck with three years-plus remaining in his term."

But however outraged the Mexicans are, and however different these two issues are, it only seems fair to link them. After all, Mexico is asking us to start down the path of eliminating our southern border and embracing a European Union-style shared sovereignty — the least we can expect is for them also to eliminate barriers that are important to their nation.

Nor has this idea come out of the blue. In the July 30, 2001, Weekly Standard, economist Irwin Stelzer suggested just such an approach. Stelzer wrote that "monopoly oil prices" could offset a good part of the economic growth assumed in the president's tax cut and that "the finger of blame points squarely at Mexico." He wrote that we should insist that Mexico cooperate with the United States and other pro-free market countries and stop supporting the OPEC oil cartel and its leaders such as the Marxist Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Stelzer said that before Bush strikes any deal on amnesty, "he should insist on the free movement of ...oil from Mexico" and the opening of Mexico's oil resources to American investment.

While Mexican opposition may be no surprise, the Democrats' furor over the oil-for-illegals approach is, given the importance of Mexico's oil to the United States and the huge costs that an illegal-alien amnesty would impose on us. After all, they have no chance whatever of getting an amnesty through Congress without some kind of sweetener, and this would seem an obvious candidate.

But it is not to be. Rep. Robert Menendez was so angry that he held a press conference last Friday denouncing the resolution. He was joined by Rep. Ciro Rodriguez and Silvestre Reyes; the latter, a past head of the Hispanic Caucus, said the amendment was an "insult" to Mexico and indicative of an "insane and outofcontrol attitude on the part of a country [the United States] that believes that as a matter of public foreign policy bullying is acceptable." It was Menendez who prompted the whole dust-up in the first place; Ballenger's amendment, to the State Department appropriations bill, was offered as a substitute to a proposal by Menendez calling for the conclusion of a "migration" accord which, among other things, "respect[ed] the human dignity of all migrants, regardless of their status" — i.e., an amnesty for illegal aliens.

The partisan nature of the vote suggests the depth of opposition in the president's own party for his preferred immigration policies. The only Republican to vote against Ballenger's oil-for-illegals linkage was Pete King (who has a career grade of F on the reformist Americans for Better Immigration website). Even such flamboyant Republican supporters of high immigration as Ileana Ros Lehtinen (career grade of F), Chris Smith (D-), and Steve Chabot (D+) voted for the linkage.

However bad the immigration positions of these Republicans, they at least understand that a massive illegal-alien amnesty must be met with some gesture from Mexico. But the Democratic-party/Mexican-government position on amnesty for illegals appears to be all quid from the United States and no quo from Mexico.

Stay tuned.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Mexico; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: amnesty; immigration; mexico; oil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-140 next last

1 posted on 05/14/2003 3:59:29 PM PDT by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Free the USA; Libertarianize the GOP; HiJinx; Carry_Okie; FITZ; Spiff; JackelopeBreeder; ...
ping
2 posted on 05/14/2003 4:00:12 PM PDT by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: madfly
Those folks sound just like our marxist/democRATS.
3 posted on 05/14/2003 4:03:52 PM PDT by Budge (God Bless FReepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: madfly
But the Democratic-party/Mexican-government position on amnesty for illegals appears to be all quid from the United States and no quo from Mexico.

How does this differ from the Bush position?

4 posted on 05/14/2003 4:11:12 PM PDT by sarcasm (Tancredo 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: madfly
Bump!

g in AZ

5 posted on 05/14/2003 4:12:44 PM PDT by Geezerette (... but young at heart!-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: madfly
"After all, Mexico is asking us to start down the path of eliminating our southern border and embracing a European Union-style shared sovereignty — the least we can expect is for them also to eliminate barriers that are important to their nation."

I'm laughing so hard I'm in tears here. We can't seal our Southern border with Mexico unless we build a version of the Great Wall, and even THAT won't stop people from bailing over somehow. It's ABOUT TIME we got SOMETHING out of Mexico besides illegals and empty rhetoric.

