Amnesty Bill Climbing Out Of Coffin—But We Can Slam The Lid
Earlier this week, President Bush traveled to Capitol Hill,
hat in hand, to make his case. Reporters on the scene
described the reaction to Bush`s visit as tepid, at best. But
now the same backstabbing Senators—still
convening in private—have apparently revived the bill while
to convince a rightly skeptical public that
border security will be the number one priority of any final
As I file my column, the terms of the agreement are not
completely clear. Apparently, the Senate will hear a limited
number of proposed amendments from each side. [Senators
To Revive Immigration Bill,” David Espo, Associated Press,
June 14, 2007]
VDARE.COM contributors are divided about how the S. 1348
soap opera will play out.
Peter Brimelow, writing that
“the moral of recent
immigration legislation history is that Washington`s insiders
have ways of making elected officials talk—and vote”,
warned that immigration patriots must be prepared for
legislation to pass—but that the struggle for America will then
simply be fought, and won, on another, darker, plane.
I am the in-house optimist. I am convinced that even though
the other side
is relentless in its pursuit of amnesty, only good things
can come from our back-to-back trouncings (last year`s
S. 2611 and this year, S.1348) of horrible immigration
No one can argue that popular momentum is not overwhelmingly
on our side. And we should take heart in
Steve Sailer`s blog (read it
here) pointing out that Florida`s
Martinez`s popularity has
nose-dived. Perhaps, suggests Steve, Florida residents are
less keen on amnesty than Martinez realizes.
And Utah reader Craig Russell pointed out that three Senate
Democrats who face re-election in 2008 acknowledged by their
“Nay” vote on
cloture that immigration is a huge factor in their states.
Read his letter
These examples on top of our
long string of successes are positive proof that the trend
is going our way.
The road ahead will be long and rocky. But the bad guys are
on their heels. They badly underestimate
the power of the grassroots.
California case in point:
Senator Dianne Feinstein For an old dame, she sure is
With her net worth
estimated at between $43 and $99 million, why does Feinstein
care what other people think? Feinstein is
so rich that, according to the San Francisco Chronicle,
her 347-page Senate financial disclosure statement is “nearly
the size of phone book.”[Bay
lawmakers among wealthiest |Feinstein and Pelosi continue to
top the list of the richest members of Congress, By Zachary
Cole, June 26, 2004]
talk show hosts drumming up the opposition by using this
amnesty over and over and over again. In 15 years in the
Senate, I`ve never received more
hate or more
racist phone calls and threats.” [Kennedy
Vows To Revive Measure, By Carl Hulse and Robert Pear,
New York Times, June 9, 2007)
Really? Feinstein didn`t take any phone
calls personally—you can be sure of that. And her staff, if I
understand the procedure correctly, simply lists the calls as “pro”
or “con” and tallies them up at the end of the day.
Staffers don`t make an independent analysis of the caller`s
I can`t help but wonder if Feinstein
included my call as “racist?”
When I phoned her Washington, D.C. office,
I identified myself as a California Democrat opposed to
In conclusion, I noted that many growers
simply use the same people who picked the crops last year…a
much better option than importing more
guest workers who will bump poor people
out of their jobs and who
will never go home.
(Aside: During my call, I conveniently
omitted the fact that I have never actually voted for Feinstein
and would have done so only with a pistol held to my head.)
The immigration reformers I know are much
too bright to call and make, as Feinstein called them,
threatening remarks. Hard to do as it is, we know that a
measured response to
the Senate`s treasonous behavior is better for our cause.
For sure a few hotheads also telephone.
While I wish they had minded their manners, I am nevertheless
going to rally to their defense.
Shall we say that Feinstein may have
provoked them into
In the first place, for Feinstein, a
co-author of S. 1348, to hole herself up behind locked doors
with the so-called
“Gang of 12″—12 Senators
dedicated to destroying America—to write immigration
legislation violates the concept of the U.S. Senate and the
Every Senator, especially those opposed to
open borders like
Alabama`s Jeff Sessions and others, should have the
opportunity to participate.
If the Gang of 12`s Open Borders position
popular as they claim, why did they negotiate “in
the shadows“— to borrow
an overused phrase.
committee hearings or
debates Americans, according to South Carolina Republican
Senator Jim DeMint, “…feel betrayed and violated. They
don`t trust our Congress.” [Gang
of 12 Mulls Over Immigration Bill, By Julie
Hirschfeld Davis, Washington Post,
May 24, 2007]
Secondly, as if her secrecy wouldn`t be
enough on its own to make an immigration reformer lose his cool,
just look at who Feinstein aligned herself with.
As the old saying goes, you can tell a lot about people by
the company they keep. And Feinstein is cozy with some real
Never before have we been so well positioned to win. I like
where we are. Nothing could make me trade places with the other
Joe Guzzardi [e-mail
him] is the Editor of VDARE.COM Letters to the Editor.
In addition, he is an English teacher at the Lodi Adult School and has
a weekly newspaper column since 1988. This column is exclusive