At first I thought the IRS scandal was leaked to distract from the
Benghazi scandal. But that didn't make sense because the IRS scandal is a
more obvious abuse of power than the White House lying about the murder
of four Americans in Libya.
Before I had resolved which scandal was distracting from which, we
found out the Department of Justice was spying on The Associated Press
-- not to protect national security, but to prevent the AP from scooping
the White House. Then, this week, it broke that the Department of
Justice was also spying on Fox News for reasons that remain unexplained.
Meanwhile, Sens. Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham and
John McCain are working feverishly to turn the country into Mexico.
So now I think all the scandals are intended to distract from Rubio's amnesty bill.
For decades, Mexicans have been about 30 percent of all legal
immigrants to the United States, while only a smidgen more than 1
percent come from Great Britain. Is that fair? Granted, their food is
better, but why is it the norm is to have nearly 30 times as many
Mexican as British immigrants?
We have been taking in more immigrants from Guatemala, the Dominican
Republic and Colombia, individually, than from England, our mother
country. There are nearly twice as many immigrants from El Salvador as
from Canada, and 10 times as many as from Australia.
Why can't the country be more or less the ethnic composition that it
always was? The 50-1 Latin American-to-European ratio isn't a natural
phenomenon that might result from, say, Europeans losing interest in
coming here and poor Latin Americans providing some unique skill
desperately needed in our modern, technology-based economy.
To the contrary, it's result of an insane government policy. Teddy
Kennedy's 1965 Immigration Act was designed to artificially inflate the
number of immigrants from the Third World, while making it virtually
impossible for anyone from the nations that historically provided our
immigrants to come here.
Pre-1965 immigrants were what made this country what it was for a
reason: They were the pre-welfare state immigrants. From around 1630 to
1966, immigrants sank or swam. About a third of them couldn't make it in
America and went home -- and those are the ones who weren't rejected
right off the boat for being sick, crippled or idiots.
That's why corny stories of someone's ancestors coming here a
half-century ago are completely irrelevant. If their ancestors hadn't
succeeded, their great-grandchildren wouldn't be here to tell the story
because no one was given food stamps, free medical care and housing to
stay. (And vote Democrat.)
Now we're scraping the bottom of the barrel by holding ourselves out
as the welfare ward of the world and specifically rejecting skilled
immigrants.
As Milton Friedman said, you cannot have open borders and a welfare
state. The reason a country's average immigrant matters is that the
losers never go home -- they go on welfare. (Maybe if they had to work,
immigrants wouldn't have as much time to build bombs.) Airy statements
about wanting to end welfare aren't going to change that implacable
fact.
It should not come as a surprise that a majority of recent immigrants
are following a path that's the exact opposite of earlier immigrants.
The immigrant story of lore is that the first generation is poor but
works hard, then the second, third and fourth generations soar up the
socioeconomic ladder.
But innumerable studies have shown that Mexican first-generation
immigrants work like maniacs -- and then the second, third and fourth
generations plunge headlong into the underclass.
By now, Mexicans are the largest immigrant group in America, with about 50 million Hispanics living here legally.
Marco Rubio's amnesty bill will soon make it 80 million. First, there
are at least 11 million illegal immigrants, a majority from Mexico, who
will be instantly legalized. Then we'll get their entire extended
families under our chain migration system.
I wouldn't want that many Japanese! I wouldn't want that many Dutch
(not that there are that many Dutch)! Why do we have to become a
different country? Was there a vote when the country decided to turn
itself into Mexico? No other country has ever just decided to turn
itself into another country like this.
The nation's plutocrats are lined up with the Democratic Party in a
short-term bid to get themselves cheap labor (subsidized by the rest of
us), which will give the Democratic Party a permanent majority. If
Rubio's amnesty goes through, the Republican Party is finished. It will
be the "Nancy Pelosi Democratic Party" versus the "Chuck Schumer
Republican Party."
When that happens, the cover-up of murder in Benghazi, a little IRS
abuse or governmental spying on journalists will be a good day for civil
liberties.
A majority of Americans still do love this country -- including, one hopes, legal immigrants who thought they were leaving
Mexico. But a policy that will change America forever is about to slip
through under the cloak of endless scandals from the corrupt Obama
administration.
1 comment :
Someone necessarily lend a hand to make critically posts I might state.
This is the very first time I frequented your website page and
thus far? I surprised with the analysis you made to create this particular put up amazing.
Fantastic process!
Here is my site :: Recover Twitter Password Tutorial
Post a Comment