Save Our State  

Go Back   Save Our State > Priority Topics Section > Immigration

Immigration Topics relating to the subject of US Immigration

WELCOME BACK!.............NEW EFFORTS AHEAD..........CHECK BACK SOON.........UPDATE YOUR EMAIL FOR NEW NOTIFICATIONS.........
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-09-2012, 06:19 PM
Jeanfromfillmore's Avatar
Jeanfromfillmore Jeanfromfillmore is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,287
Default NumbersUSA sees it different

From NumbersUSA

Election gave us pretty much the same players in Washington the next 2 years -- but our immigration position seems slightly improved on net

No question that the results were quite mixed for those of us desiring rational, pro-worker immigration policies. But I believe the net puts us in a somewhat stronger position the next two years than in the last two years.
Let's take a first look.
Improvements in the Senate
There were some good signs in key races of voters sticking with candidates for Congress who recognize that immigration policies have profound effects on the ability of millions of American workers to earn a liveable wage -- or even to have a job.
NEVADA: The result here may be most important because it calls into question an arguing point many pundits are trying to make this morning about the growing Hispanic vote. Nevada has a gigantic and rapidly growing Hispanic electorate and was given the choice between two sitting Members of Congress with totally different approaches on immigration and U.S. jobs.

Rep. Shelley Berkely has earned a D-minus for her preference of U.S. jobs going to illegal aliens and to additional immigrant workers.
She was going up against Dean Heller who just recently left the U.S. House upon being appointed to fill out the Senate term until this election. Heller has earned an A+ for his immigration policy preference for U.S. workers taking U.S. jobs.
Nevada chose Heller, the pro-enforcement candidate.
INDIANA: The primaries had already ensured that Indiana would improve the Senate for us. State Treasurer Richard Mourdock (R) guaranteed a positive change when he defeated long-time incumbent Sen. Richard Lugar (R) in the primary, using immigration as one of his key issues. Lugar has the worst anti-worker immigration record of Senate Republicans. Mourdock filled out our NumbersUSA survey and promised to support all of our top priorities in enforcement and in reductions in worker importation.


But this race was one in which American workers couldn't lose because the Democrats nominated Rep. Joe Donnelly, the Democrat with the third best immigration-reduction grade in all of Congress.
Donnelly's victory makes him part of our bi-partisan firewall against the massive increases in the legal foreign workforce that are favored by the Democratic Majority Leader in the Senate (Harry Reid). It is important to remember that the Dream Act amnesty was defeated in 2010 because of five Democratic Senators.
TEXAS: Ted Cruz easily won the seat long held by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who has not been terrible on immigration but is generally a wishy-washy C-Grade politician who seemed always looking for a way to undercut American workers for the sake of employers seeking to pay lower wages. The only place she was reliably good was on border issues.


But Cruz qualified as one of NumbersUSA's True Reformers, having filled out our survey pledging to work to eliminate chain migration, visa lottery and birthright citizenship for illegal aliens, while supporting mandatory E-Verify and a lot more enforcement. Cruz won a Republican primary against an establishment-backed opponent out of the George Bush mold of anti-worker immigration policies.
Out-spoken champions survive relentless targeting
Gigantic amounts of money were expended by open-borders groups to embarrass two of the most out-spoken opponents of illegal immigration. They failed.
Rep. Steve King was easily re-elected in a much-tougher re-drawn district against the wife of a popular former governor. He stands as a likely next chairman of the U.S. House immigration subcommittee and has been nearly perfect in his pro-active support for immigration policies that benefit the American worker.



Sheriff Joe was also easily re-elected in Arizona. Nobody's political scalp was more prized and sought by the open-borders advocates.
Democratic allies
Strong pro-enforcement records seemed to help Democratic incumbents in tough races. We will look to them to play important roles in bi-partisan resistance to the sweeping increases in foreign workers that Pres. Obama called for in his campaign.
In addition to the new Sen. Donnelly (the third best Democrat in Congress):
Sen. John Tester (D) of Montana won re-election in a largely Republican state. The fact that he has the best immigration-reduction grade of any Senate Democrat surely helped him



Rep. John Barrow surprised perhaps even himself by surviving once again in a highly conservative Georgia district. He has the second best Democratic immigration-reduction record in Congress.



Rep. Jim Matheson gained re-election in a tough re-drawn district over Mia Love who was something of a national celebrity candidate in the Republican Party. But Love's positions on immigration weren't clear, while Matheson's record in Congress has been improving, moving him into the fourth best Democratic immigration-reduction grade over the last four years. For example, he bucked Speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2010 and voted against the DREAM Act amnesty.
2013 Obama-Reid-Boehner Rule
vs. 2012 Obama-Reid-Boehner Rule
Obviously, the presidential race is what everybody most wants to talk about today. We have to deal with the fact that a Romney victory would have meant that the White House would have been occupied by somebody who campaigned on taking U.S. jobs away from illegal foreign visitors and giving them to unemployed Americans.
The news media almost universally called that pro-worker position "harsh." The fact that Hispanic American workers would have benefitted the most and the fastest from Romney's promise of mandatory E-Verify was obscured not only by the media's labeling it anti-Hispanic but also by Romney's failure to clearly articulate the benefits of his pro-enforcement positions.
Instead, the presidency will continue to be held by Obama, who seemed to suggest in the debates that he doesn't want any illegal foreign workers (other than dangerous criminals) to ever leave.
The federal lawsuit that NumbersUSA is funding will certainly be even more important in the coming months as the courts decide whether federal immigration agents should be required to obey orders from the Obama Administration that they disobey the immigration laws Congress has passed.
Because Obama ran on an anti-enforcement platform and Romney on a pro-enforcement platform, lots of pundits today are rushing to say that every presidential candidate in the future will have to run on a platform of opening up U.S. jobs to foreign-worker competition because nobody can win without a high percentage of the growing Hispanic vote and because Hispanics insist on open-borders policies.
This is an insult to Hispanic Americans, as well as a betrayal of all the American workers who struggle to earn decent wages and to even have a job. The fact is that in most of the 20 states with the highest Hispanic voting share, the pro-enforcement Romney did much better in 2012 than the non-enforcement GOP nominee John McCain did in 2008. (This is based on the spreads between DEM & GOP in each year.)
Obama will be entering his second term with a far smaller margin of votes than in 2008 and with less of any kind of mandate. I imagine he will be more aggressive this time in pursuing his higher-foreign-worker agenda, but he will have less to work with.
Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nevada) will still be running the Senate while Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) will still be running the House.
This is a combination that prevented legislation that would worsen immigration policies in 2011 and 2012. It also was a combination that prevented bills to improve the policies.
How they and other key congressional leaders react to various immigration initiatives will have a lot to do with how voters express themselves directly to those politicians. That will be yours and our job, and now is no time to let up. Just as for the last two years, we will have to mobilize Americans regularly and vigorously to stop this triad from imposing further harm on American workers through reckless immigration policies.
You and we have been fighting against these kinds of forces since 2001, regardless of the Party in power, and have stopped all amnesties every single year. This is no time to break the streak.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-13-2012, 06:18 PM
Don Don is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 649
Default

A huge number of states are petitioning for secession. This issue has gone mainstream.

Say Texas seceded. Texas has lots of Mexicans, but if Texas could make its own immigration laws and welfare laws, (and if its people didn't have to worry about the "civil rights" traitors in the Dept. of Justice), Texas could STOP WELFARE, PUBLIC EDUCATION, FOOD STAMPS, HEALTHCARE, etc to the parasites and what do you think they'd do then? I think many would "self-deport." You don't even have to lynch them.

Third world parasites come here for tax free under the table wages, free health care, food stamps, etc. Remember that in 1994, 60% of voters in the comparatively liberal state of California passed Prop. 187, only to be stopped by the Federal Courts. (You can't violate the "Rights" of invaders, only the rights of tax paying Americans).

Any seceded state could have its own immigration policies and depart those who didn't "self-depart" when the welfare spigot was cut off.


With foreign parasites sent packing, one way or the other, jobs would open up for Americans who pay taxes on their wages.

This would apply to any state that seceded, not just Texas. Think of the heavily white states that have fewer Mexicans and other third world takers.

More American makers. Fewer Third World Takers.

If millions of White Americans start hitting the streets and making their views on secession known, our gutless politicians should take note. White Americans still outnumber the parasites by a good amount. The Tea Party was 98% white was a good example of traditional American self-organizing. The Tea Party was a purely conservative undertaking, but the anti-immigrant movement should appeal to a fair number of white blue collar working class people who wouldn't be caught dead with the right wing Tea Party but who have been screwed by the free traders of both major parties would be motivated to join this kind of movement.

Don't laugh. Obama care is going to destroy what's left of the American economy. Today I heard that 6 million lay offs are coming. SIX MILLION!!!

American whites, as a group, own huge numbers of guns and are not likely to just starve quietly. As more whites are eating out of dumpsters and sleeping under plastic tarps, this secession movement could get traction.

Last edited by Don; 11-13-2012 at 07:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-13-2012, 07:41 PM
ilbegone's Avatar
ilbegone ilbegone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,068
Default

Quote:
A huge number of states are petitioning for secession. This issue has gone mainstream.
I knew you got a lot of your stuff from Stormfront, but the first paragraph show's you are way deluded as well.

And it suggests that if you weren't hiding in a basement somewhere there would be some nice young men in medical uniforms chasing you around with giant butterfly nets and tranquilizer laden syringes trying to get you back to wherever you escaped from.

Not a lot of voluntary "freedom of association" when you have both hands strapped behind your back, is there?
__________________
Freibier gab's gestern

Hay burros en el maiz

RAP IS TO MUSIC WHAT ETCH-A-SKETCH IS TO ART

Don't drink and post.

"A nickel will get you on the subway, but garlic will get you a seat." - Old New York Yiddish Saying

"You can observe a lot just by watching." Yogi Berra

Old journeyman commenting on young apprentices - "Think about it, these are their old days"

SOMETIMES IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

Never, ever, wear a bright colored shirt to a stand up comedy show.


Last edited by ilbegone; 11-13-2012 at 08:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright SaveOurState ©2009 - 2016 All Rights Reserved