Showing posts with label FAIR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FAIR. Show all posts

Friday, May 31, 2013

WALL STREET JOURNAL Claims Americans Aren't On Fire Over Amnesty—Because Talk Radio Has Been Bought Off?.

A very interesting post from www.Vdare.com about Talk Radio suppressing the immigration amnesty response. This follows this post about lies in the "Gang of Eight" amnesty bill.  This follows this post about the release of illegal immigrant felons from prison by ICEThis follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more about what is happening in the nation now click here and you can read the two very interesting books that are
shown HERE.



WALL STREET JOURNAL Claims Americans Aren't On Fire Over Amnesty—Because Talk Radio Has Been Bought Off?

In Washington, the Congressional offices are not reporting much activity from citizens opposing the massive Senate amnesty bill and that the phone calls are nothing like what happened during the 2007 victory against anarchy.
On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal gave the subject a page-top treatment with a photo of citizens speaking out against amnesty in Phoenix:
image
Part of the problem is likely the buying off of talk radio “conservatives” with big-money ad purchases (paid by Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg), particularly of Senator Rubio lying up a storm about how conservative the bill is, how filled with enforcement it is, blah blah. Those ads have run heavily on Rush Limbaugh’s show, among others. Limbaugh has recently begun speaking of amnesty again, but such a death threat to traditional America needs constant reinforcement, does it not? Perhaps he heard from enough irate listeners that buying into the Rubio snake oil is not acceptable.
We Won’t Be Distracted from Amnesty, RushLimbaugh.com Transcript, May 28, 2013
RUSH: By the way, Chris Cillizza’s point, that piece that I was sharing with you about how all of these scandals are distracting everybody away from amnesty, not here. And I just want to reiterate with all of these things that are going on, amnesty is the biggie, folks, because if amnesty is achieved, then all the rest of this is academic, and we basically have a one-party government and country for at least a generation. By the way, Chris Cillizza, even in his story, Chris Cillizza’s point was that the IRS scandals were distracting talk radio from raising the alarm about amnesty. He admitted that it was talk radio that stopped amnesty in 2007.
Chris Cillizza, the Washington Post. And he said all these other scandals — Benghazi, IRS — are providing cover for amnesty, got talk radio distracted, so they know where their real problems lie. Cillizza admits it. But here’s the point. The amnesty bill, as it’s written, or the pathway to citizenship bill, delays citizenship for a number of years. That’s why you’re hearing pathway to citizenship. Well, what’ll happen, the theory is — and it’s a good one — what’ll happen is if the law is passed, then it’ll immediately be challenged, that this citizenship provision is unconstitutional. You can’t bring these people out of shadows. You can’t grant them this. You can’t do that. They’re citizens now, and all you need is one Obama judge, one liberal judge, and they’re not hard to find these days, and, bammo, you’ve got instant citizenship, instant voting.
imageFAIR recently posted a list of 40 things wrong with S. 744 which could be helpful talking points, but the important thing callers should be saying is that the bill hurts American workers and taxpayers, and they want it voted down. Legalizing lawbreaking is no way for a great nation to deal with a vexing problem.
Here’s the text of the WSJ article:
Immigration Bill Slow to Stir Foes’ Passion, Wall Street Journal, May 28, 2013
Fierce Backlash That Derailed 2007 Overhaul Bid Has Yet to Materialize, Though Opponents Vow to Intensify Campaign
Grass-roots activists were instrumental in derailing the previous attempt by Congress to overhaul immigration laws, in 2007. This time, they have yet to ignite a similar fire.
Coordinated rallies last week to oppose the current bipartisan immigration legislation drew sparse crowds, with fewer than 10 people showing up for a protest in Dover, Del. The number of phone calls to lawmakers’ offices opposing the bill has been a fraction of what it was six years ago. As a discussion topic on conservative talk radio in recent weeks, immigration has ranked behind issues such as Syria-Israel tensions and President Barack Obama’s speech on counterterrorism.
