Gunfight At The Immigration Reform Corral


Gather up the posse. Deputize every
able man, woman and child.

January 1 marked the first day of
the Great Immigration Reform Shootout of 2004. We aim to
round up and hogtie once and for all the traitors,
seditionists and

ethnic identity politicians
and

lobbyists
who are out to destroy the United States.

The Shootout of 2004 will be a
classic show-down between the guys wearing black hats—the

White House
, the

Congressional Hispanic Caucus
, the California State
Latino Caucus, the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund,

La Raza
, to name but a very few—against the guys in
white hats, people like you and me who want to save
America.

And (as a

Californian
I might modestly observe)

immigrant-inundated California
is once again leading
the good guys.

George W. Bush fired the first shot
on

Christmas Eve
when, through the Washington Post,
he

proclaimed
that in early January he would submit an
outline for “immigration reform” (translation:

open borders
) for Congress` consideration.

I view Bush`s brazen attack on
Americans who long for a

sensible immigration policy
as good for reform—real
reform. Everything is now unmistakably out in the open.
In an economy with

9 million unemployed Americans
and another

9 million underemployed
, Bush has the effrontery to
enthusiastically endorse a

guest worker
program.

And as his re-election bid unfolds,
Bush will be facing more bad news from the job front:


The arrogant assumption behind
Bush`s guest worker/amnesty proposal is that he`s free to
do what pleases him because all his

Democratic opponents
are on the

same open-borders page
.

In other words, the Bush is saying,
“I know you traditional Republicans don`t like
this, but so what? You`re too loyal ever to vote
Democratic.”

Bush`s analysis might be too cocky.
Voters have a third option: “Someone Who Isn`t
Either One of You.”
  (Interested readers should
go to

www.nota.org
, “Voters For None of the Above,”
for a history of the ultimate protest vote.)  Or there`s
a fourth option: stay home. As Steve Sailer has

demonstrated
, it was only high turnout among whites,
and not conversions among minorities, that won the 2002
elections for the GOP.

And if enough people—especially in a
handful of critical states—opt for that third or fourth
option, then the election outcome is a crapshoot.

Bush is betting that voters aren`t
angry or savvy enough to vote the
Someone-Who-Isn`t-Either-One-of-You ticket. But I say
Bush underestimates the popular rage.

We`re smoking mad in California,
that`s for sure. And we`re fighting back where it matters
the most—with our voices and our votes.

Watch the progress of California`s

Save Our State initiative
—a likely winner—and the $15
billion bond proposal on the March 2004 ballot—a likely
loser. Of special note is that $15 billion might be
roughly the total amount the state spends annually on
services to illegal aliens.

To be placed on the November 2004
ballot, the Save Our State initiative needs slightly more
than 500,000 signatures collected by late April—a snap in
the age of Internet downloading. And the required half a
million total is a drop in the bucket compared to the
number of outraged Californians—ten times that sum at a
minimum.

BUT the same prediction for success
cannot be made for the $15 billion bond that novice
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is banking on to
temporarily bail out California.

In December 2003, the State Senate

narrowly approved
the bond issue that would include
some spending caps. But guess what isn`t capped?
Apparently, Californians would be forced to continue to
fund

education
,

medical care
and penal system costs for illegal
aliens while adding $15 billion to its debt structure.

And, absent any mention of the
impact of illegal immigration costs, we must assume that
we`ll be asked to underwrite those expenses indefinitely.

That`s no way to balance a budget.
Just ask Gray Davis.

And guess what else? To reduce even
further the likelihood of Schwarzenegger getting his bond
dream come true, Californians will also be

asked
in March to approve a separate $14 billion
education bond issue.

Most enlightened California voters
know that new

school construction costs
correlate directly to

unchecked increases
in the illegal alien/children of
illegal alien

student population
. With California still smarting
from a depressed economy and over-taxation, I think the
school bond has the proverbial snowball`s chance.

The
entire political class will be against SOS and in favor
of the bonds. That`s a formidable force—but one that
Californians have repeatedly proved they can defeat, with
initiative votes for Official English, and against tax
monies for illegals, bilingual education and affirmative
action.

That`s why California is the immigration enthusiasts`
weak point—because we can take issues directly to the
people through the initiative process.

A Yes vote on SOS and two No votes
on $29 billion in bonds that fail to address illegal
immigration would prove that seismic pressure continues
to build for reform and against the status quo..

And what Bush or any of his
democratic opponents should realize is that every time
one of them opens his mouth in favor of illegal
immigration in any form, he loses votes. For proof, look
no further than the disastrous performance of

Cruz Bustamante
in the October 2003 Recall Election.

Reckless immigration policies have created High Noon in
America. As in the

movie of the same name
, the American public is like
Hadleyville`s fearless Marshall Will Kane. With
gunslinger Frank Miller

vowing
to take over the town with his henchmen, Kane
knows that it`s

now or never
.

With America looking down the gun
barrel of reconquista, 2004 will be the year the
white hats began to prevail.

Joe Guzzardi [email
him], an instructor in English at the Lodi
Adult School, has been writing a weekly newspaper column
since 1988. This column is exclusive to VDARE.COM.