Remember to enter Amazon via the VDARE.com link and we get a commission on any purchases you make—at no cost to you!
"Your country needs you.Our American family will only be as strong as our growing Latino community." Obama To The NCLR, 2011
Back in the summer, when the Obama Regime was conspiring with the drug cartels to dump tens of thousands of illegal alien minors into the U.S., I wrote Obama’s Border Dissolution Is Treason. The Answer Is Impeachment. It Would Work. Tonight, after reading the President’s speech announcing his attempt to impose Amnesty through executive branch coup—easier on the blood pressure than actually watching him—I stand by every word of my argument. And I believe that, had the GOP precipitated an impeachment fight and nationalized the midterm elections on the issue of immigration, it would now have a veto-proof majority.
Still, the result of the midterms means that the GOP can control the Senate’s agenda and now needs to persuade fewer red-state Democrats to change sides to reach the necessary two-thirds approval. In the volatile atmosphere of Senate trial, pressure on these Democrats will be intense. Obama really could be convicted.
But the real objective will be to get him to back off Executive Amnesty. Unlike Bill Clinton, whose crime had been irrevocably committed, Obama can always undo the cause of his indictment. Many queasy white liberals—remember, even the Washington Post editorialized against this reckless step—will press him to do so.
There are, of course, other steps the GOP could take. At VDARE.com, we particularly like the immediate abolition of birthright citizenship, which would deprive the Democrats of their incentive to encourage illegal immigration. But none sends the same simple, devastating message as the disgrace of impeachment.
But this means that someone has to think the unthinkable and say the unsayable, because no-one knows when what might suddenly become thinkable, sayable—and doable. I believe that this is VDARE.com’s role—to take risks and push the envelope of public debate. I want to thank our readers for their loyal support at this dark and dangerous moment for the historic American nation.
Asserting a legal and constitutional authority he himself said he did not have, President Obama is going rogue, issuing an executive amnesty to 4 to 5 million illegal aliens.
He will order the U.S. government not to enforce the law against these 5 million, and declare that they are to be exempt from deportation and granted green cards.
Where did Obama get his 4-5 million figure, not 2-4 million, or 5-7 million? Nowhere in law, but plucked out of his own mind, as to what he can get away with. Barack Obama just felt it was about right.
Our rogue president has crossed an historic line, and so has the republic. Future presidents will cite the "Obama precedent" when they declare they will henceforth not enforce this or that law, because of a prior commitment to some noisy constituency.
The political, psychological and moral effects of Obama's action will be dramatic. Sheriffs, border patrol, and immigration authorities, who have put their lives on the line to secure our broken borders, have been made to look like fools. Resentment and cynicism over Obama's action will be deeply corrosive to all law enforcement.
Businessmen who obeyed the law and refused to hire illegals, hiring Americans and legal immigrants instead, and following U.S. and state law on taxes, wages and withholding, also look like fools today.
Obama's action makes winners of the scofflaws and hustlers.
Bosses who hired illegals off the books will also receive de facto amnesty. La Raza is celebrating. But, make no mistake, a corrupt corporate crowd is also publicly relieved and privately elated.
Immigrants who waited in line for years to come to America, and those waiting still, have egg on their faces. Why, they are saying to themselves, were we so stupid as to obey U.S. laws, when it is the border-jumpers who are now on the way to residency and citizenship?
When the world hears of the Obama amnesty,
When it rains, it pours. Just before unveiling his colossal administrative amnesty for millions of "undocumented" aliens and foreign tech workers on Thursday, President Obama separately ordered up to 8,000 more executive pardons and special work passes for Liberians, Sierra Leoneans and Guineans illegally in this country.
Strange, isn't it? The same administration that refused to enact travel bans from Ebola-plagued West African nations to protect Americans is now granting "temporary protected status" (TPS) to West Africans on American soil so they don't have to go back.
It's not really about public health, of course. It's about political pandering and electoral engineering.
Here's the dirty open secret: There's nothing "temporary" about TPS benefits. Under both Democratic and Republican administrations, the program has become an endless, interminable residency plan for unlawful border-crossers, visa overstayers and deportation evaders from around the world.
TPS golden ticket holders live here, work here...
“The Secret People” is hyperbolic and not very logical, but it contains some memorable phrases.
It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest
God’s scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best.
But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet.
Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.
Whether God does indeed nurse “scorn for all men governing,” I couldn’t say. But plainly Chesterton thought the common people of England did:
We saw the King as they killed him, and his face was proud and pale;
And a few men talked of freedom, while England talked of ale.