“This time I am getting this sense of resignation,” said Rusty Childress, a veteran opponent of illegal immigration in Phoenix. “We have to awaken the sleeping giant.”
The current immigration bill, introduced by a group of senators known as the “Gang of Eight,” would provide a pathway to citizenship to about 11 million people illegally in the U.S. and create new work-visa programs. It also would require beefed-up border security and employment verification before steps to legalize undocumented immigrants could kick in.
Opponents of the bill say that, like the 2007 effort, it amounts to amnesty for law breakers and doesn’t stanch the flow of illegal immigration. Adding legalized immigrants to the workforce would disadvantage jobless Americans, they say.
But this year’s bill hasn’t stirred as much opposition. It has more support from mainstream Republicans eager to improve the party’s standing with the fast-growing Hispanic population, and from many evangelical Christian leaders. Also, a steep drop in illegal immigration in recent years has meant fewer television images of migrants sneaking into the country.
Even so, prospects for the bill’s passage appear mixed. The Senate legislation hasn’t yet been tested in that chamber, and efforts by a bipartisan House group to write a similarly broad bill haven’t succeeded. The path to citizenship provision of the Senate bill could prove particularly troubling in the House.
Meantime, opponents promise to intensify their campaign. Mr. Childress leads “Remember 1986,” a group named after the year of the last big immigration overhaul, signed by President Ronald Reagan. The group sponsored the coordinated rallies last week, many of which were dwarfed by larger protests the same day against the Internal Revenue Service over its scrutiny of conservative nonprofits. Mr. Childress said his group would start targeting a tea-party base that he said is “newly energized” since the IRS news broke.
A fierce backlash against the bill six years ago ultimately spelled its demise because it prompted lawmakers such as Georgia Republican Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss, who helped draft sections of the measure, to withdraw support. “The backlash began as soon as an outline for a bill was announced, and it was relentless,” said Joan Kirchner, a top aide to Mr. Isakson. Neither of the Georgia senators has taken a public position on this year’s bill.
In recent weeks, Mr. Isakson’s office has been receiving about 100 calls a day compared with as many as 2,000 a day in 2007. The volume is expected to rise if a bill reaches the floor, Ms. Kirchner said, “but signs are it won’t be as intense.” Activists said they are planning a protest outside Mr. Isakson’s Atlanta office in early June.
Michael Harrison, publisher of Talkers, a talk-radio trade magazine, said many influential hosts have “moved on” to discuss gun control, health care and other “hit topics” because “the public’s attitude is different on immigration.”
Alan Ogushoff, who made protest calls to Mr. Chambliss’s office in 2007, often several times a day, said he remains a foe of any legalization. But, the avid listener of conservative talk radio said, “I’m just going to let this happen and move on; I’m burned out fighting it.”
Roy Beck, president of NumbersUSA, a national group that channeled grass-roots opposition to the 2007 bill into a barrage of calls, faxes and emails to lawmakers, agreed “there may be some fatigue” now. Still, the group over the weekend said it unveiled TV and radio ads opposing the bill in 18 states. One radio script warning of the dangers of adding more potential workers says: “Jobs—20 million of our friends, family and neighbors still can’t find one.”
Groups pressing for an immigration overhaul, such as businesses and undocumented youngsters, also have been more vocal. The Evangelical Immigration Table, made up of leaders of Christian organizations, this week will launch another round of national radio ads to promote the overhaul.
“This time, there is not as much emotion on our side,” said Mr. Beck of NumbersUSA. But, “I don’t know if that means there is less resolve.”

