Monday, March 3, 2014

THE DEMOCRAT PARTY - THEIR WAR ON THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS and BUILDING THE LA RAZA MEXICAN WELFARE STATE

Politics

 
THOUSANDS of AMERICANS (Legals) LAID OFF… as Dems put millions of Mexicans in our jobs!
"They hauled them down to the border," Sakuma said. "Three days later, they were standing in our office, but they had a different name and a different Social Security number."

Democrats Try Wooing Ones Who Got Away: White Men


Photo

Launch media viewer
As chairman of the Democratic Party in Oakland County, Mich., Frank Houston, second from right, has tried to persuade other white men to support his party. Credit Joshua Lott for The New York Times
 
ROYAL OAK, Mich. — Frank Houston knows something about the longtime estrangement of white men from the Democratic Party. His family roots are in nearby Macomb County, the symbolic home of working-class Reagan Democrats who, distressed by economic and social tumult, decided a liberal Democratic Party had left them, not the other way around.
Mr. Houston grew up in the 1980s liking Ronald Reagan but idolizing Alex P. Keaton, the fictional Republican teenage son of former hippies who, played by Michael J. Fox on the television series “Family Ties,” comically captured the nation’s conservative shift. But over time, Mr. Houston left the Republican Party because “I started to realize that the party doesn’t represent the people I grew up with.”
Now, as chairman of the Democratic Party in Oakland County, Michigan’s second largest, Mr. Houston is finding out how difficult it can be to persuade other white men here to support Democrats, even among the 20 or so, mostly construction workers, who join him in a rotating poker game.
 

Unconvinced by Democrats




Percentage of white men voting for a Democratic presidential candidate
College graduate
40%
30
No college degree
20
10
0
’84
’88
’92
’96
’00
’04
’08
’12

Mr. Houston is part of an internal debate at all levels of his party over how hard it should work to win over white men, especially working-class men without college degrees, at a time when Democrats are gaining support from growing numbers of female and minority voters.
It is a challenge that runs throughout the nation’s industrial heartland, in farm states and across the South, after a half-century of economic, demographic and cultural shifts that have reshaped the electorate. Even in places like Michigan, where it has been decades since union membership lists readily predicted Democratic votes, many in the party pay so little attention to white working-class men that it suggests they have effectively given up on converting them.
Not Mr. Houston. “There’s a whole cadre of us — of young, white men political leaders in Oakland County — who are saying, ‘We can’t just write off 30-year-old to 40-year-old guys, let alone anyone who’s older.’ ”
So Mr. Houston and like-minded Democrats are working to deploy new, data-driven targeting tools to get the message to white men that the party is more in sync with them than they might think. “We can tell you to the number how many we need and where they live,” said Matt Canter, the deputy executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
No Democratic presidential candidate has won a majority of white men since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama all prevailed with support of the so-called rising electorate of women, especially single women, and minorities. But fewer of those voters typically participate in midterm elections, making the votes of white men more potent and the struggle of Democrats for 2014 clear.
“Realistically, winning votes from working-class white men has just been a very tough political challenge for Democrats,” said Geoff Garin, a Democratic pollster. With demographic trends favoring Democrats nationally and in many states, strategists say it makes sense to concentrate resources on mobilizing women, young people, Hispanics, blacks and other minority voters.
Democrats generally win the votes of fewer than four in 10 white men. But they win eight of 10 minority voters and a majority of women, who have been a majority of the national electorate since 1984, while white men have shrunk to a third, and are still shrinking.
White male voters have been crucial in some past midterms, most clearly in 1994, when they helped Republicans take control of the House for the first time in 40 years, and again in 2010.
 
