Yes, We Can Send Them Home                                  

            With unemployment pushing close to 10 percent, it’s not easy these days to be an advocate of illegal immigration. For the time being, at least, the Obama Administration admits that it doesn’t have the votes to pass an amnesty. Cool heads within the administration realize that legalizing illegals, thus inviting more to come and take jobs, is a good way to invite a political backlash.

            But never underestimate the cunning and determination of those who strive to undermine our rule of law and nationhood. One of the lines they’re using now is that, like it or not, there is no way we can deport the 12 million or so illegal aliens who now live in our country. Therefore we must legalize them and make them citizens.

            Interestingly, this is the same line they were using back in 1986 when they passed the first amnesty. At that time they said it was impossible to deport the three million illegal aliens then living in the country. No matter what the numbers are, it’s clear that they simply don’t want enforcement of our immigration laws.

            And it’s especially clear now as the Obama Administration steps back from even the very modest upgrades of enforcement grudgingly carried out by the Bush Administration during the latter part of its second term. Obama is not going to complete the border fence, continue worksite raids to arrest illegal aliens, and require federal contractors any time soon to use the E-Verify system, which allows employers to check the legal status of employees.

            Interestingly, these and other steps seemed to have some impact on illegal immigration. Arrests at the border have declined, and during the past year perhaps as many as one million illegal aliens have gone home. No doubt the greatest reason for these changes has been declining job opportunities due to the recession. But many observers believe that the uptick in enforcement played a role too.

            Illegal alien advocates dishonestly suggest that the only way to deport illegal aliens is to apprehend and repatriate each and every one of them. To do so, they claim, would require intrusive police state measures.

            Present and past experience clearly indicate otherwise. When illegal aliens see that we are serious about enforcing our laws, quite often they go home on their own volition, thus deporting themselves. To illustrate, in 1954 the administration of President Dwight Eisenhower grew concerned about the rise of illegal immigration across the Mexican border. Unencumbered by our current concerns of political correctness, the administration acted swiftly and forcefully.

            That year immigration agents rounded up and deported approximately 130,000 illegal aliens. As the consequence of this action, more than a million more saw the writing on the wall and departed on their own.

             We can deal with 12 million illegal aliens with a policy of attrition, i.e., slowly tightening enforcement to encourage this population to leave. We don’t lack the means to do so, only the will. And what saps that will is the greed, treachery and ambition of the illegal alien lobby.           

Pro-Alien Lobby Pitches Hate Hype

            Unable to argue rationally about immigration policy (because they have no rational arguments), the promoters of open borders and mass legal immigration are resorting more and more to “hate hype.” That is, they try to claim that any views differing from their own are “hate” and therefore don’t deserve a hearing. They also claim that  “hate speech” causes hate crimes, and thereby suggest that “hate speech” (meaning speech they hate) should be outlawed—our First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of expression not withstanding.

            The “hate crimes” bill, S.909, now pending in the Senate now raises this possibility. It provides that someone who “counsels” someone else to commit a hate crime also can be charged with the crime. Many hate hype artists seem to confuse counseling and criticism.

            Recently, something called the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund said that criticism of illegal immigration, which it characterized as “the dehumanizing, racist stereotypes and bigotry of hate groups,” correlates “closely” with an alleged increase in “hate crimes” against Hispanics. This claim got wide play in the media, even though its statistics were flawed.

            The figures showed a numerical increase in officially tabulated hate crimes against Hispanics since 2003. Omitted, however, was the fact that these crimes slightly declined if the year 2001 is selected as the starting point. In any case, simple numbers are meaningless. What is significant is the number of crimes per capita against a particular group. Given the sharp increase in the total Hispanic population since 1995, hate crimes per capita against Hispanics have declined significantly during the past 14 years. So much for the theory that rising criticism of immigration during that time has prompted a hate crime wave.

            One may wonder, on the other hand, if the pro-alien lobbies continuing propaganda on behalf of illegal aliens has encouraged them to commit crimes against  American citizens, crimes including murder, vandalism, drunken driving and tax evasion. The hate hype chorus has little to say when Americans are victims.

            If indeed their rhetoric promotes crime against citizens, the solution is not censorship, but more free speech to expose what they are doing. This is the American way. The pro-alien lobbies don’t understand that way because they are anti-American to the core. They don’t believe in our country’s borders and laws because they don’t believe in our country. This truth is hard to deny, which is why the pro-aliens don’t want anyone speaking it. Truth is hate to those who hate truth.

What Are Reid and Company Up To?

 

            Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) believes that the Senate can pass an amnesty for illegal aliens before the end of the year. He said that he was willing to put his party’s “reputation on the line” to accomplish this goal. Even if he can’t persuade all Senate Democrats to vote for amnesty, the senator maintains that he can find enough Republicans to pass the legislation.
            What is one to make of this? For one thing it certainly suggests that Reid has little concern for millions of unemployed Americans who are cut off from jobs now held by illegal aliens—and would face further competition from more illegal immigration encouraged by the amnesty. And his desire to pass a bill, so soon, also may reflect his political self-interest.

            By all accounts he will face a difficult re-election campaign in 2010. Thus, if he sponsors something as unpopular as amnesty, Reid may want enough time to elapse so that—he hopes—voters will forget about it before they go to the polls.

            Or there might be some duplicity and deception involved. Many Democratic leaders, probably including President Obama, don’t want a push for amnesty until unemployment goes down. It’s probably not because they care about unemployed Americans, but more probably because they care about the high political cost of pushing an amnesty with so many citizens out of work. They might get so mad that they will never forget. On the other hand the leadership is facing intense pressure from Latino supremacists (La Raza, etc.) and other open border zealots to pass an amnesty and pass it now. So what are the Democratic leaders to do?

            Maybe they will make an all-out push to pass amnesty in the Senate, with the knowledge that it may not make it in the House. In 2006 the Senate passed amnesty legislation which languished in the House and eventually died. This would help to placate the open border lobby while failure to go the full distance and enacting a bill would keep the general public from getting too riled up.

            Whatever the case, it appears that something is up in the Senate. And that is where supporters of genuine immigration reform must now focus their attention. If Reid and company try to pass a bill in the upper chamber, the American public must rise up and stop him. Passage in the Senate does not guarantee immediate passage in the House, but it will give amnesty promoters encouragement of eventual passage.

            Winning in the Senate in 2006 prompted them to try again in 2007. Failure in both chambers in 2007 threw a monkey wrench into their agenda. We should prepare to throw another one.        

California Refutes Mass Immigration Advocates                       

            If mass immigration and diversity are as wonderful as its pushers claim, how do they explain California? Four decades ago, the state offered an excellent quality of life, a pleasant environment with wide-open spaces, an economic climate congenial to the middle class, excellent schools and public services, and a unifying American culture.

            That was when the tidal waves of immigration, much of it illegal, began rolling over the state. Largely pushed by immigration, California’s population skyrocketed from 20 million in 1970 to more than 36 million today. Twenty-eight percent of that population is foreign born, the highest percentage of any state in the union.

            So what is California like today? One who sums it up well is Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA): “The once legendary California quality of life has declined precipitously.” That indeed is an understatement. Immigration boosters, with their typical dishonesty, try to pretend that immigration isn’t really the main cause, but it is hard to think of a problem the state has which is not significantly aggravated by immigration.

            Just consider the sheer overcrowding and traffic gridlock in the state—and the loss of green space and breathing room. Orange County, near Los Angeles, got its name from its once numerous orange groves. Today, strip malls and other development cover most of the land where the oranges once grew. Certainly mass immigration has something to do with this.

            And also it has something to do with a soaring tax burden on middle-class taxpayers who have to pick up the fiscal tab for the schooling, welfare and health costs of an immigrant population that is, on average, poor and unskilled. The strain on services has been intense, but in spite of the sharp tax hikes, the state is struggling to avoid bankruptcy.

            Four decades ago, California was a conservative-leaning state, though one with a balance of left and right factions and a functioning two-party system. Today, leftist politicians in the Democratic Party, relying significantly on the votes of semi-assimilated immigrants to impose an agenda of business regulation and social engineering that makes California less and less congenial to traditional middle-class Americans. Their aggravation increases all the more amid the constant conflicts and misunderstandings brought about by multicultural diversity.

            As a consequence, more Americans are leaving California than going there.  Immigration boosters spin their theories well. But the reality of mass immigration, not the theory, is California today. And if that immigration doesn’t stop, or at least slow down, most other states will follow the sad direction of what was once the Golden State.  

Supreme Court Nominee Is a Member of ‘The Race’

 A fact largely ignored by the mainstream media is that Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s appointee to the Supreme Court, is a member of the National Council of La Raza (NCLR), a racialist organization that seeks to undermine immigration law. Its transparent goal is to let in more Hispanics to build Hispanic clout and influence. The word “La Raza” means “The Race.” NCLR consistently opposes any effective steps to curtail illegal immigration, while promoting benefits for illegal aliens, including amnesty.

While posing as a “civil rights” organization, NCLR has funded radicals. One of its grants in 2003 went to a chapter of MEChA, a group calling for Latino homeland in the Southwest. One of its slogans is “For those inside the race, everything; for those outside the race, nothing.” NCLR also has funded “charter schools” that promote Hispanic separatism.

Marcos Aguilar, the principal at one of those schools in Los Angeles stated that “We don’t want to drink from a white water fountain. . . . And ultimately the white way, the American way of life will eventually lead to our own destruction.” 

Recently, NCLR has launched a campaign to silence criticism of illegal immigration by calling it “hate speech.” As one example, a spokeswoman for the organization called on CNN to censor the commentary of the popular news reporter Lou Dobbs on illegal immigration.

Apparently in keeping with her NCLR affiliation, Sotomayor sees her ethnicity as an advantage in making judicial decisions. During a 2001 speech at the University of California's Berkeley School of Law, she stated, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experience would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

During his presidential campaign, President Obama addressed the NCLR’s national convention and promised his support of their agenda. Sotomayor’s appointment appears to be one payment on that promise.

Her presence on the Supreme Court, for certain, will be no help to genuine immigration reform. Please call your senators and ask them not to confirm Sotomayor. To reach their offices, call the Capitol Hill Switchboard at (202) 224-3121.