Fox, the Saddam mini-me, is scared.

6 posted on 05/14/2003 4:12:44 PM PDT by cake_crumb (UN Resolutions=Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb; sarcasm
Increase Eastern European Immigration!

Why? Because it will dillute the future voting power of the Mexican Aztlaners, and hence make it much easier for the GOP to cut back on the Goodies that all those Mexican Baby boomers are going to want from the Gooooooooooobermint when they grow up and become loyal Rat voters.
7 posted on 05/14/2003 4:18:11 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
Increase Eastern European Immigration!

They have. Hundreds of thousands have immigrated here from Eastern Europe and Russia in the last decade. The problem is illegal immigration, if they would cut it off it would slow the Aztlan train down considerably.

Personally, I'd like to see a break in ALL immigration for a while, we've taken in over 35 million in the last 40 years, enough is enough.

8 posted on 05/14/2003 4:32:31 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
"They have. Hundreds of thousands have immigrated here from Eastern Europe and Russia in the last decade. The problem is illegal immigration, if they would cut it off it would slow the Aztlan train down considerably."

Well ilegal immigration isn't a political problem for the GOP UNLESS they grant amnesty to a lot of these illegals.

Illegal immigration is more of an economic problem (see California).

However I advocate increasing East European immigration to a large level because it would be much easier for the GOP to just vote once to change legal immigration, than it would be deporting millions of illegals and spending billions to guard the border.

So increasing East European immigration is a lot less messier compared to the other alternatives, although I have not met a SINGLE Republican who knew that this was an option to them :(
9 posted on 05/14/2003 4:42:55 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sarcasm
How does this differ from the Bush position?

What is the "Bush position," and link to a delineation of it.

10 posted on 05/14/2003 4:47:14 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
On a major immigration issue, Bush said he was hopeful the United States and Mexico will reach an agreement by early September that would pave the way to legalize the status of up to 3 million Mexicans and ``serve as a precedent for other nationalities.

``I fully recognize, particularly in Miami and a lot of other places, there are workers here from other nationalities,'' said Bush. ``But to me, it makes sense to deal with the Mexican issue first, simply because the numbers are so overwhelming.''

11 posted on 05/14/2003 4:51:57 PM PDT by sarcasm (Tancredo 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
I don't think there'll be any consideration of amnesty until Bush's second term, maybe after the 2006 election.
12 posted on 05/14/2003 4:57:09 PM PDT by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
although I have not met a SINGLE Republican who knew that this was an option to them...

Chris Smith of NJ is a mass-immigrationist Republican as this article says, and he is largely responsible for the increase in East European immigration, which is fine in moderation. We're already taking in a million a year, how much more do you want to increase it to? By saying it's impossible to stop illegal immigration and deport the illegals so let's just balance the Aztlan train with other immigrants is not feasible in my opinion. We can't take in the world.

At some point, maybe when enough Americans shout from the rooftops the Republicans will finally grow a spine, close the border and start deporting illegals. It can be done, it was before in the fifties. The taxpayer can only build so many schools, so many hospitals, and so many prisons.

13 posted on 05/14/2003 4:57:44 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Well Bushs's amnesty proposal was a wreck in August of 2001 because:

1: The Republican House Leadership (God Bless them!) was ready to rebel against Rove because they correctly viewed Amnesty, as ensuring the Demographic destruction of the GOP.

2: The Democrats had out-manuevered the GOP by proposing that ALL illegals be given amnesty, not merely the 3 million Mexicans Rove had originally hoped for.

Of course the White House quietly abandoned the plan after 911 (and they probably would have abandoned the proposal even if 911 had not happened, due to House leadership resistance).

I'm not sure what they're current plan is, although the fact that the White House cancelled the Cinco De Mayo festivities, is a pretty strong indicator that There (Hopefully) will not be an amnesty proposal any time soon.