And this year, Democrats, hobbled by Mr. Obama’s sagging popularity, are defending many red-state Senate seats, including some in places with few members of minorities, like West Virginia. A big reason for Democrats’ emphasis on raising the minimum wage is the polling proof that the issue resonates with all groups, including white men. In Michigan, Mr. Houston is leading an effort to place a minimum-wage increase on the November ballot and said it “really polls well with white men.”
Some white men have proved to be within reach: single men, college students and graduates with advanced degrees, the nonreligious, and gay men. But working-class married men remain hardest to win over and, unless they are in unions, get the least attention — to the dismay of some partisans.
“You can’t just give Republicans a clear field to play for the votes of white working-class men without putting up some sort of a fight because that just allows them to run the table with these voters, thereby potentially offsetting your burgeoning advantage among minorities, single women, millennials,” said Ruy Teixeira, an analyst at the left-leaning Center for American Progress.
“I just think Democrats are having a hard time figuring out how to effectively pursue it,” he added.
What discourages Democrats is that men’s attitudes shaped over generations — through debates over civil rights, anti-Communism, Vietnam, feminism, gun control and dislocations from lost manufacturing jobs and stagnant wages in a global economy — are not easily altered.
“Democrats are for a bunch of freeloaders in this world as far as I’m concerned,” said Gari Day, 63, an Avis bus driver from suburban Detroit. “Republicans make you work for your money, and try to let you keep it.”
Michael Bunce, 48, buying parts at a Lowe’s in Southfield, Mich., first ascribed his Republican bias to fiscal matters, but quickly turned to social issues like gay rights. “I don’t see why that’s at the top of our priority list,” he said. “But you say that out in the open, and people are all over your back.”
Democrats’ gloom about white men was eased temporarily by Mr. Obama’s 2008 election when he won 41 percent of white male voters — the first time a Democrat exceeded 40 percent since Mr. Carter in 1976. But their support for his re-election fell to 35 percent, roughly what Democrats have gotten since they lost to Richard Nixon.
Republicans say Democrats’ appeals to women, minorities and gays have been counterproductive with white men. “When you’re spending 60 percent of your time talking about birth control and Obamacare, not a lot of men are paying attention to you,” said Brad Dayspring, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.
Among the Senate races where white men could be decisive are those in Georgia, where a Democrat, Michelle Nunn, is wooing them in hopes that many will favorably remember her father, Sam Nunn, a popular former senator, and in Arkansas, where Senator Mark Pryor, whose father, David Pryor, was also a longtime senator, is fighting to keep his job with frequent talk of his Christian faith.
Senator Mark Warner of Virginia has stood out among Democrats for years with his efforts to court white working-class men, stumping rural areas and small towns in Senate and governor’s races. Currently, he is favored to beat Ed Gillespie, the former Republican Party chairman.
Generally, however, the Democrats’ Senate majority is at risk, which helps explain why the party has not tried to revive gun-safety legislation proposed after the Newtown, Conn., school massacre. Few issues have hurt Democrats more among working-class white men over time.
“It’s a bad stigma: If you’re a Democrat, you’re against guns,” said State Representative Scott Dianda, a Democrat in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. He is quick to say he is a hunter.
Democrats’ disadvantage in Michigan with white men was plain in a poll of likely voters last month by the nonpartisan EPIC-MRA. Representative Gary Peters, the Democratic candidate for Senate, trailed Terri Lynn Land, the Republican secretary of state, by three percentage points. But among white men, she led by 21 points.
Mr. Peters, like Mr. Houston, is from populous Oakland County, but for six days recently, Mr. Peters traversed Michigan’s northernmost reaches, prospecting in the subzero cold of the vast Upper Peninsula — home to 3 percent of the state’s population — for votes among the mostly white residents, known as “Yoopers.” He did what he could to get their attention. At one point, Mr. Peters spied some fathers with their sons atop a snow pile for WOLV-FM’s “Yooper Luge.” He got the broadcaster to introduce him, then borrowed a boy’s plastic disc and skidded downhill.
In another town, he stopped to see a single voter: a Republican small-business man.
“The fact that he was there in my conference room speaks volumes,” said the man, Mark Massicotte, 57, president of L’Anse Manufacturing. “It counts for a lot. It tells me he’s listening




What will America stand for in 2050?

The US should think long and hard about the high number of Latino immigrants.

The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end. 

AMERICANS SAY HELL NO to BANKSTER-FUNDED DEMOCRAT PARTY for LA RAZA SUPREMACY: Williams: Dems face struggle in cash wars | TheHill

Williams: Dems face struggle in cash wars | TheHill


THOUSANDS of AMERICANS (Legals) LAID OFF… as Dems put millions of Mexicans in our jobs!


"They hauled them down to the border," Sakuma said. "Three days later, they were standing in our office, but they had a different name and a different Social Security number."

