"Tens of millions of people have been coming to America with non-American values — essentially, values of the left such as big government and a welfare state. And thanks to the Democratic Party and the left, they don't jettison these non-American values at the border and are encouraged to hold on to them."
The radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost" territories in the American Southwest.
As Earl Shorris, author of Latinos: A Biography of the People, observed: "Latinos have been more resistant to the melting pot than any other group. Their entry en masse into the United States will test the limits of the American experiment...."
In the age of a rapidly changing work force, the Democrat initiative to flood the country with people who can't compete in today's job market is myopic, not to mention fiscally irresponsible.
Michael Tracey: ‘Major Political Liability’ for Bernie Sanders to Embrace Open Borders Agenda
3:17
Left-wing populist Michael Tracey says it is a “major political liability” for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) to be “percieved” of as endorsing an open borders agenda in the 2020 election.
During an interview with SiriusXM Patriot’s Breitbart News Tonight, Tracey — a supporter of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) — said Sanders should stick to his 2015 rhetoric in which he explicitly opposed hemispheric open borders as an effort by the billionaire class to drive down American wages.
LISTEN:
Tracey said:
Bernie has, in the past and even earlier on in this campaign … he was asked a question about open borders at a public event and he said, “No, of course, I don’t support open borders.” So it was more in line with what he said in the previous campaign.But I think in Bernie’s case, he’s also incorporated a lot of younger activists into his campaign, and those are certainly the people exerting influence on him in terms of advocacy or organizations that supported him — so he’s tempered his rhetoric a bit so as not to offend their sensibilities, which I don’t think is a great strategy for broad-based political appeal.Ironically, if he had just kept the same course on immigration that he articulated in that 2015 interview where he said it was a “Koch brothers scheme” essentially, I think he’d be in a much better place now because I just don’t think … even being perceived to endorse open borders … is a major political liability.
As Breitbart News reported, Sanders navigated his way through an interview with the New York Times in which he readily admitted that businesses importing cheaper foreign workers — often illegal aliens — suppresses the wages of America’s working and middle class.
“Yeah, if you’re being paid $5 — if you’re being paid $5 an hour, now, of course, it’s going to lower wages,” Sanders said. “Why would I hire at a higher wage?”
Later in the interview, though, Sanders backs away from immigration’s wage-suppression impact on Americans and focuses on a $15 minimum wage — suggesting that illegal aliens be legalized and paid the same wage as Americans.
“All I am saying is that if for whatever reason, I’m paying you $5 an hour, okay,” Sanders said. “You don’t think that’s going to lower the wages that she gets?”
The political liabilities, as Tracey notes, may come from Sanders’ embracing free health care for all 11 to 22 million illegal aliens for which American taxpayers would be forced to pay. The plan would likely cost Americans about $660 billion over the course of a decade, and experts have said such a policy would drive a migration of foreigners “with serious health problems” to America’s borders.
A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll conducted in September 2019 revealed that free health care for illegal aliens at taxpayers’ expense is the most unpopular policy position in the 2020 Democrat presidential primary, Breitbart News noted.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.
Jose Angel Gutierrez, professor,
University of Texas, Arlington and founder of La Raza Unida (NOW THE UNIDOSus
Fascist Party) political party screams at rallies: "We have an aging white America. They are dying.
They are shitting in their pants with fear! I love it! We have got to eliminate
the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have
got to kill him!"
"Tens of millions of people have
been coming to America with non-American values — essentially, values of the
left such as big government and a welfare state. And thanks to the Democratic
Party and the left, they don't jettison these non-American values at the border
and are encouraged to hold on to them."
“THE RADICALS
SEEK NOTHING LESS THAN SECESSION FROM THE UNITED STATES WHETHER TO FORM THEIR
OWN SOVEREIGN STATE OR TO REUNIFY WITH MEXICO. THOSE WHO DESIRE REUNIFICATION
WITH MEXICO ARE IRREDENTISTS WHO SEEK TO RECLAIM MEXICO'S "LOST"
TERRITORIES IN THE AMERICAN SOUTHWEST.” MARIA HSIA CHANG PROFESSOR OF
POLITICAL SCIENCE, UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA RENO
IMMIGRANTS CHANGE CULTURES
Whether it's New Yorkers in Florida or Latinos in America.
July
25, 2018
The most frequently used
description of America by those who advocate for large numbers of immigrants —
those here legally or illegally — is "America is a nation of immigrants."
The statement sounds
meaningful. But in reality, it's meaningless. What else could America be? If no
one had come to America from elsewhere, the North American continent would have
remained populated only by its indigenous people — which is what many on the
left wish had happened. As the late Howard Zinn, author of "A People's
History of the United States," the most widely used American history text
in high schools and universities, said to me, the world was not better off
thanks to the founding of America.
So, the statement
"America is a nation of immigrants" tells us nothing about the only
questions that matter: Should be there any limits to immigration? And what
should we do about illegal immigration?
Regarding the first
question, an increasing number of Americans on the left do not believe in any
limits: We should allow all those escaping poverty or violence into the United
States. As Hillary Clinton was caught on tape saying, she doesn't believe in
borders. She speaks for the American left: In the past few weeks, leftists have
marched in American streets demanding the abolition of ICE, the Immigration and
Customs Enforcement agency.
Therefore, for the left, the
second question, "What should we do about immigration?" is
essentially irrelevant. Their answer is "Nothing. All migrants are
welcome."
However, for those of us —
liberals, conservatives and independents — who do believe in borders, the
second question is critical.
And the reason has nothing —
absolutely nothing — to with race or ethnicity. The reason we worry so much
about vast numbers of immigrants is that too many immigrants in too short a
period of time will change American culture and values. Our concern is not
rooted in xenophobia; it is rooted in values-phobia .
Why is this an issue now?
Because the vast majority of past immigrants changed their values,
not America's, when they came to this country. They came here to become
American, not only in terms of language, citizenship and national identity but
also in terms of values.
But while some immigrants
still do, the majority does not. They want to become American citizens in order
to better their lives — a completely understandable motivation — not to embrace
American values and identity. The majority of today's immigrants from Latin
America, for example, wishes to become wealthier ... Latin Americans.
Tens of millions of people
have been coming to America with non-American values — essentially, values of
the left such as big government and a welfare state. And thanks to the
Democratic Party and the left, they don't jettison these non-American values at
the border and are encouraged to hold on to them.
Again, the concern many have
over the issue of immigration has absolutely nothing to do with race or
ethnicity. Pope Francis is a good example. He looks like a white European, but
he has brought the left-wing Latin American values of his native Argentina into
the papacy.
One more proof that
opposition to vast numbers of immigrants has nothing to with xenophobia, racism
or nativism and everything to do with values is the effect of American
immigrants going from northern states to southern states. The large number of
(white) American internal "immigrants" from northeastern states has
changed Florida's values. Once a rock-solid conservative state, Florida has
become more and more liberal and leftist because of the influx of people from
New York and the Northeast.
Is noting the values effect
of New Yorkers immigrating to Florida — or Californians to Arizona and Oregon —
xenophobic, racist or nativist? Of course not.
That's why opposition to
large-scale Muslim immigration into Europe (or America) also has little or
nothing to do with xenophobia, racism (Muslim is not a race anyway) or
nativism. It has to do with changing European values. Large-scale Muslim
immigration to Europe will do to Europe's values what large-scale
northern-state immigration has done to Florida and what large-scale European
immigration did to the native culture of North America.
So, while the issue appears
to be whether one is for or against large-scale immigration into America, the
real issue is whether one wants to preserve American values or see them
changed.
The left wants them changed.
Conservatives don't.
THE
AZTLAN INVASION & THE LA RAZA FASCIST PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY
“The
radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to
form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire
reunification with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost"
territories in the American Southwest.”
MULTICULTURALISM,
IMMIGRATION AND AZTLAN
By
Maria Hsia Chang Professor of Political Science, University of Nevada Reno
One
of the standard arguments invoked by those in favor of massive immigration into
the United States is that our country is founded on immigrants who have always
been successfully assimilated into America's mainstream culture and society. As
one commentator put it, "Assimilation evokes the misty past of Ellis
Island, through which millions entered, eventually seeing their descendants
become as American as George Washington."1 Nothing more vividly testifies
against that romantic faith in America's ability to continuously assimilate new
members than the events of October 16, 1994 in Los Angeles. On that day, 70,000
people marched beneath "a sea of Mexican flags" protesting
Proposition 187, a referendum measure that would deny many state benefits to
illegal immigrants and their children. Two weeks later, more protestors marched
down the street, this time carrying an American flag upside down. Both
protests point to a disturbing and rising phenomenon of Chicano separatism in
the United States — the product of a complex of forces, among which are
multiculturalism and a generous immigration policy combined with a lax border
control. The Problem Chicanos refer to "people of Mexican descent in the
United States" or "Mexican Americans in general." Today,
there are reasons to believe that Chicanos as a group are unlike previous
immigrants in that they are more likely to remain unassimilated and
unintegrated, whether by choice or circumstance — resulting in the formation of
a separate quasi-nation within the United States. More than that, there are
Chicano political activists who intend to marry cultural separateness with
territorial and political self-determination. The more moderate among them
aspire to the cultural and political autonomy of "home rule". The
radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to
form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire
reunification with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's
"lost" territories in the American Southwest.
Whatever
their goals, what animates all of them is the dream of Aztlan. According to
legend, Aztlan was the ancestral homeland of the Aztecs which they left in
journeying southward to found Tenochtitlan, the center of their new
civilization, which is today's Mexico City. Today, the "Nation of
Aztlan" refers to the American southwestern states of California, Arizona,
Texas, New Mexico, portions of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, which Chicano
nationalists claim were stolen by the United States and must be reconquered
(Reconquista) and reclaimed for Mexico. The myth of Aztlan was revived by
Chicano political activists in the 1960s as a central symbol of Chicano
nationalist ideology. In 1969, at the Chicano National Liberation Youth
Conference in Denver, Rodolfo "Corky" Gonzales put forth a political
document entitled El Plan de Aztlan (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan). The Plan is a
clarion call to Mexican-Americans to form a separate Chicano nation: In the
spirit of a new people that is conscious not only of its proud historial
heritage, but also of the brutal "gringo" invasion of our
territories, we, the Chicano inhabitants and civilizers of the nothern land of
Aztlan from whence came our forefathers ...declare that the call of our blood
is...our inevitable destiny.... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds,
water the fields, and gather the crops, and not to the foreign Europeans. We do
not recognize capricious frontiers on the bronze continent.... Brotherhood
unites us, and love for our brothers makes us a people whose time has come ....
With our heart in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the
independence of our mestizo nation. We are a bronze people with a bronze
culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers
in the bronze continent, we are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we
are Aztlan.
How
Chicanos are Unlike Previous Immigrants Brent A. Nelson, writing in 1994,
observed that in the 1980s America's Southwest had begun to be transformed into
"a de facto nation" with its own culture, history, myth, geography,
religion, education, and language. Whatever evidence there is indicates that
Chicanos, as a group, are unlike previous waves of immigrants into the United
States. In the first place, many Chicanos do not consider themselves immigrants
at all because their people "have been here for 450 years" before the
English, French, or Dutch. Before California and the Southwest were seized by
the United States, they were the lands of Spain and Mexico. As late as 1780 the
Spanish crown laid claim to territories from Florida to California, and on the
far side of the Mississippi up to the Great Lakes and the Rockies. Mexico held
title to much of Spanish possessions in the United States until the Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American war in 1848. As a consequence,
Mexicans "never accepted the borders drawn up by the 1848 treaty."
That
history has created among Chicanos a feeling
of
resentment for being "a conquered people,"
made
part of the United States against their will
and
by the force of arms. Their resentment is
amply
expressed by Voz Fronteriza, a Chicano
student
publication, which referred to Border
Patrol
officers killed in the line of duty as "pigs
(migra)"
trying to defend "the false frontier."
Chicanos
are also distinct from other immigrant groups because of the geographic
proximity of their native country. Their physical proximity to Mexico gives
Chicanos "the option of life in both Americas, in two places and in two
cultures, something earlier immigrants never had." Geographic proximity
and ease of transportation are augmented by the media. Radio and television
keep the spoken language alive and current so that Spanish, unlike the native
languages of previous immigrants into the United States, "shows no sign of
fading."
A
result of all that is the failure by Chicanos to be fully assimilated into the
larger American society and culture. As Earl Shorris,
author of Latinos: A Biography of the People, observed: "Latinos have been
more resistant to the melting pot than any other group. Their entry en masse
into the United States will test the limits of the American
experiment...." The continuous influx of Mexican immigrants into the United
States serve to continuously renew Chicano culture so that their sense of
separateness will probably continue "far into the future...." There
are other reasons for the failure of Chicano assimilation. Historically, a
powerful force for assimilation was upward social mobility: Immigrants into the
United States became assimilated as they rose in educational achievement and
income. But today's post-industrial American economy, with its narrower paths
to upward mobility, is making it more difficult for certain groups to improve
their socioeconomic circumstances. Unionized factory jobs, which once provided
a step up for the second generation of past waves of immigrants, have been
disappearing for decades. Instead of the diamond-shaped economy of industrial
America, the modern American economy is shaped like an hourglass. There is a
good number of jobs for unskilled people at the bottom, a fair number of jobs
for the highly educated at the top, but comparatively few jobs for those in the
middle without a college education or special skills. To illustrate, a RAND
Corporation study forecasts that 85 percent of California's new jobs will
require post-secondary education. For a variety of reasons, the nationwide
high-school dropout rate for Hispanics (the majority of whom are Chicano) is 30
percent — three times the rate for whites and twice the rate for blacks.
Paradoxically, the dropout rate for Hispanics born in the United States is even
higher than for young immigrants. Among Chicanos, high-school dropout rates
actually rise between the second and third generations. Their low educational
achievement accounts for why Chicanos as a group are poor despite being
hardworking. In 1996, for the first time, Hispanic poverty rate began to exceed
that of American blacks. In 1995, household income rose for every ethnic group
except Hispanics, for whom it dropped 5 percent. Latinos now make up a quarter
of the nation's poor people, and are more than three times as likely to be
impoverished than whites. This decline in income has taken place despite high
rates of labor-force participation by Latino men, and despite an emerging
Latino middle class. In California, where Latinos now
approach one-third of the population, their education levels are far lower than
those of other immigrants, and they earn about half of what native-born
Californians earn. This means that, for the first time in the history of
American immigration, hard work is not leading to economic advancement because
immigrants in service jobs face unrelenting labor-market pressure from more
recently arrived immigrants who are eager to work for less. The narrowing of
the pathways of upward mobility has implications for the children of recent
Mexican immigrants. Their ascent into the middle-class mainstream will likely
be blocked and they will join children of earlier black and Puerto Rican
migrants as part of an expanded multiethnic underclass. Whereas first
generation immigrants compare their circumstances to the Mexico that they left
— and thereby feel immeasurably better off — their children and grandchildren
will compare themelves to other U.S. groups. Given their lower educational
achievement and income, that comparison will only lead to feelings of relative
deprivation and resentment. They are unlikely to be content as maids,
gardeners, or fruit pickers. Many young Latinos in the second and third
generations see themselves as locked in irremediable conflict with white
society, and are quick to deride successful Chicano students as
"wannabes." For them, to study hard is to "act
white" and exhibit group disloyalty. That attitude is part of the Chicano
culture of resistance — a culture that actively resists assimilation into
mainstream America. That culture is created, reinforced, and maintained by
radical Chicano intellectuals, politicians, and the many Chicano Studies
programs in U.S. colleges and universities. As examples, according to its
editor, Elizabeth Martinez, the purpose of Five Hundred Years of Chicano
History, a book used in over 300 schools throughout the West, is to
"celebrate our resistance to being colonized and absorbed by racist empire
builders." The book calls the INS and the Border Patrol "the Gestapo
for Mexicans."
For
Rodolfo Acuna, author of Occupied America: The Chicano's Struggle Toward
Liberation, probably the most widely assigned text in U.S. Chicano Studies programs,
the Anglo-American invasion of Mexico was "as vicious as that of Hitler's
invasion of Poland and other Central European nations...." The book also
includes a map showing "the Mexican republic" in 1822 reaching up
into Kansas and Oklahoma, and including within it Utah, Nevada, and everything
west and south of there
"This
is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a
common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is
taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational
program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA
$800,000.00 in March of 2009!
"Today
we march, tomorrow we vote!"
Mexican
Invasion
By
Tom Barrett
At
the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also through Canada)
the United States will be completely over run with illegal aliens by the year
2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to become
citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens
and their offspring will be the dominant population in the United States.
According to US Border Control (see LINK below). “They will have made such
inroads into the political and social systems that they will have more
influence than our Constitution over how the U.S. is governed. The ugly
consequence of an ignored U.S. Constitution is already taking place.” The
millions upon millions of illegal aliens streaming into the US are the
foundation for what could be another attempt at secession by several US states.
Many of them will use ill-conceived programs that reward illegal immigration to
become US citizens. Other illegals will simply go to the polls and vote without
taking the trouble to apply for citizenship. Together, these groups could form
a voting block that could tear our nation apart. Those of you who read the
email version of this column should go to www.ConservativeTruth.org to see the
map posted there. It shows the borders of a new nation proposed by influential
Mexican nationals and Hispanic US Citizens. (See LINK below: Professor Predicts
'Hispanic Homeland'.) It includes six northern states of Mexican, as well as
Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, and southern Colorado. The idea of a Hispanic
Homeland could be ignored as the pipedream of crackpots if a substantial
majority of Mexican citizens did not support it. A
Zogby poll of Mexicans done in June 2002 revealed that a substantial majority
of Mexican citizens believe that southwestern America properly belongs to
Mexico. They said that Mexicans do not need the permission of the U.S. to enter
this territory. 58 percent of Mexican citizens agreed with this statement:
"The territory of the United States' southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico." Only
28 percent disagreed with the statement. Listen to what some Mexican government
officials and US leaders (including politicians and Professors at
taxpayer-funded Universities) have to say on this subject. Jose Angel
Gutierrez, professor, University of Texas, Arlington and founder of La Raza
Unida political party screams at rallies: "We have an
aging white America. They are dying. They are shitting in their pants with
fear! I love it! We have got to eliminate the gringo, and what I mean by that
is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to kill him!" (See
LINK below.) Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council "They’re afraid
we’re going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions.
They’re right. We will take them over. Mario Obledo, California State Secretary
of Health, Education and Welfare under Jerry Brown, who was awarded the
Presidential Medal of Freedom by Bill Clinton, says, “California is going to be
a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn’t like it should leave." Proposition
187 was the California initiative supported by a majority of Californians that
denied taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens. Speaking at a Latino
gathering in response to Proposition 187’s passage in 1995, Art Torres, the
Chairman of the California Democratic Party, said: "Power is not given to
you. You have to take it. Remember, 187 is the last gasp of white America in
California." The national newspaper of Mexico, Excelsior: "The
American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico
without firing a single shot." Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County
Supervisor: "We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens
that are becoming citizens of this country...I gotta tell you that a lot of
people are saying, "I’m going to go out there and vote because I want to
pay them back." Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General: “We are
practicing ‘La Reconquista’ in California." "Reconquista" means
the reconquest of the US southwest by Mexico. (See LINK below.). These people are
serious! They think they are going to take US territory. The Mexican President
declared it here in our country, and Bill Clinton signed a Presidential
Executive Order that paves the way for at least part of Mexico’s dream. Mexican
President Ernesto Zedillo said in Chicago on July 23, 1997, "I have
proudly affirmed that the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed
by its borders and that Mexican migrants are an important – a very important –
part of this. For this reason, my government proposed a constitutional
amendment to allow any Mexican with the right and the desire to acquire another
nationality to do so without being forced to first give up his or her Mexican
nationality." Translation: It is next to impossible to receive Mexican citizenship
unless you can prove you are of Mexican descent. But Mexico knows that the US
has soft immigration laws and will grant citizenship to almost anyone. (After
all, we grant citizenship every day to immigrants from countries who have sworn
to destroy us.) So Mexico wants to take advantage of this ridiculous situation
by encouraging their citizens to apply for US citizenship while keeping Mexican
citizenship. That way the Mexican government can influence the political
process here in the US. Executive Order 13122, signed on May 25, 1999, by the
most treasonous president this nation has ever been cursed with, Bill Clinton,
established an Interagency Task Force on the Economic Development of the
Southwest Border. Part of the Order reads, "The Southwest Border or
Southwest Border region is defined as including the areas up to 150 miles north
of the United States-Mexican border in the States of Arizona, New Mexico,
Texas, and California." According to experts on international law, this
sets the stage for a 150-mile-wide “Border Zone” that will neither belong to
Mexico or the US. This could then become the first area of a Hispanic Nation
that would eventually encompass the areas shown in the map of the proposed
Republica del Norte (The Northern Republic). Our government, pushed by liberal
Democrats, has been systematically laying the groundwork for such a breakaway
republic. Did you know that immigrants from Mexico and other non European
countries can come to this country and get preferences in jobs, education, and government
contracts? It’s called affirmative action or racial privilege. Some time ago a
vote was taken in the U.S. Congress to end this practice. It was defeated.
Every single Democratic senator except Ernest Hollings voted to maintain
special privileges for Hispanic, Asian and African immigrants. They were joined
by thirteen Republicans. Bill Clinton and Al Gore have repeatedly stated that
they believe that massive immigration from countries like Mexico is good. They
have also backed special privileges for these immigrants. Mexico, a nation that
has benefited enormously from American generosity is now working to destabilize
our country. Is “destabilize” too strong a word? I don’t think so. Whether or
not Mexican leaders think they can actually create enough hatred against
“gringos” to accomplish the creation of a new republic made up of mainly US
territory, they know that pushing that agenda will cause huge political
problems here and allow Mexico to accomplish many of their goals. Is the
government of Mexico behind this? You have seen quotes from a Mexican President
and a Mexican Consul General in support of it. They have everything to gain and
little to lose by pushing it. The Mexican government is also pushing illegal
immigration, which destabilizes our economy. The US Border Control website (see
LINK below) shows an illustration from a Mexican government publication showing
their citizens how to best illegally enter the US. Why? It takes the strain of
taking care of unemployed Mexicans off the Mexican treasury and puts it on the
US treasury. And when the illegals get on welfare, they send some of their
money home, which helps the Mexican economy. All this talk by Mexican and US
officials about the US illegally occupying Mexican territory does nothing but breed
racial hatred. The sad thing is that none of this is about race. It is about
the things that all wars and conflicts are about: Greed, power and money. I
don’t like to talk about a problem without offering a solution. The US
politicians and professors who advocate taking US territory are guilty of
sedition. Remove them from their offices and (hopefully) put them in a federal
penitentiary where they can consider the error of their ways. The Mexican
politicians who do the same are guilty of inciting sedition. This is very close
to an act of war. Immediately cut of all economic aid to Mexico until its
government publicly disavows this lunatic plan. Finally, we must realize that
we can’t stop this by marching US troops into Mexico. We should use troops to guard
our borders, because the US Border Patrol cannot cover the huge US-Mexico
border without help. And we need to use pass laws that will stop the government
from rewarding illegal immigrants at the expense of those who follow the law.
We have a huge immigration problem in this country. This ridiculous Hispanic
Homeland idea is just a symptom of the problem. INTERNET RESEARCH: Professor
Predicts 'Hispanic Homeland' 1. http://www.aztlan.net/homeland.htm Professor
Predicts 'Hispanic Homeland' ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A University of New Mexico
Chicano Studies professor predicts a new, sovereign Hispanic nation within the
century, taking in the Southwest and several northern states of Mexico. Charles
Truxillo suggests the “Republica del Norte,” the Republic of the North, is “an
inevitability.” He envisions it encompassing all of California, Arizona, New
Mexico, Texas and southern Colorado, plus the northern tier of Mexican states:
Baja California, Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León and Tamaulipas. Along
both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border “there is a growing fusion, a reviving of
connections,” Truxillo said. “Southwest Chicanos and Norteño Mexicanos are
becoming one people again.” Truxillo, 47, has said the new country should be
brought into being “by any means necessary,” but recently said it was unlikely
to be formed by civil war. Instead, its creation will be accomplished by the
electoral pressure of the future majority Hispanic population in the region, he
said.
The Chicago Model: Population Replacement and the Transformation
of the USA
Speaking
at the University of Missouri in Columbia during a 2008 speech, then-Senator
Obama said, "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the
United States of America."
Many
believe that this fundamental transformation was pursued for the eight years
Obama was in office.
Few
would say that at the time that a fundamental transformation was already going
on in Chicago. For more than fifty years, the Chicago Democrats were
using population removal to get votes and guarantee the outcome of
elections. Just as an iron curtain once fell across Europe, a red curtain
had already fallen across Chicago's 50 wards.
The roots of transformation
What
are the origins of this program to transform the nation? The roots
of Obama's politics are to be found in the uni-party politics of
Chicago. It has been the aim of the national Democratic Party to use
Chicago as a model and then impose that political model on the United States.
The
Chicago model requires, first of all, population
replacement. Population replacement leads to voter replacement and
then cultural replacement. Once population replacement is
accomplished, voting will eventually reach a point where it becomes irrelevant.
After
population replacement, any opposition party to the Democrats can never get
enough votes to stop the fundamental transformation of the United States from a
constitutional republic to a socialist democracy. Democrats will
always have a guaranteed majority once population is
replaced. Today, uncontrolled immigration and redefining citizenship
are the keystone to unlocking that guaranteed majority.
The
ongoing debate over Obama's natural-born citizenship status is an example of
how the subject of voting and citizenship is viewed by the
Democrats. What should have been a discussion about constitutional
qualifications became one about racism.
This
accusation of racism nullified the issue in the minds of many, who had a foggy
idea about citizenship to begin with. The debate also showed that
Democrats want votes no matter where they can get them. They want votes up
to the point where votes become irrelevant, as is now the case in most Chicago
elections.
Englewood and Daley College
What
we intend to show here in summary form is how the accumulation of individual
lives and the political decisions made by men produce social changes that some
may not desire and others maliciously intend. Just like the accumulation
of individual coccolithophores over time made the white cliffs of Dover, so
population replacement has altered forever Englewood and Daley College.
If
we take as examples a Chicago neighborhood and an educational institution in
the city, we see how a plan for fundamental transformation was carried
out. Both of these examples show how population replacement
eventually led to voter and cultural replacement. Population
replacement and voter replacement became cogs in the uni-party state that
continues to run Chicago, making the city the most segregated in the nation.
The
destruction and transformation of Chicago's Englewood community was perhaps the
first and best example of how population removal led to voter removal and the
transformation of values. What happened over the course of about 50 years
was that a viable community, often rivaling Chicago's Loop in terms of wealth,
shopping, and cultural attractions, was transformed into a wasteland that
encouraged broken families, poverty, and drug addiction.
The
ruling Democrats in Chicago could see this transformation happening before
their eyes and did nothing to stop it. They did little to stop
redlining, the exodus of the white working class to the suburbs, or the influx
of poor blacks from the South.
In
short, Chicago's ruling elites built a plantation where blacks migrating from
the Southern states would be housed in projects and made to vote
Democrat. In many ways, black leaders became the capos of a
plantation that assured that Democrats would win election after election in
Chicago. Can anyone point to an example of how Jesse Jackson
improved, over the long run, the lives of many blacks living in Chicago?
Local
urban election victories would be in turn translated to victories on the
national level by other segregated U.S. cities. Chicago became the
model for Democratic victories at the polls. By the time Barack
Obama ran for office, the formula for victory by controlling urban minorities
with the help of progressive whites was well in place.
If
we move from the example of how a neighborhood experienced population
replacement for the sake of voter and cultural replacement, the transformation
of Daley College on the southwest side of Chicago becomes a good example of how
and institution can also be fundamentally transformed by removing one
population and replacing it with another.
Daley
College, originally named Bogan Junior College, was established to serve the
white ethnic communities on the southwest side of the city. As Latino immigration
increased in the '70s and '80s, a political decision was made to turn what was
now Daley College into an all Latino school. That meant replacing
the faculty and forcing out the white ethnic students. After an all
Latino administration was put in place, little by little, Daley College was
transformed into an all Latino institution. Population replacement
also led to value and cultural replacement.
Where
once there were students speaking Polish and Lithuanian,
students fleeing communism, there are now Mexican
students speaking Spanish and demonstrating in favor of
illegal immigration and socialism.
Ethnic cleansing in the U.S.
What
happened at Daley College and Englewood was nothing short of ethnic cleansing,
yet few in Chicago would recognize it as that today. Most Chicagoans
know little of the history of Englewood or Daley College.
Liberalism
and ignorance may be in the water they drink. Yet to participate
today in that structure set up by the Democrats is to participate in its evil,
the same way the Germans of the 1930s participated in the growing evil of their
politics.
Across
the nation, controversy over illegal immigration, the watering down of
citizenship, and the relentless attack on U.S. history seems to many to be
unending. Unfortunately, even those with a good heart and a desire
for justice are attracted, perhaps in their innocence, to the illusions of the
Democratic Party. Sometimes, we imagine that these misguided
citizens outnumber those who are in politics not for patriotism, but for power. The structure of evil
that is the Democratic Party is oblivious to them.
For
the Democrats, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob must be replaced with the
ideals of the progressive state. If the Democrats have to use Islam
or the wisdom of the great theologian Nancy Pelosi for that removal, they
will. In many cases, the ruling Democratic Party in large U.S.
cities distorted the values of freedom and justice to the point where they
became the false values of multiculturalism and diversity.
There
are some who may argue that Chicago politics is just ordinary urban politics
found in a U.S. city that has undergone wave after wave of European
immigration. Furthermore, the fundamental transformation of Chicago
has brought prosperity to some. Walking along the lakefront, it may
be hard to argue against that point of view. To make a
counter-argument, you must go to Englewood and Daley College to see the
spiritual and physical devastation the Democratic Party's quest for power has
wrought.
Beyond
that, there is the religious question, which may be at the heart of U.S.
political history. How did Catholic immigrants end up supporting a
progressive politics that was opposed to their faith? Even when some
Catholics resisted the transformation of their neighborhoods, as in the case of
Father Lawlor, they were betrayed by Catholic politicians.
"Undocumented immigrants" will become undocumented
Democrats
It
is obvious to many who call themselves deplorables and those living in the
heartland that the election of Donald Trump help saved the
nation. The Chicago model of fundamental transformation could no
longer proceed unstopped. Nevertheless, the Democratic Party is
still focused on its goal.
As
always, the world goes on. Yesterday's topless towers of Ilium give
way to today's Magnificent Mile. The uni-party, headed by the
Democrats, still runs Chicago. Chicago politicians are not yet done
with their hope for a fundamental transformation.
The
Democrats still plan to have the same power structure for the nation that we
see in Chicago. Illegal immigration is the first step toward population and
voter replacement, just like in Englewood and at Daley
College. Illegal aliens will become undocumented Democrats.
Nevertheless,
in many small towns across the heartland, citizens are becoming aware that
population and cultural replacement is in store for them. They want
nothing to do with it. In 2016, they took matters into their own
hands. Donald Trump and the deplorables have frustrated the plan for
national, uni-party control. It remains to be seen for how long.
“Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is
calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how
porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?”
Pelosi's Stake in Illegal
Immigration
The Minuteman Project,
founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The
Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch
our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For
performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and
his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even
murderers. They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia
University and vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the
liberal press.
So it was no surprise
that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his
publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics
that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those
immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose
every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of
focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American
citizens?”
Gilchrist did not stop
there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the
kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would
never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have
had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the
Foley page controversy.
Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in
FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley
where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor
– is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal
immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I
previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to
pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that
would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee
seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens
from Mexico with Social Security benefits.
At the same time, Pelosi
has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or
documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed
into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border
security and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must
use an electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work
in this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers' licenses for illegal
aliens in 2005. This year she opposed
legislation requiring presentation of a legitimate government-issued photo ID
to prove eligibility to vote, claiming that “there is little evidence anywhere
in the country of a significant problem with non-citizen voters.” She is
dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist by the name of Nuradin Abdi was
just recently reported to have illegally registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau
of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was indicted earlier this year as part of a
conspiracy to blow up the Columbus Mall.
How many other terrorist
suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi
oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our
recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates
provide to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the
“matricula consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank
accounts, apply for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify
themselves to police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’
licenses and then perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally
register to vote in our elections.
Pelosi also believes in
giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal
homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share
information they learn about an individual's immigration status with Federal
immigration authorities. Pelosi’s
hometown of San Francisco is one of the sanctuary cities she voted to protect
for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi even voted against strengthening our
immigration law with regard to the deportability of alien terrorists.
Jim Gilchrist cut to the
chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want
you to read:
"As we’ve shown
again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are
working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their
only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no
matter if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is
dead, alive, a citizen or an illegal alien."
Pelosi sees Jim
Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More illegal aliens mean more votes for the
Democrats and more grape-pickers for Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So
she even voted against a measure that would have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’
funds to tip off illegal aliens as to where the Minutemen citizen patrols may
be located! She obviously wants to see the Minutemen put out of business –
permanently. She can count on the liberal press to distort the work of the
Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye Gilchrist’s pointed questions about
her motivations for helping illegal aliens during the run-up to the mid-term
elections that may make her the next Speaker of the House.
Gilchrist, of course, is
accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message
out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the
"Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans.
Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I
love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and
interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no
illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the
audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance,
which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff
of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and
community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and
White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement
declaring:
“The Minutemen are not a
legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia
who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate
crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations
have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is
illegal.” (Emphasis added)
We have come to the point
in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and
who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy
issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world
is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of
lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border
and reporting illegal entry to the authorities.
Leftist slogans like “no
human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is
illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is
the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome here.
Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who
breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and
a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has
broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s
boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted
to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants,
but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter
our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values,
not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did
it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be
thrown aside now?
What we are witnessing is
a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary wants to drag us before the United Nations
for intending to build a fence on our side of the border with our money to keep
out aliens who seek to enter our country illegally. They will probably get
a sympathetic ear as some UN bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing
as “illegal” immigrants in the first place. For the first time in our history,
Americans are being asked to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves
as a nation and protect our own borders to a globalist governance body. Will
Pelosi lead her liberal loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against
America’s right to control its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding
out?
It is high time, as Jim
Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that
Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal
immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.
CALL NANCY PELOSI
Washington , DC - (202) 225-4965 San Francisco , CA - (415)
556-4862
USE THE EMAIL AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS POSTING AND SEND A COPY TO LA
RAZA PELOSI
If you are out of her district, you can still make your feelings
heard: Americanvoices@mail.house.gov
Levin Unloads on
Immigration: Dems, Media Propagandists, RINOs ‘Incentivizing Lawlessness,
Chaos’
Nationally syndicated radio talk
show host, TV host, author and American lawyer Mark Levin (Screenshot)
On his Facebook and Twitterpages Thursday morning, nationally
syndicated radio talk show host,
Fox News Channel “Life, Liberty & Levin” host, author and American lawyer Mark Levin unloaded on
immigration, suggesting that Democrats, their media propagandists and RINOs
“are incentivizing lawlessness, chaos, and the human misery that comes with it”
in demanding amnesty and refusing to secure the southern border.
“By demanding amnesty and refusing to secure the southern
border, the open borders Democrats and their propagandists, joined by RINOs,
are incentivizing lawlessness, chaos, and the human misery that comes with
it,” stated Mark Levin on Twitter and his Facebook page.
Mark Levin’s comments came after President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order halting family separation at the border on Wednesday.
As reported by CNSNews.com,
Trump said the following before signing the executive order, titled “Affording
Congress an Opportunity to Address Family Separation”: “We're signing an
executive order I consider to be a very important executive order. It's about
keeping families together while at the same time making sure that we have a
very powerful, very strong border, and border security will be equal, if not
greater than previously.”
President Trump’s signing of the executive order, however,
“wasn’t enough” for the liberal media, reported Newsbusters’ Nicholas Fondacaro, as “[t]he liberal broadcast networks of ABC, CBS, and NBC
dedicated another 89 minutes of airtime to the issue on
Wednesday alone.”
Levin opened his social media comments ripping Democrats and
media on the U.S. “zero-tolerance” immigration policy, saying,
“The open borders Democrats and media policy: if you’re an alien adult and come
to our country illegally with a child, you’re welcome here.”
Turning to previous administrative actions, Levin then detailed
a bit of the history behind U.S. immigration policy.
“It was the Clinton administration that settled a lawsuit in
1997 resulting in the release from detention of illegal alien kids in 20 days,
thereby separating them from the adults who are being processed through the
immigration system,” tweeted Levin.
Levin continued in another tweet: “It
is the Obama administration that schizophrenically separated from adults and
detained some illegal alien minors, but also allowing illegal alien adults and
children accompanying them into the country without upholdi
What do they bring to the table?
Critical
to the contentious and ongoing immigration debate is the undeniable fact that
low-skilled jobs, requiring little to no formal education, are disappearing or
being phased out of almost every industry in America. In the age of a rapidly changing work force, the Democrat
initiative to flood the country with people who can't compete in today's job
market is myopic, not to mention fiscally irresponsible.
Unlike
in the United States, the process of legal immigration in Australia is
strict. It's highly regulated and involves a lengthy process for
anyone wishing to relocate permanently to the land down under. In
fact, part of the Australian immigration application process is proof of
employment – prior to
arriving – in addition to a proven ability of every applicant to financially
support himself. Preference is given to potential new citizens who
have a college degree or skill set in engineering, medicine, and
technology. Work visas are granted, but the number is abysmally
small compared to the number the government receives each
year. Furthermore, the official language of Australia is
English. In order to be employed in almost every sector of industry,
applicants must speak, read, and write English fluently.
Australia
is just one example of a handful of countries that require immigrants to bring
something to the table. In other words, the immigrant must first
prove that he will not be a financial drain on society and will contribute
positively to the community.
First
and foremost, people crossing the U.S. southern border are uneducated,
illiterate, and lacking any real-world skill set. Strike
one: They are, for the most part, shut out of the highly competitive,
educated American work force, consigned to manual labor in the service,
restaurant, agriculture, or hospitality industry. With that in mind,
there is a finite number of low-skilled labor jobs available – there are only
so many lawns to mow, toilets to clean, restaurant dishes to wash, and hotel
rooms to be vacuumed.
Despite
the Democrat canard about immigrants doing the jobs that Americans refuse to
do, even some of those jobs are disappearing – for example, taking fast food
orders at the counter. The CEO of McDonald's recently announced that
all McDonald's restaurants in the U.S. will be outfitted with computer order
kiosks over the next few years. No doubt, other fast food
restaurants will follow the lead of McDonald's. That alone equates
to a sharp reduction in employees, many of whom are low-skilled, barely
educated immigrants, young and middle-aged.
The
same kind of technology innovations are also occurring in the agriculture
industry; automated harvesting machines are replacing human
hands. Ever see a machine shake a pecan tree and catch falling
pecans in a steel hopper? I have.
Strike
two: The vast majority of new arrivals, whether they be illegal aliens or
refugees, don't speak English. A first-generation immigrant will
never bother learning to read or write English, either. They don't
have to. If allowed to stay in the U.S., they gravitate toward
predominantly minority neighborhoods, where everyone speaks some form of their
native tongue. Firsters may acquire enough English to get by, but
for the most part, they will continue to speak their native languages at home,
in their communities, and within their family circles, which severely limits
their employment opportunities. If they do seek work outside the
home, they will be in the company of people much like themselves: uneducated,
low-skilled manual laborers.
Unfortunately,
this segment of American society has one of three paths of livelihood in the
U.S.: destined to stagnate in a service industry job with little upward
job mobility, government dependence, or a life of crime.
The
correlation between chronically unemployed foreign entrants to the U.S. and
every category of violent crime in the United States is no
coincidence. There's a good reason why President Trump, with the
help of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is chasing down, rounding up,
arresting, and deporting MS-13 gang members. The majority of
foreign-born MS-13 gang members have taken advantage of the easily accessible
southern border for the sole purpose of expanding the drug trade in the United
States. Strike three for America.
Until stricter, highly regulated, and closely monitored border
access is achieved, hordes of people who bring nothing to the table will
continue to plague America
Nancy Pelosi Demands Zero Border Enforcement:
Detention of Illegal Aliens Is ‘Form of Child Abuse’
President Donald
Trump’s executive order which modifies his “zero tolerance” policy at the
United States-Mexico border has leftDemocrats and
the open borders lobby fighting for an end to all border enforcement, inviting
floods of illegal immigration and cheap foreign labor into the country.
The
zero-tolerance policy mandates that all illegal border crossers — including
illegal alien adults who cross the border with children — be prosecuted and
eventually deported from the U.S. This policy results in border-crossing
parents having their children taken into federal custody. This is a loophole
known as the Flores Settlement Agreement.
In
an effort to modify and strengthen his zero-tolerance policy, Trump signed an
executive order on Wednesday that keeps border crossing family units in
detention together while they are prosecuted. These border crossing families
will be held in facilities run by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and
the Department of Justice (DOJ) rather than being released into the interior of
the U.S. through the “Catch and Release” program.
No comments:
Post a Comment