What the House is trying to do now, is trying to put a "Poison Pill" inside any Amnesty agreement, which is what the Oil Privitization scheme is.

The House GOP knows Mexico will never accept American influence over their oil, so the GOP put this proposal in to make sure there aren't enough votes to pass it.

So instead of just not taking up the amnesty issue, the GOP can say "Well we had a deal to give amnesty but Mexico rejected it therefore we had to withdraw the proposal".
14 posted on 05/14/2003 4:58:15 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
We're takeing in 1 million East Europeans a year????

I'm pretty sure it's only 90,000 Eastern Europeans per year.

15 posted on 05/14/2003 5:01:50 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
The taxpayer can only build so many schools, so many hospitals, and so many prisons.

Not if we go to a mandatory 70 hour work week. Now, get back to work, slacker. :)

16 posted on 05/14/2003 5:01:55 PM PDT by monkeywrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
Well Bushs's amnesty proposal was a wreck in August of 2001 because

What was Bush's amnesty proposal in August of 2001?

Even back then, some of us asked for documentation of what Bush's policy was, and we got nothing but unsubstantiated leaks with no names attached.

There may have been a "trial balloon", but there has never been an official Bush policy to grant amnesty to anybody.

There wasn't going to be an amnesty then, and there's not going to be an amnesty now.

17 posted on 05/14/2003 5:02:52 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: madfly; Dutchy
Silvestre Reyes said the amendment was an "insult" to Mexico and indicative of an "insane and outofcontrol attitude on the part of a country [the United States] that believes that as a matter of public foreign policy bullying is acceptable."

What is insane and out of control Mr. Reyes, is our government turning a blind eye to the FIVE MILLION illegals living in our country. If we were truly bullies, we'd deport them all, tomorrow!

18 posted on 05/14/2003 5:04:01 PM PDT by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
We're takeing in 1 million East Europeans a year????

Actually I'm talking about all immigrants, 1 million a year. What do you want to do, lower immigration from other countries while increasing East European immigration, or add to the 1 million total we're already taking in annually?

19 posted on 05/14/2003 5:04:59 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"What was Bush's amnesty proposal in August of 2001?"

It was pretty clear INITIALLY what the plan was.

Originally the plan was to essentially give amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants from Mexico, but the Democrats totally outmanuevered Rove by saying "That isn't good enough, ALL illegals should be given amnesty, not just Mexicans".

So by Spring, the White House started back tracking, and the House leadership said it was highly unlikely the proposal would pass in the House.

By Summer the deal was dead and Bush was looking for a way to withdraw the proposal without loosing face, but then 911 came and the rest is history.

20 posted on 05/14/2003 5:08:31 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: monkeywrench
Not if we go to a mandatory 70 hour work week. Now, get back to work, slacker...

You know that's what it's coming down to, we're working our lives away to support lawbreakers who benefit a few rich corporations. I'm suprised people aren't angrier than they are.

21 posted on 05/14/2003 5:09:21 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
I want substanially Lower immigration from Latin American countries, and raise the number of Eastern Europeans substantially.

The media will call the GOP racists, but the media calls Republicans racist no matter WHAT you do, and furthermore the people who will most offended by this are the people LEAST likely to vote Republican.
22 posted on 05/14/2003 5:11:49 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
I think the anger will come. It's almost too late...
23 posted on 05/14/2003 5:12:32 PM PDT by monkeywrench
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: StarFan
Isn't it INSANE that Representative Silvestre Reyes, who is on all these committees, can speak against the US Gov't in the Mexican press, calling us a Nation who bullies?

http://clerk.house.gov/members/inter_mem_list.php?statdis=TX16

Silvestre Reyes  
Texas-16th, Democrat
1527 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515-4316
Phone: (202) 225-4831

Committees
Subcommittees

 

24 posted on 05/14/2003 5:17:38 PM PDT by madfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
The problem that the rest of the world is having with the US lately is that the US is simply not taking the usual BS from abroad like we used to. Mexico, Europe, etc are used to making demands and badmouthing us at will and not suffering any consequences. Guess what, amigo? There is a new sheriff in town.