Monday, March 4, 2013

Communism, Socialism, Cultural Marxism, Democratic Hegemonists, Crony Capitalism, Ethnic Agendas, Treason Etc.—The “Ugly Roots” Of Immigration Enthusiasm

A very interesting post from www.VDare.com about immigration enthusiasm. This follows this post about how liberalism has hurt African-Americans. This follows this post about a race hoax at U.T. Austin.  This follows this post about Emmit Till. In the meantime, you can read two very interesting books HERE.

Communism, Socialism, Cultural Marxism, Democratic Hegemonists, Crony Capitalism, Ethnic Agendas, Treason Etc.—The “Ugly Roots” Of Immigration Enthusiasm
 
A number of “Hispanic Republicans” a.k.a. professional ethnics/ Treason Lobby shills recently launched what is obviously an orchestrated guilt-by-association smear of CIS, FAIR, NumbersUSA and immigration patriots in general on the grounds that that they are all secretly eugenicists, pro-abortion, “nativist” etc. etc.
Ms. Chavez, a former member of the Young People's Socialist League, is at best a neoconservative but she gets to lay down the law.
  • Bob Quasius [Twitter] the white guy at “Café Con Leche Republicans” is attacking Ann Coulter with many references to dead nativists, and makes a drive-by attack on Charles Murray, who is allegedly “hardly a credible source on demographics” because of the familiar accusations of racism which are (a) unfounded, and (b) irrelevant to credibility since Murray doesn’t just assert demographic facts, but always provides data.
Of course, this is an old, tired argument for Conservatism Inc. immigration enthusiasts—for our Washington Watcher’s documentation and debunking, see here. Even National Review’s immigration beards have been induced to whimper—see Krikorian and O’Sullivan here and here.
All the current smearers are Hispanic, even Quasius. (Well, actually he’s married to a Hispanic woman, and makes a living, GOP-campaign consultant style, by running Café Con Leche Republicans and whining about “Hate.”)
They apparently are Republicans. And they say they’re conservatives. But they’re favoring radically transformative levels of legal and illegal immigration, a program supported by the worst elements of the hard Left—including the current President of the United States.
So, if we’re looking at motives, here are the “ugly roots” of immigration enthusiasm:
  • Communists
The 1965 Immigration Act replaced the 1952 McCarran-Walter Act, which was an anti-Communist bill. The breakdown of the McCarran-Walter Act was a major objective of the Communists, as Congress heard in testimony in 1965, and pro-Communist writers are still gloating over its defeat. See, more recently, Communist Party Resolves: Immigrant rights is a struggle for democracy, CPUSA website, May 27, 2010.
  • Socialists
Mexico is a much more socialist country than the United States, and more immigration will tend to make the US more socialist. American socialists know this [ Socialism and Immigrants’ Rights, By Teddy Shibabaw, SocialistAlternative, June 22, 2010] and perhaps, once again, we should include the current President of the United States in their number. Elected with the votes of many Hispanic legal immigrants, he’s the man who installed socialized medicine in America—which is also, contrary to advertisement, being provided to immigrants.
  • Cultural Marxists
Cultural Marxism, the opportunistic mutation of generic Leftism especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union, explicitly seeks to exploit racial antagonism—a strategy dating back to Trotsky. For example, Cultural Marxists are currently using the arrival of immigrants and their “cultures” to suppress the inculcation of American patriotism in public schools.
  • Democratic Hegemonists
Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party said in 199:."Remember, [Proposition]187 is the last gasp of white America in California. Understand that.”
He wasn’t fired for this racist remark. He was still Chairman in 2009 when Paul Nachman quoted him here.( He’s still a State Senator.)
Fabian Nunez , Speaker of the California Assembly, proposed a threatening million-person march on Washington, DC so that "those rednecks that are out there making decisions for the betterment of their communities will think twice before they push forward anti-immigrant legislation against our community."[Listen to both clips here.]
Non-Hispanic Democrats also gloat over what they’re doing to America. For example, in 2007, Journolister Ezra Klein wrote on his personal blog that
I'm at a panel on immigration and American politics that is really quite convincing on how screwed the Republicans are. In a couple of decades, Hispanic immigrants will make up almost a quarter of the country. Even now, 70 of the 100 largest cities are in the South and the West, and are that large because of Hispanic immigration. [Links added by VDARE.com.]
Democratic National Committee Chairthing Debbie Wasserman Schultz has also publically boasted about establishing a Democratic hegemony by displacing the historic American nation. She has described the partisan conflict in explicitly racial terms:
Just look at the chamber at the State of the Union. Look at the side of the chamber that the Democrats sit on and the side of the chamber that Republicans sit on. And you can notice a dramatic difference in who chooses to affiliate as Democrats and who chooses to affiliate as Republicans...
...the Democratic Party is…the natural home, politically on major issues to Hispanics, to women, to Jews, to Asian-Americans, the diverse spectrum—to African Americans.
Of course, the Democrats have reason to think that immigration will deliver them hegemony.
And this is the world into which the GOP campaign consultants, and their “Hispanic” mouthpieces, wish to lead us.
  • Crony Capitalists
Crony Capitalism, in the form of Big Business seeking favors from government, usually at the expense of American workers, is an even bigger influence on the American political process than Communism or socialism. I don’t know where Mario H. Lopez and Bob Quasius get their funding, but I noted in 2002 that in a full disclosure statement, Linda Chavez had thought it necessary to mention that
Linda Chavez serves on the board of directors of ABM Industries, Inc., a publicly held company.
She’s still there, ten years later. [See picture.] ABM Industries, Inc is a janitorial company, and the janitorial industry is totally dominated by illegal labor.
Chavez was also a director of Pilgrim’s Pride, the world’s largest chicken producer—as Patrick Cleburne noted in 2008 when Homeland Security arrested 400 illegals working at Pilgrim’s Pride plants nationwide.
There’s a lot of capitalist money in promoting immigration enthusiasm. Tamar Jacoby’s ImmigrationWorksUSA gets millions from its “Trade Association Partners”—the employers of cheap, illegal, labor that displaces American workers:

[Click to enlarge]
  • Ethnic Agenda-Mongers
Leonard Glickman, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society and formerly a spokesman for the U.S. Federal Office of Refugee Resettlement, was quoted here on VDARE.com in 2003 as saying
"The more diverse American society is the safer [Jews] are." [Community Questioning 'Open Door', by Nacha Cattan, Jewish Daily Forward, November 29, 2002.]
This seems to be the same idea that Earl Raab expressed, the first time the Census reported that whites would become a minority in America:
We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country.
We [Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible—and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever."
[Earl Raab, San Francisco Jewish Bulletin, July 23, 1993]
Emanuel Celler, a Jewish Congressman from Brooklyn, made his first ever speech in the House of Representatives against the massively popular and extremely necessary Johnson act of 1924. Celler, who served in the House for over 49 years, was able to reverse this success with the Hart-Celler Act, which was to become the Immigration Act Of 1965. His biography in the Jewish Virtual Library makes it clear that he opposed immigration restriction and endorsed mass immigration for ethnic reasons. As the JVL puts it ”Today, nearly 75 percent of American Jews descend from immigrants from Eastern Europe. In this season in which we celebrate the ancient Hebrews' exodus to freedom, it is fitting to recall Emanuel Celler's efforts to make America a promised land for Jewish immigrants, and for all victims of persecution.”
Teddy Kennedy, on the other hand, was the floor manager of the same law in the Senate. Kennedy was no 40 year veteran, but elected on pure nepotism, and less qualified than Senator Barack Obama. But he was Irish, and apparently full of Irish resentment at Anglo-American immigration restriction. He even used to say that he’d seen (mythical ) signs saying “No Irish Need Apply” as a young man. ["No Irish Need Apply": A Myth of Victimization, By Richard Jensen, Journal of Social History 36.2 (2002) 405-429 ]
Neither Celler nor Kennedy seemed concerned with the effect of wide-open immigration on the rest of America. And neither of them predicted that both Irish and Jewish immigrants would be displaced by the massive Third World influx.
  • Reconquistas
Reconquista is a special case of the ethnic resentment motives shared by a Celler, Kennedy, and to a certain extent by capitalist Tamar Jacoby. You see, there’s a whole country to the south of the United States called Mexico. They learn in school that the United States stole a large part of their country in the Mexican War.
Their desire to move in, settle down, and take over is not pretty.
Here’s a sign from an Arizona rally:
"To the diplomats in Arizona talking of illegal deals, why R U so hipocratics [sic] when we know that almost 1/2 of what it was Mexico, was bought illegally by the US. Santa Ana was a conquestee from France, he was not the president of Mexico or Mexican. 1845-1847 we were fighting our own independence with their own people and also fighting the French. The US took advantage N offered Santa Ana money for the Mexican's land. Do U call this legal?"[Reconquista Is Real, By Michelle Malkin on May 2, 2006 ]
This is exactly what the Main Stream Media claims we are: semi-literate, with conspiracy theories, hating the government, made-up history—and a potential for violence.
In fact, off course, immigration patriots are usually peaceful “middle-aged men in suits” as Jared Taylor put it once. But the Mexican Reconquistas are indeed like that, and they get a good deal of intellectual support from the Left—tenured professors of ethnic studies and so on—and also from “Hispanic Republicans.”
In contrast, Hispanic  “hate crimes” against whites and the deliberate, ethnic cleansing of blacks from what are now Hispanic neighborhoods is not part of the MSM narrative. But it’s much, much larger.
  • Conquistador Racism
Mexico is dominated by white Mexicans, not by its Indian and mestizo majority. This is partly due to racism—Mexican racial attitudes are quite old-fashioned:
Similarly, many “Hispanic Republicans” are white Cubans—for example, the American Conservative Union’s Al Cardenas...or Marco Rubio. Their sense of arrogant entitlement has led Steve Sailer to dub them “Conquistador-Americans.” And they seem to be bringing it here.
  • Treason
It may be that the desire of Ted Kennedy, Ezra Klein, or even Barack Obama to change the ethnic composition of the United States for their own political benefit could be called treason—and we have said so at VDARE.com—but in many of those cases it would be hard to say what country they’re betraying the United States to.
But in the case of many Mexican-American politicos, who belong to a National Association Of Latino Elected And Appointed Officials, the answer is: “They’re betraying their country to Mexico.”
Thus this picture of Speaker Of The California Assembly Fabian Nunez, saluting the Mexican flag in the Mexican manner while listening to the Mexican national anthem in Mexico City, Mexico on Friday August 26, 2005.
 El saludo civil a la Bandera Nacional ("The Civil Salute to the National Flag")
My conclusion: if immigration enthusiasts want to talk about “evil roots,” well—to quote George W. Bush at unfortunate but typical moment—
bring it on.
James Fulford [Email him] is a writer and editor for VDARE.com.