The poet had hold of an important point. Politics doesn’t occupy much space in people’s minds. Sport, celebrities, entertainment, gadgetry, gossip, and, yes, ale, are all much more popular topics of conversation among ordinary citizens.
George Will remarked some years ago that he had published a shelf of books about politics and one about baseball, and his royalty statements told him where America’s heart was. (My own statements suggest that even analytic number theory is more interesting than politics to the book-buying public.)
In Anglosphere nations it’s hard to get great masses of people concentrating on political topics. This is even the case with a topic like immigration, vital to the futures of their children and grandchildren.
From time to time, however, the Chestertonian paradigm breaks down. Some event comes up to concentrate people’s minds on a key issue, and they do speak. Twenty-one thousand of them spoke in the parliamentary constituency of Clacton, in Chesterton’s England, last month, electing the first ever Member of Parliament from the anti-globalist, immigration-patriot United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP).
The voters of a different constituency...
Above, the sixth Jonathan Gruber video--details here, comments about "mislabeling" at 30:38--just to give you an idea of the scale of the revelations.
Isn't Jonathan Gruber worse than the Downing Street memo?
Gruber, who was paid half a million dollars to design Obamacare, is on tape bragging about how the Democrats relied on "the stupidity of the American voter" to pass that law. Which, ironically, was sort of a stupid thing to say on camera.
Gruber, who will hereafter be known as "the architect of Obamacare," said:
"If you had a law which said that healthy people are going to pay in--if you made it explicit that healthy people pay in and sick people get money, it would not have passed. ... Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage. And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical to getting the thing to pass."
The Downing Street memo consisted of minutes from a July 2002 meeting of British labor, defense and intelligence officials during the run-up to the Iraq War, in which the MI6 head, Richard Dearlove, reportedly said that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
These notes from a British cabinet meeting were called the smoking gun of Bush's lying his way into war. The Downing Street memo was written about in dozens of New York Times articles--including six hysterical Frank Rich op-eds. It has been mentioned more than a hundred times in The Washington Post. It was covered on ABC's "Nightline," by George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "This Week," on NBC's "Meet the Press"--even on the "Today" show. It was discussed nightly on MSNBC, where Keith Olbermann covered it like it was Kim Kardashian and he was the E! Network.
By contrast, this week, NBC's Chuck Todd dismissed the Gruber tapes as "a political story" and The New York Times said of Gruber: "In truth, his role was limited." (NYT, March 28, 2012: "Mr. Gruber helped the administration put together the basic principles of the proposal, (then) the White House lent him to Capitol Hill to help congressional staff members draft the specifics of the legislation.")
But when the Downing Street memo came out, conservatives weren't allowed to say, Yeah, well, the British memo writer didn't have anything to do with the president's decision...
The Fulford File | Before Any “Immigration Reform”, GOP Should Insist On Ending Birthright Citizenship—Now!
The great Laura Ingraham, who is a lawyer, just raised the birthright citizenship issue, which she said leads to “all sorts of fraud and gaming the system.” Here’s a clip of her saying that that, courtesy of the George Soros-funded Cultural Marxists at Media Matters:
The Media Matters people titled that clip Ingraham Urges GOP To Enforce Immigration Laws By Partially Repealing 14th Amendment, and they linkedto The Fourteenth Amendment's Guarantee of Birthright Citizenship, By Elizabeth Wydra, American Constitutional Society, May 14, 2009.
Salon.com, in the usual Leftist echo-chamber style, piled on with Laura Ingraham wants to change Constitution to strip immigrants’ children of citizenship, By Luke Brinker, November 17, 2014.
But this is just wrong—automatic citizenship for the children of foreigners resident in the US is not in the Fourteenth Amendment, but is only a controversial judicial interpretation, which Congress can overrule. The text of the relevant clause says that
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
That part about “subject to the jurisdiction” excludes a number of categories, including foreign diplomats, American Indians (whose citizenship stems from the later Indian Citizenship Act of 1924) and the children of a hypothetical invading army.
Laura Ingraham was quoted by Salon:
Responding to former GOP congressman Joe Scarborough...
Two years ago, when Obama launched his first administrative amnesty known as "DACA" (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), the White House gave aid and comfort to illegal alien applicants who were concerned that their previous felony identity theft and fraud crimes would preclude them from the new non-deportation benefits. The Department of Homeland (In)security made clear that illegal workers who wanted coveted employment documents would not have to disclose to the feds whether they used stolen Social Security numbers.
Center for Immigration Studies analyst Jon Feere reported at the time that ethnic lobbyists and open-borders businesses lobbied the Obama administration hard "to keep American victims of ID theft in the dark while shielding unscrupulous businesses from enforcement." [Obama Administration Promises to Ignore SSN Fraud, Protect Law-Breaking Businesses, September 27, 2012] As an Obama official told The New York Times, DHS employees are "not interested in using this
“Latino Conservatives”: GOP Should Fight Obama Amnesty—By Enacting Its Own Amnesty (Which Would Benefit “Latino Conservatives”)
According to Suzanne Gamboa of NBC News, the group has announced the formation of “a coalition advocating for immigration reform” to be enacted by Congress, rather than by Obama. [Latino Conservatives Launch Immigration Group As W.H. Close To Executive Action,November 13th, 2014]
In other words, this group wants the same thing as the President, they just want it done a different way.
The problem with this plan: Congress has already tried to pass Amnesty several times over the past decade. The Republican leadership has always been complicit in these efforts. And every time, it’s been a grassroots pushback by the American people that has prevented Congress from delivering on its promises to the cheap labor lobby.
That’s why Obama has now simply dispensed with Congress and is brazenly and openly declaring his intention to do it himself. He has no other alternative, especially not with a new Republican Congress.
So what does this “conservative” Latino group, which calls itself the “Hispanic Leaders for Immigration Reform Coalition,” hope to accomplish?
As you might have guessed, it’s more handouts to subsidize their own ethnic tribalism.
According to NBC’s Gamboa, herself a “lifetime member” of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists:
Separately, a group of conservative Hispanics announced Thursday [November 13th] they were launching the Hispanic Leaders for Immigration Coalition, made up of right of center Hispanic leaders who want to see immigration reform "addressed in a conservative way by the U.S. Congress." The launch of the group came with the release of a study by the conservative groups arguing that the Latino vote is in play politically for 2016 and Latino voters tend to be more conservative and is "a vote that deserves to be courted aggressively by all parties."
This certainly sounds familiar. And, with a little digging, it emerges that this supposedly new group is composed of members of the same old Open Borders Rogues’ Gallery we’ve been profiling for years.
The first rogue: Al Cardenas, Cuban-born chairman, until recently, of the American Conservative Union. (See VDARE.COM file on Cardenas). Cardenas wants the Congress to deal with immigration next year: "We're going to do everything possible in our sphere of influence to see to it that this issue is fairly debated and brought to the floor for a vote”.
So Cardenas says he wants the immigration “fairly debated and brought to the floor for a vote”? Well, we already know where Cardenas stands on the issue. In an opinion piece published...
“How do you like the Journal‘s war?” So boasted the [...]
The only hope: the GOP/ GAP will become the explicit defender of the American majority’s interests via a National Conservative program of immigration restriction, pro-worker policies, and opposition to corporate exploitation. But this would mean overcoming the ideological bankruptcy of the Beltway Right—and the short-term pecuniary interests of the Republican Congressional leadership.
Ominously, there are troubling signs that the new Republican majority, having been elected largely on the strength of the public’s opposition to Amnesty, is already wobbling. Thus Betsy Woodruff at Slate giggles that “the GOP is about as divided over immigration policy as any political party is over any single issue.” [The Coming Immigration War, November 14, 2014]
Significantly, there does not seem to be a consensus among Republican Party about what actually to do if and when Obama pulls the trigger on unilaterally legalizing almost five million law-breaking aliens.
GOP congressional leaders are discussing a series of short-term funding measures that would “create a forum to push back against the president, and, possibly, gain concessions. Republicans also are planning to file a lawsuit against the president over his use of executive authority, according to the lawmakers and aides.” [Congressional Republicans consider using short-term funding bill to pressure Obama, Robert Costa, Washington Post, November 14, 2014] The power of the purse could be used to simply defund Obama’s Amnesty, as Senator Jeff Sessions (R-America) has urged. [Jeff Sessions: Defund Obama’s Exec Amnesty in Next Funding Bill, Tony Lee, Breitbart, November 6, 2014]
But, needless to say, this approach concedes the initiative entirely to President Obama, who has already acknowledged that what he is proposing to do is unconstitutional.
Of course, the ultimate solution to such a blatant and criminal abuse of executive power is impeachment, which is indeed gaining acceptance in the mainstream but remains unmentionable on Capitol Hill.
However, the real question is whether the Congressional GOP leadership wants to stop Obama’s Amnesty at all. It seems more likely that they are interested in allowing Obama to go through with Amnesty on the theory that this will “get it behind” them, while they reap the political rewards of public outrage in 2016.
Indeed, even the “short term funding” gambit seems like boob bait. Republicans are desperately afraid of being held responsible for another government shutdown if Obama...