Frankly, I think that this proposal lets Mexico off lightly. I would demand:

1) An abolition of restrictions on american citizens from owning property in Mexico (currently, no american can own property there....they don't want "foreigners" to buy up Mexico).

2) Bilingual ballots in mexican elections (if its good for the goose....)

3) Allow americans to attend mexican universities at the same tuition as mexicans (like mexicans currently get in state tuition at california schools...even illegals).

4) Affirmative action...which will make sure that white and black americans have an equal chance at jobs in mexico as do native mexicans.

This is just for starters...I know that I'll think of a few more as time goes on.

The reason that they're pissed is that they are used to making demands, crying "racism" and having a bunch of guilty white liberal gringos giving them whatever they want.

25 posted on 05/14/2003 5:21:25 PM PDT by quebecois
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
I want substanially Lower immigration from Latin American countries, and raise the number of Eastern Europeans substantially.

That isn't going to happen, the most to expect is a decrease in all immigration, maybe take another look at the Jordan Commission's recommendations, which lowered annual levels to 500,000 and cut the family chain.

Besides, even if Congress wanted all immigration to come from Eastern Europe, the pool is not endless. And when their economies advance to the Western level, even fewer will want to come to the US.

26 posted on 05/14/2003 5:25:39 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Then the fun started.The Mexican press exploded in outrage.

I'm thinking this might have been a trial balloon or something from the Bush administration. President Fox and the Mexican politicians are very excited about illegal immigration to the US when they think it has to cost only the US taxpayer. They can demand they have access to every programs, school, hospital, welfare program (the Whole Enchilada) when it's Americans who have to pay. They never intended for the oil riches of Mexico to help out these poor citizens of theirs in any way ----watching them yelp now about the thought of losing one oil dollar to benefit the illegals here is very funny actually. The Mexican elite does not intend to share the oil money ---not with Americans, not with Mexicans.

27 posted on 05/14/2003 5:26:14 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Personally, I'd like to see a break in ALL immigration for a while

I'm with you. We need a break. We need time to absorb and assimilate the hoardes and hoardes we have taken in.

28 posted on 05/14/2003 5:30:02 PM PDT by Nea Wood ("If a President of the United States ever lied to the American people, he should resign." -- Bubba)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: madfly
Mexican immigration boils down to one issue only-we need workers to support the baby-boomers medicare/ss bills-and only Mexico has the requisite number of workers-70 million under age thirty in fact. The only way to thwart the inevitable here is to shut off the medicare/ss spigot...Dubya ain't gonna do THAT!!!
29 posted on 05/14/2003 5:30:42 PM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
"That isn't going to happen, the most to expect is a decrease in all immigration, maybe take another look at the Jordan Commission's recommendations, which lowered annual levels to 500,000 and cut the family chain."

Sure it can happen, all you have to do is tell the GOP that it is demographically DOOMED unless it let's in Eastern Europeans, and lower Hispanic immigration.

NEVER underestimate a politicians ability to look out for his self interest.

And there are over 300 million eastern europeans, so you have LOTS of people to choose from...

30 posted on 05/14/2003 5:34:04 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: mo
Bzzzzzzzzt.

Mexican immigration will not Help Social Security at all because Mexicans are too poor to pay much in taxes since they're badly educated and chronically poor.

High Skill immigration coming from eastern europe and Asia will save social security because, those immigrants are educated enough to get good jobs and can therefore be taxed.
31 posted on 05/14/2003 5:36:43 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
And there are over 300 million eastern europeans, so you have LOTS of people to choose from...

How many do you suppose want to come here? The reason so few from Western Europe wish to immigrate to the US is because their economies are on par as ours. Soon, East Europe and Russia will be too now that they got rid of communism.

