Monday, January 28, 2013

Amnesty redux

Today, in tandem with the legislative push for open borders, NPR ran a segment on the Dillingham Commission that, in 1911, found that immigration into the US from northwestern Europe was preferable toimmigration from southern and eastern Europe. It served as a segue into how it is illegitimate to empirically and clinically track and measure differences in tendencies and behaviors of various population groups. Reporter Audie Cornish quoted a professor of sociology who "studies the immigrant experience". Says one professor Alba:
If we could, if you will, rank groups in terms of their desirability, in terms of their ability to assimilate--that kind of thinking is still present. ... [The Dillingham Commission] was overtly racist. There can be little question about the importance of scientific racism in the early twentieth century and the degree to which it shaped the thinking that went into the Dillingham commission report. And we are not as racist today, but that doesn't mean that we are today altogether free of this thinking that some immigrant groups are superior to other immigrant groups."
Census data make it quite easy to rank immigrant groups into the US (see here and here). That Alba and others like him would rather plug their ears, cover their eyes, and reminisce about the stories their grandparents told them about Ellis Island than face reality doesn't change this.

Incidentally, isn't it just wonderful how there is always a bipartisan gang of congress critters glowing eagerly in the limelight as they wait to introduce amnesty X.0? Let's take a look at the lifetime immigration grade cards that NumbersUSA gives members of the sensible, even-keeled, putatively middle-of-the-road party of amnesty-pushers this time around:

John McCain, AZ (R) -- D
Marco Rubio, FL (R) -- C-
Jeff Flake, AZ (R) -- C
Lindsey Graham, SC (R) -- C
Michael Bennet, CO (D) -- F-
Dick Durbin, IL (D) -- F
Robert Menendez, NJ (D) -- F-
Charles Schumer, NY (D) -- F

The group gets an F+. Congress as a whole earns a C. Not one of the eight are to the restrictionist side of the Congressional center, while six of eight are on the open borders side of the spectrum. When Lindsey Graham and Jeff Flake are your immigration hard-liners, you know you have trouble.

Having grown wary of this seemingly perennial amnesty push, I was at risk of apathy this time around, but tripe like the NPR segment has prodded me into action. I've contacted both my senators and my house member expressing my opposition to 'comprehensive' immigration reform. Pithily, I stated that unemployment is high, the need for low-skilled labor has never been lower, and a path to citizenship is a path to more Democratic voters (all three of my representatives are Republicans) with bastard children in one hand while the other hand stretches out to Uncle Sam.

If you're of a similar mind, please do the same. We've risen up and body-slammed the Establishment before. Let's do it again.


boo said...

There already is a de facto amnesty going on right now since we don't heavily enforce our immigration laws except for illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes or for ones that are caught illegally crossing the US-Mexico border. The 11 million they are talking about legalizing are already here.

I guess we should fight against amnesty to prevent them from voting, but that seems like the only real reason to fight amnesty at this point.

bdoran said...

Perhaps the answer is to harness the rising power of Law Enforcement Nullification - a small part of which openly nullifies the attempted overturning of the 2d Amendment NOW, this happens before us Gentlemen - a larger part I'm certain nullify in practice.

If you know anyone in Law Enforcement they are not fans of current immigration policies, they have to face the consequences.

Work with what you have. The above is a great thing to have...

A. Carrick Bend said...

How did my senior senator from the great state of South Carolina, Lindsey Graham, rate a C? He is, on his best day, an F.

Ed Tom Kowalsky said...

Why do we waste our time and effort attempting to preserve a viable America? This country is DONE, folks. Kaput. Finito. The only solution is secession. This, I aver, is where we must focus our resources, intellectual and otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Can somebody recommend a pre-written letter I can use to put in my email to my reps?

Anonymous said...


I recommend using the and websites to easily contact your representatives using customizable, pre-written messages on immigration matters. They also provide phone numbers and a prepared script to use when calling. You can also sign up for alerts and updates on upcoming legislation.

Numbers USA


Californians For Population Stabilization (Home Page) (the Take Action page)

Anonymous said...

If you want some proof that illegal immigration is not a victimless crime you can also check out:

Scroll through the Crime Victims section to view a growing list of citizens killed by illegals. Every one of those deaths was preventable had the government enforced the law.

One of the most egregious examples of how government’s refusal to enforce the law meant terror and death for its citizens is the case of John Lee Malvo – one of the D.C. snipers.

“…Malvo was a foreign national who had been apprehended the previous year. As a stowaway, he was required by law to be immediately deported back to his home country. Instead, the INS overrode the Border Patrol’s designation and released John Lee Malvo upon the unsuspecting American public. Had immigration law been followed by the INS, there would have been no two-man hit team and it is likely that there would have been no devastating series of murders.”

Anonymous said...

My sense is that European peoples cannot have relative increase in times of plenty.

Modern civilization must literally fall for European peoples to have relative increase.

Hunger must return to the world such that people live and die by their wits.

Do the elites wish to break civilization itself? Because I do believe its working...

Noah172 said...

I told my Representative in person; he had a meet-and-greet in the district. He's got an A from NumbersUSA anyway, so it was more of an "attaboy" than "change your mind," but if we don't keep up the pressure, even on the ones with good records, we'll lose this one.

Audacious Epigone said...

A. Carrick Bend,

Allow that to inform you as to just how bad the rest of this 'bipartisan' group of eight is.

Dan said...

I wrote letters to every single Democratic senator and every single Democratic representative.

The Undiscovered Jew said...

I'll cross post here the comment I just left on the "Lion's" new blog:

Romney lost because the absolute number of Republicans actually fell compared to 2008. And 2008 was also a low GOP turnout election. Mitt wound up with more overall votes than McCain only because Romney, based on CNN exit polls, won the Independent vote 50-45 over Obama. McCain by contrast lost Independents by 52-44% in 2008. The result was Romney netted 2 million more Independent votes than McCain did but still lost because of an unenthusiastic base.

Based on CNN exit polls, the voter turnout model for 2012 was D 38%, I 29% and R 32%. Total vote counts came out to 129,064,662. Romney Republicans 96-3%, Independents 50-45%, and lost Democrats 92-7%.

In 2008, CNN’s voter turnout model was D 39%, I 29% and R 32%. The total vote count was 131,313,820. McCain won Republicans 90-10%, lost Independents 44-52%, and lost Democrats 89-10%.

The total number of Republican votes for 2012 was 41,300,692 (0.32 * 129,064,662).

The total number of Republican votes for 2008 was 42,020,422 (0.32 * 131,313,820).

Romney lost almost 800,000 Republicans compared to McCain’s already dreadful performance.

The Undiscovered Jew said...

My sense is that European peoples cannot have relative increase in times of plenty.

Sure they can. The Medieval Ages and Renaissance saw the European population rise in a time of rapidly improving wealth.

The Undiscovered Jew said...

For the record, Romney didn't deserve to have poorer Republican turnout than McCain because Mitt was the only Rockefeller Republican since Eisenhower who would have made a decent president.