Will Illegals Elect Jeb Bush for America's Second LA RAZA Supremacy presidency after Obama?


MEXICO and the MEX FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “THE RACE” endorse JEB BUSH –

BUSH VOWS TO OUT HISPANDER THE GREAT HISPANDERER BARACK OBAMA AND EXPAND THE LA RAZA WELFARE STATE IN AMERICA’S OPEN BORDERS …. Mexicans already get all our jobs!

 
 
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
 
 
What will America stand for in 2050?
The US should think long and hard about the high number of Latino immigrants.
The principal beneficiaries of our current immigration policy are affluent Americans who hire immigrants at substandard wages for low-end work. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American workers lose $190 billion annually in depressed wages caused by the constant flooding of the labor market at the low-wage end. 
AMNESTY = Depressed Wages for Americans, Poverty for Americas and Jobs and Massive Welfare for Illegals… it’s all about keeping wages depressed!
THE TRAGEDY of LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT
In America, all jobs go to foreign born that are either imported or permitted to jump our borders!
THOUSANDS of AMERICANS (Legals) LAID OFF… as Dems put millions of Mexicans in our jobs!
"They hauled them down to the border," Sakuma said. "Three days later, they were standing in our office, but they had a different name and a different Social Security number."
AMERICA: NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!!!
Most evangelicals, 73 percent, said that, instead of bringing in more immigrant workers, employers should be ‘required to try harder to recruit and train, Americans from those high-unemployment groups. And most evangelicals, 68 percent, said they are willing to pay higher prices if it is necessary for employers to raise wages to fill jobs with Americans instead of adding more foreign workers.”
MASSIVE UNEMPLOYMENT IN AMERICA AS OBAMA and the DEMOCRAT PARTY PUSH OUR BORDERS OPEN, SABOTAGE E-VERIFY, AND PROMISE ILLEGALS NO ENFORCEMENT OF LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT of ILLEGALS… it’s all about buy the Mexican vote and keeping wages depressed for DEM POL paymasters!
There are mounting warnings by economists that the US confronts long-term economic stagnation and high unemployment into the indefinite future….
"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith
SUPER TOP
OBAMA’S AMNESTY HOAX TO LEGALIZE MEXICO’S LOOTING, DESTROY THE GOP WITH 40 MILLION NEW DEMS, AND KEEP WAGES FOR GREATER PROFITS FOR THE PAYMASTERS OF CORRUPT DEMS’
HERITAGE FOUNDATION: OBAMA’S AMNESTY WOULD ADD 100 MORE ILLEGALS AND COST AMERICANS (Legals) BILLIONS AND BILLIONS
the staggering cost of Mexico’s looting:
 

WHY LA RAZA WANTS MORE BUSH - ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS Waiting for Jeb | TheHill

Waiting for Jeb | TheHill

THOUSANDS of AMERICANS (Legals) LAID OFF… as Dems put millions of Mexicans in our jobs!


"They hauled them down to the border," Sakuma said. "Three days later, they were standing in our office, but they had a different name and a different Social Security number."



THIS COUNTRY NOW HAS A MASSIVE WELFARE STATE JUST TO PAY FOR MEXICO’S ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS. THE ANCHORS EXPAND WELFARE FOR ILLEGALS AND ANCHOR AND EXPAND MEXICO’S WELFARE STATE IN AMERICA. 

NEXT TO DRUGS AND CRIMINALS, MEXICO’S BIGGEST EXPORT IS ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS.

MEX-INFESTED LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALONE PUTS OUT $600 MILLION PER YEAR IN WELFARE TO ILLEGALS, PRIMARILY ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS!

 
Jeb Bush: U.S. Economy Needs ‘More Fertile’ Immigrants

Catherine Thompson 10:51 AM EDT, Friday June 14, 2013  

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R), a longtime immigration reform advocate, said Friday that because immigrants are "more fertile" they are a crucial source of labor for the United States.

"Immigrants create far more businesses than native-born Americans,” Bush said at a Faith and Freedom Coalition conference, as quoted by the Washington Post. “Immigrants are more fertile, and they love families, and they have more intact families, and they bring a younger population. Immigrants create an engine of economic prosperity.”