Doesn't matter anyway, it's time for a pause in all immigration like we had in 1924. We're overloaded as it is.

32 posted on 05/14/2003 5:42:51 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
Sure it can happen, all you have to do is tell the GOP that it is demographically DOOMED unless it let's in Eastern Europeans, and lower Hispanic immigration.

What? You mean nobody's ever told the GOP this?

NEVER underestimate a politicians ability to look out for his self interest.

True in the short term, but not the long term. Clinton's military and security policies, continued, would arguably lead to their grandchildren paraded in chains in Peking. But, that's much later. Politicians care about NOW and the near future--i.e., the next election.

33 posted on 05/14/2003 5:44:21 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine (South-south-west, south, south-east, east....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Nea Wood
We need time to absorb and assimilate the hoardes and hoardes we have taken in.

The polls are all showing the same thing, we need a break. Only a few in Washington are listening.

34 posted on 05/14/2003 5:45:42 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
"What? You mean nobody's ever told the GOP this?"

When I bring this idea up to Republican friends of mine they say something like "Wow! I never even considered something that simple as an option!"

I've never seen ANY website or even a SINGLE article discuss this as a possibility...

So as far as I can tell, No one except me and some fellow Russian immigrants I know had this idea.

35 posted on 05/14/2003 5:55:32 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest; Pubbie
They have. Hundreds of thousands have immigrated here from Eastern Europe and Russia in the last decade. The problem is illegal immigration, if they would cut it off it would slow the Aztlan train down considerably.

I'm all for that. However, can anyone elaborate on the current problem of "legal immigration's" effect on the City of Glendale, CA?

That is one town that has deteriorated considerably over the last 20 or so years, because of the influx of the Armenian population. This is one group who dare not assimilate, with a sizable amount of them collecting welfare and medicaid (courtesy of Uncle Sam)....all while many of them are driving Mercedes and other expensive cars. The Armenian kids are forming gangs, and fight with the surrounding Latino and Oriental gangs. The crime rate has jumped considerably in the last 20 years, it is no longer safe to walk around the local mall there.

Many of the Armenian doctors practicing there are flat out ripping off Medicare, as some are caught in fraudulent claims. Unfortunately, the problem these people bring are spreading around the surrounding areas.

Anyone in the Glendale/Burbank area comment?

36 posted on 05/14/2003 6:07:03 PM PDT by kstewskis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis
"However, can anyone elaborate on the current problem of "legal immigration's" effect on the City of Glendale, CA?"

It is wrecking the state because millions of illegals, who don't make enough money to be taxed, are flooding into the State, while the people rich enough to be taxed are running for their lives to Utah and Colorado.

And since these illegal mexicans have ZERO job skills, they have boatloads of kids, who also have no job skills, and therefore grow up to be gang members.

Watch for an EXPLOSION in the Latino Crime rate in California when those Mexican baby boomers grow up a la the Black gang crime wave of the 70's 80's and mid 90's...
37 posted on 05/14/2003 6:15:34 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis
This is one group who dare not assimilate, with a sizable amount of them collecting welfare and medicaid (courtesy of Uncle Sam)....all while many of them are driving Mercedes and other expensive cars.

Just another example of an immigration policy so far out in left field...

38 posted on 05/14/2003 6:16:25 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Temple Owl
ping
39 posted on 05/14/2003 6:17:54 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
Watch for an EXPLOSION in the Latino Crime rate in California when those Mexican baby boomers grow up a la the Black gang crime wave of the 70's 80's and mid 90's...

THAT has already happened, and it started in the 80's. Kalifornia is trashed, thanks to the immigration problem, both legal and illegal.

My issue is with the Eastern European immigration. If they come from a non communist background, fine. They are generally hard workers. I use Glendale, CA as an Armenian experiment gone horribly wrong. If they are from the communist bloc countries, they will (and have) bleed our system dry as well. Including Medicare fraud.

40 posted on 05/14/2003 6:20:18 PM PDT by kstewskis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
"How many do you suppose want to come here? The reason so few from Western Europe wish to immigrate to the US is because their economies are on par as ours. Soon, East Europe and Russia will be too now that they got rid of communism."

Well Eastern Europe has a LONG way to go before the living standard is close to the American living standard.

Russia has been doing economically quite well recently, BUT again, it still has a looooong way to go.

In Russia at least 30% of the population is living in poverty, and I imagine many of those people would like to come over.

For the most part, Eastern Europe is generally very poor, and there surely must be tens of millions of young people who would love to come over to the US.
41 posted on 05/14/2003 6:20:30 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: quebecois
The reason that they're pissed is that they are used to making demands, crying "racism" and having a bunch of guilty white liberal gringos giving them whatever they want

Biiiing! You get the prize.

With Mexico, it's always been "what's ours is ours, what's yours is negotiable" -- and the latest generation of gringos laid down for that, emboldening them further.

We'll see if a little generational spine is being grown in D.C.

42 posted on 05/14/2003 6:23:10 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
Just another example of an immigration policy so far out in left field...

Trust me, it's ugly. When you have a difficult time reading the signs on a building, you wonder if you still live in the US.

My poor grandma would spin in her grave if she saw what happened to her town.

43 posted on 05/14/2003 6:23:17 PM PDT by kstewskis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: madfly
Pemex opens up exploration in its Burgos Field
44 posted on 05/14/2003 6:23:56 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis
"My issue is with the Eastern European immigration. If they come from a non communist background, fine. They are generally hard workers. I use Glendale, CA as an Armenian experiment gone horribly wrong. If they are from the communist bloc countries, they will (and have) bleed our system dry as well. Including Medicare fraud."

There is no welfare system anymore in Eastern Europe, because there is no money in any of these countries for any major welfare programs like there is in Western Europe.

As far as I can tell, Russians vote Republican, for example, the 56 ward in Philadelphia has the largest concentration of Russians in America, and that ward is the most Republican part of the city.

Russians are tied with Lithuanians as being the most educated Immigrant group in US history.

The education system in Eastern Europe is outstanding, especially in the hard sciences.

So overall, merely due to education levels, Eastern Europeans should assimilate very well into American society.


45 posted on 05/14/2003 6:26:46 PM PDT by Pubbie (Bill Owens for Prez and Jeb as VP in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: madfly
ping
46 posted on 05/14/2003 6:28:28 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Hammer...nail....BANG!!! (ya know the truth hurts! so this is painful for vince)
47 posted on 05/14/2003 6:28:28 PM PDT by Madcelt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: kstewskis
Trust me, it's ugly. When you have a difficult time reading the signs on a building, you wonder if you still live in the US.

If only the media would get in the face of the politicians causing this instead of playing the racist game all the time. It's our kids future we're talking about.

48 posted on 05/14/2003 6:29:06 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mo
Mexican immigration boils down to one issue only-we need workers to support the baby-boomers medicare/ss bills-and only Mexico has the requisite number of workers-70 million under age thirty in fact.

Oh yes, by all means. Let's keep the World's Biggest Ponzi Schemes going for another generation with the hope that the Mexican Illegals will gladly part with over half their minimum wages to pay for insolvent Gringo welfare programs. LOL. (Hint: They like their current deal with us MUCH MUCH Better). Meanwhile, we hand political control of our country to that fine government in the land of vast prosperity to the South. Real Smart. /sarcasm off

49 posted on 05/14/2003 6:29:12 PM PDT by WRhine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pubbie
For the most part, Eastern Europe is generally very poor, and there surely must be tens of millions of young people who would love to come over to the US.

That may be true, but as I've been saying we need a time-out, at least for five years. Then maybe we can resume with an immigration policy that has some sanity attached to it. I see no problem increasing immigration from that part of the world, in moderation.

50 posted on 05/14/2003 6:37:36 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-140 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson