Discussion:
No amnesty, no deal, Mr. President
(too old to reply)
Antimulticulture
2005-12-08 11:27:13 UTC
Permalink
No amnesty, no deal, Mr. President
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47780
December 7, 2005

When the 17th Street levee broke and the floodwaters of Lake Pontchartrain
inundated New Orleans, the immediate imperative was: Fix the levee. Before
the cleanup could begin, before the refugees could return, the levee had to
be repaired so water stopped flooding into the city. Everybody understood
this.

Why, then, has it taken five years for the White House to wake up to the
first imperative in the immigration crisis: Fix the border, stop the flood?
Why is President Bush still chattering on about a "guest worker" program
that has nothing to do with the crisis?

Since he took office in 2001, Bush said in Tucson, Ariz., U.S. border agents
have apprehended and sent home 4.5 million illegal aliens, "including more
than 350,000 with criminal records."

Astonishing. That is 75,000 criminals a year, 200 felons a day, for the last
five years, trying to break into our country to rape, rob and kill, and
molest our children. Of the millions of illegals who succeeded in breaking
in on Bush's watch, how many came to rape, rob and murder, like John Lee
Malvo, the Beltway sniper?

This is a national crisis, an existential crisis. But after five years of
ignoring it, and now finally addressing it, what did Bush say in Tucson? I
can't defend the border if you won't give me a guest worker program. Said
Bush, "[W]e will not be able to effectively enforce our immigration laws
until we create a temporary worker program."

But this is preposterous. Bush is saying he cannot do his constitutional
duty to protect the nation from invasion - unless we let 12 million illegal
aliens become guest workers and allow greedy U.S. businesses to go overseas
and hire foreigners for jobs that U.S. workers won't take at the paltry
wages they offer.

But not since the "bracero" program of decades ago have we had a national
guest-worker program. And never in our history have we given business carte
blanche to go abroad and hire foreigners to come and take American jobs. Yet
Bush says if we don't, he can't control the border. What he means is, he
won't control the border.

The president's speech in Tucson was a kind of extortion of those who have
fought for tough border protections. Bush is saying: Unless you give me what
I want, a guest-worker program, you're not getting what you want. But what a
majority of Americans want is what they have a right to demand: That Bush do
his sworn duty and enforce the immigration laws of the United States.

Conservatives should reject this "guest-worker" program, even if it is
Bush's price tag for border protection. Far from solving the crisis, this
Chamber of Commerce-LULAC scheme will mean final defeat, after decades of
struggle to protect the borders. For though Bush may say, "I oppose
amnesty," his guest-worker program is amnesty.

Amnesty means no punishment and a reward for law-breaking. And that is
exactly what Bush is proposing. In his guest-worker program, those who broke
our laws and broke into our country get to stay and work for six years, then
go home on sabbatical, then return to work permanently. What is that, if not
rewarding law-breaking?

Twenty years ago, Ronald Reagan was persuaded to grant a one-time amnesty to
millions of illegal aliens who had been here for years. Result: Some 1.5
million illegal aliens were caught almost every year after. They had missed
out on the amnesty, and they, too, wanted in. When Bush first broached his
"guest-worker" program two years ago, there was a surge to the border from
Mexico.

A recent Pew Hispanic Poll found 46 percent of all Mexicans say they would
like to live in the United States and 20 percent, more than 20 million, are
willing to break in. If Congress votes for Bush's guest-worker program,
nothing will stop the flood - for the world will see it as admission that
America is a weak nation that will not even order out of its home those who
have broken in uninvited, sat down at the table and demanded to be treated
like a member of the family.

As Reagan said, the country that can't control its borders isn't really a
country anymore.

[Ed. Or cultural anhiliation via multiculturalism and CAFTA-esque
agreements...]

The battle to regain control of the borders is a cause that has won the
support of a No-Longer-Silent Majority. The open-borders, Business
Roundtable Republicans know it. On the run, they want to compromise. They
will accept some border security, they say, if they can get in return an
amnesty for their illegal workers and the legislated right of U.S.
businesses to go overseas and hire foreigners to take American jobs.

Conservatives need to tell the White House: No deal, no amnesty, do your
duty, defend the border, or we will find men and women to replace you who
will enforce our laws and protect our country.

[Ed. It is easy, the politicians should apply the same logic they use on
military facilities, the White House, their own houses and top-secret
installations, nationwide...]

--
Jim
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Western_Nationalist
Union Against Multiculty

"Abolish Multiculty and String Up The Traitors!"
Regge trajectories
2005-12-13 08:41:55 UTC
Permalink
I think that, basically, the United States of America is FINISHED.

You can't have a country without secure borders and we don't have secure
borders.

The ugly people have taken over and there is nothing you can do about it.
Loading...