Bush was criticized for seemingly flip-flopping on support for a path to citizenship after he co-authored a book, “Immigration Wars: Forging An American Solution,” but ultimately supported immigration reform legislation being hammered out in Congress.

*

IN MEXIFORNIA IT IS A DIFFERENT STORY. MEX CONSULATES OPERATE TO HELP LA RAZA LOOT THE STUPID GRINGOS!

OBAMA and MEXICO LOOT PRIVATE ENTERPRISE HOSPITALS AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR “FREE” HEALTHCARE FOR LA RAZA MEXICANS… What’s left for Americans (Legals)???

 


NO ENFORCEMENT PROMISED TO BORDER JUMPERS AND ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS:


“I’m afraid we’ll have a deal like in 1986 where the amnesty provisions become law and the enforcement doesn’t occur,” Sessions said Wednesday on the Senate floor. “We don’t have the kind of commitment to law enforcement at this point that gives the American people the confidence that we’re moving on the right path. So this is no sure thing.”

 

A CASE OF ONE ANCHOR BABY BREEDING MEXICAN FAMILY

THEY DO SO ON BEHALF OF THEIR GREEDY BIG AG BIZ DONORS!




Jose Herria emigrated illegally from Mexico to Stockton, Calif., in 1997 to work as a fruit picker. He brought with him his wife, Felipa, and three children, 19, 12 and 8 -- all illegals. When Felipa gave birth to her fourth child, daughter Flor, the family had what is referred to as an "anchor baby" -- an American citizen by birth who provided the entire Silverio clan a ticket to remain in the U.S. permanently.

 THE DEMOCRATS’ AMNESTY HOAX: DESTRUCTION OF THE GOP, THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS AND 40 MILLION “UNREGISTERED DEMS” VOTING FOR MORE LA RAZA SUPREMACY AND LOOTING OF AMERICA.


"Remember 187 -- the Proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens --- was the last gasp of white America in California." --- Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party… NOW THE PARTY for LA RAZA SUPREMACY… do a search for Barack Obama and LA RAZA.

A week later, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said the immigration bill was “far worse” than ObamaCare: He described the bill as an attempt by Senate Democrats “to establish another monolithic voting bloc” among Hispanic Americans.



 
Jeb Bush generated quite a bit of publicity for his new book yesterday by suggesting that amnestied illegal immigrants should not be eligible for citizenship. Instead, he’s suggesting they be given some kind of permanent status that would provide them work cards, Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses, and the right to travel abroad and return, but not allow for eventual naturalization — in effect, a kind of permanent guestworker program or a green-card-lite, rather than an actual green card. This is consistent with suggestions from other pro-amnesty Republicans, including Senator Rubio and a group of House members working up an amnesty deal.
Unfortunately, it’s a trick.
Jeb Bush, as you would imagine, has long been in favor of citizenship for illegal aliens. This “evolution” in his thinking is a tactic to offer a “compromise” version of amnesty that is somehow less distasteful to Republican lawmakers, as a way of duping them into voting for it, or giving them cover to dupe their constituents into thinking it’s not really an amnesty. And it’s being offered as an option opposed by the Left, and the Left is playing its role, calling the move a “blunder of huge proportions” and the like.
This enables the organ of the pro-amnesty movement to label it “a middle-ground option” when it is nothing of the kind. (That was also the point of last month’s “leaking” of Obama’s immigration bill.) Once the illegal population is legalized, the game is over — the amnesty will obviously never be revoked, and the Democrats will then launch a campaign against Republicans accusing them (correctly) of imposing on helpless Latinos a Jim Crow–style system of second-class status, something more appropriate to Saudi Arabia. If they go this way, the GOP candidate in 2016 will look back fondly on Romney’s 27 percent of the Hispanic vote — and he’ll have sabotaged his own base as well, resulting in an even further drop in blue-collar white turnout and Republican share.
When I say this whole debate over a “compromise” form of amnesty is kabuki, scripted out months ago by the open-borders crowd, I don’t mean that metaphorically. The pre-planned nature of this struck me at the House Judiciary Committee hearing a few weeks ago. San Antonio mayor Julian Castro (whose part-time job consists solely of chairing city-council meetings, by the way) insisted under questioning that a path to citizenship is the only option that Congress should consider, and was itself a “compromise” between open borders and mass deportation.
But then, his handler, Angela Kelley, head of immigration matters at the Center for American Progress and a key White House proxy on the issue, leaned forward and whispered in Castro’s ear. After that, he changed his tune slightly, saying a path to citizenship was the best outcome but that a lesser status might be acceptable. It wouldn’t surprise me me if Angela Kelley and White House immigration coordinator Cecilia Muñoz have actually done conference calls with staff for Rubio and Bush gaming out this strategy.
The question before us is not how illegal immigrants should be legalized, but whether they should be amnestied at all. And until we have a real enforcement infrastructure in place, the answer has to be “no.”
WHO IS THE LA RAZA FASCIST IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION?
THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA IS FUNDED BY BARACK OBAMA WITH AMERICAN TAX DOLLARS AND OPERATES OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE UNDER OBAMA APPOINTEE CECILIA MUNOZ
ANOTHER BUSH CAPITULATES TO LA RAZA SUPREMACY – NEXT MOVE IS TO HISPANDER LIKE AN OBAMAnation AND PROMISE MUCHO GRINGO-PAID LA RAZA WELFARE, “FREE” ANCHOR BABY BIRTHING=18 YEARS of WELFARE, AND A GRINGO JOB FOR EVERY ILLEGAL THAT VOTES!
 
Jeb Bush: I'm 'in Sync' With Lindsey Graham on Immigration Reform
By George Stephanopoulos | ABC OTUS News – 2 hrs 22 mins ago
During an interview for "This Week," former Florida governor Jeb Bush told me that he was "in sync" with South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham on the issue of immigration reform.
Graham, a key member of the bipartisan group of senators pushing for immigration reform, took Bush to task after the former Florida governor said Monday that he did not support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, which is a key component of the plan being pushed by the Senate group. Bush subsequently reversed course and said he could in fact support a plan that included a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants already living in the United States.
"Senator Graham and I talked. He was responding to concerns that were expressed before the book was actually published," Bush said. "I told him that I support his efforts and I applaud what he's doing. And he concluded, after he heard what the thesis of the book is that we're in sync. We're on the same - on the same path."
"The basic premise needs to be that coming to the country legally should be easier with less cost than coming to the country illegally. And if you can create a system like that as is being discussed in the Senate and in the House- through a path to citizenship, that's fine," Bush said. "But my guess is that will take a long, long time to achieve. In the interim, it's important to take people out from the shadows to allow them to have- the dignity of being- having legal status."
Florida governor Jeb Bush told me that he was "very encouraged" about the possibility of comprehensive immigration reform - a legislative achievement that has eluded lawmakers for more than a decade - becoming law by the end of the year.
"I'm very encouraged. There are some big sticking points about how do you deal with making sure that there's enough seasonal workers, temporary worker programs that have been quite successful in the past," Bush said. "There's a lot of work being done, really good work, courageous work, 'cause this is complex and may not be popular, but I think it's- it is possible that comprehensive reform can be done."
Turning to President Obama's new effort to reach out to his colleagues on right - which included inviting the GOP's 2012 vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan to lunch - Bush complimented the president, comparing his actions to those of Ronald Reagan, an icon of the Republican Party.
"I'm very encouraged by the fact the president is trying to restore some personal connection with policymakers in Congress. I'm at the Reagan Library today and that's kind of what Ronald Reagan did. He didn't scorn his adversaries, he embraced them and got a lot done," Bush said. "This is very positive in my mind. It makes it harder to reach agreement when there's not trust. It's just human nature. And so this is maybe a good, positive first step."
Bush qualified his praise for the president, tweaking him for a lack of "seriousness" when it came to the president's efforts to reach a deal to reduce the national debt and specifically his willingness to embrace entitlement reform as part of a potential bargain with Republicans.
"I haven't seen the seriousness of the president's efforts. I'd love to see a specific plan that really did reform- bend the cost curve for Medicare and the entitlement system. I haven't seen it, so if there is through these talks, some kind of consensus that emerged, I don't think you should say, 'no, no, no' about anything'" Bush said.
"Frankly, there was already been one of the largest tax increases in American history a month ago. And frankly, we ought to be focused on sustained economic growth, which grows more revenue for people and for government than any tax increase that's been suggested, so there are a lot of things that could be done to create a real grand bargain. And let the process work. I'm hopeful that the president's sincere about this," Bush said.
Bush also insisted during out conversation that he is not positioning himself for a 2016 presidential run as he promotes his new book "Immigration Wars," even as speculation grows that he aims to be the third member of the Bush family to occupy the oval office.
"I'm not viewing this as a political reentry either. I just don't view it that way," Bush said. "Everything's viewed with a political lens in Washington and that's just the nature of the beast and it is what it is."
*
Jeb Bush generated quite a bit of publicity for his new book yesterday by suggesting that amnestied illegal immigrants should not be eligible for citizenship. Instead, he’s suggesting they be given some kind of permanent status that would provide them work cards, Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses, and the right to travel abroad and return, but not allow for eventual naturalization — in effect, a kind of permanent guestworker program or a green-card-lite, rather than an actual green card. This is consistent with suggestions from other pro-amnesty Republicans, including Senator Rubio and a group of House members working up an amnesty deal.
Unfortunately, it’s a trick.
Jeb Bush, as you would imagine, has long been in favor of citizenship for illegal aliens. This “evolution” in his thinking is a tactic to offer a “compromise” version of amnesty that is somehow less distasteful to Republican lawmakers, as a way of duping them into voting for it, or giving them cover to dupe their constituents into thinking it’s not really an amnesty. And it’s being offered as an option opposed by the Left, and the Left is playing its role, calling the move a “blunder of huge proportions” and the like.
This enables the organ of the pro-amnesty movement to label it “a middle-ground option” when it is nothing of the kind. (That was also the point of last month’s “leaking” of Obama’s immigration bill.) Once the illegal population is legalized, the game is over — the amnesty will obviously never be revoked, and the Democrats will then launch a campaign against Republicans accusing them (correctly) of imposing on helpless Latinos a Jim Crow–style system of second-class status, something more appropriate to Saudi Arabia. If they go this way, the GOP candidate in 2016 will look back fondly on Romney’s 27 percent of the Hispanic vote — and he’ll have sabotaged his own base as well, resulting in an even further drop in blue-collar white turnout and Republican share.
When I say this whole debate over a “compromise” form of amnesty is kabuki, scripted out months ago by the open-borders crowd, I don’t mean that metaphorically. The pre-planned nature of this struck me at the House Judiciary Committee hearing a few weeks ago. San Antonio mayor Julian Castro (whose part-time job consists solely of chairing city-council meetings, by the way) insisted under questioning that a path to citizenship is the only option that Congress should consider, and was itself a “compromise” between open borders and mass deportation.
But then, his handler, Angela Kelley, head of immigration matters at the Center for American Progress and a key White House proxy on the issue, leaned forward and whispered in Castro’s ear. After that, he changed his tune slightly, saying a path to citizenship was the best outcome but that a lesser status might be acceptable. It wouldn’t surprise me me if Angela Kelley and White House immigration coordinator Cecilia Muñoz have actually done conference calls with staff for Rubio and Bush gaming out this strategy.
The question before us is not how illegal immigrants should be legalized, but whether they should be amnestied at all. And until we have a real enforcement infrastructure in place, the answer has to be “no.”
*
IN REALITY MEXICANS LOATHE THIS NATION AND HAVE NO DESIRE TO BECOME AMERICANS. THEY SIMPLY JUMP OUR BORDERS TO LOOT. HERE’S WHAT LA RAZA WANTS FIRST:
“ Under his proposal, illegal immigrants would receive amnesty in the sense of permanent status — work cards, Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses, and so forth — but not a path to citizenship”

 
Posted on by Paul Mirengoff in Immigration, Republicans
Jeb Bush and amnesty lite
Jeb Bush has come up with a compromise approach to immigration reform. Under his proposal, illegal immigrants would receive amnesty in the sense of permanent status — work cards, Social Security numbers, driver’s licenses, and so forth — but not a path to citizenship. Citizenship would only be available if they left the U.S. and applied from their home country, a course of action few would be likely to take.
Bush would also try to secure the border. However, as I understand it, a certification of “success” in this endeavor would not be a prerequisite for the amnesty.
In theory, amnesty but no path to citizenship is a sensible compromise. We aren’t going to deport many illegal aliens under any regime; nor do I believe that mass deportation would, on balance, be a desirable policy. For me, the deal breaker on immigration reform is not amnesty per se, but rather rewarding illegal aliens with United States citizenship.
But Mark Krikorian argues that Bush’s compromise is a ruse that will pave the way for an eventual grant of citizenship:
Once the illegal population is legalized, the game is over — the amnesty will obviously never be revoked, and the Democrats will then launch a campaign against Republicans accusing them (correctly) of imposing on helpless Latinos a Jim Crow–style system of second-class status, something more appropriate to Saudi Arabia. If they go this way, the GOP candidate in 2016 will look back fondly on Romney’s 27 percent of the Hispanic vote — and he’ll have sabotaged his own base as well, resulting in an even further drop in blue-collar white turnout and Republican share.
I agree that Bush probably is trying to pull a fast one. He has long backed a path to citizenship for illegal aliens. So why the change, just as momentum is building for such a path? Bush supplied part of the answer when he told Charlie Rose that he wrote the book last year (i.e., before the momentum began to build). However, Bush continues to offer his compromise because, I suspect, he has an eye on the 2016 Republican presidential primaries. Most likely, his true preference remains a path to citizenship for illegals, but he understands that this is a unacceptable to most Republicans.
On the merits, Krikorian is also correct that it would be quite difficult to hold the line at “amnesty lite.” But it is already proving difficult to resist legislation that would provide illegal immigrants with a path to citizenship.
Depending on the exact lay of the legislative land, it might make sense to accept a compromise that, for now, denies the path to citizenship. Who knows? Republicans may one day behave like a serious political party — one that rewards the people who vote for it, not those who vote against it — rather than like masochists.
As for Bush’s proposal to proceed with amnesty before the border is certified as secure, it doesn’t bother me that much. The certification process will likely be a sham, in all events. And to the extent that there’s any progress in border security in the run-up to certification, that progress will always be subject to reversal.
Finally, as I understand it, the illegal immigrants to whom Bush would deny a path to citizenship are those who entered the U.S. illegally as adults and who choose to remain in the U.S. rather than return to their native countries to go through the lawful immigration process. Those who accompanied them as children would have path to citizenship. This represents a huge reward — on top of amnesty — for the adults who entered illegally. In my view, it is problematic.
*
Obama's 'Hispanicazation' of America
 
 
*
Immigrating America Into a Colony of Mexico
We’ve got an even more ominous enemy within our borders that promotes “Reconquista of Aztlan” or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas into the country of Mexico. With 9.2 million Mexicans now living in America, their goal of colonizing our country back into Mexico moves forward. A more sobering reality stems from the evidence that it’s Mexican-American citizens in the forefront of this disintegration of our country.
 
Americans (Legals) have become a passive society while Mexico loots and occupies.
Here’s what the Democrat Party and Mexico have done to CA.
CALIFORNIA: MEXICO’S LOOTED WELFARE STATE
 
*

Importing Poverty: Immigration and Poverty in the United States: A Book of Charts

By Robert Rector
The Obama administration has also cut worksite enforcement efforts by 70%, allowing illegal immigrants to continue working in jobs that rightfully belong to citizens and legal workers.
 
*
THE ENTIRE REASON THE BORDERS ARE LEFT OPEN IS TO CUT WAGES!
 
 
"We could cut unemployment in half simply by reclaiming the jobs taken by illegal workers," said Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, co-chairman of the Reclaim American Jobs Caucus. "President Obama is on the wrong side of the American people on immigration. The president should support policies that help citizens and legal immigrants find the jobs they need and deserve rather than fail to enforce immigration laws."
 

OBAMA’S AMNESTY HOAX TO LEGALIZE MEXICO’S LOOTING, DESTROY THE GOP WITH 40 MILLION NEW DEMS, AND KEEP WAGES FOR GREATER PROFITS FOR THE PAYMASTERS OF CORRUPT DEMS’

HERITAGE FOUNDATION: OBAMA’S AMNESTY WOULD ADD 100 MORE ILLEGALS AND COST AMERICANS (Legals) BILLIONS AND BILLIONS

the staggering cost of Mexico’s looting: