Republicans Shift Gears on Immigration Ahead of Reform Debate with Obama

Mike Lillis, The Hill, January 25, 2013

House Republicans have reshuffled their troops ahead of a high-stakes clash with President Obama over immigration reform, leaving reform advocates with a new glimmer of hope that an elusive resolution to the thorny issue is within grasp this year.

For years, conservative opponents of comprehensive immigration reform have fought successfully against efforts to overhaul the system, particularly as it pertains to the fate of the nation’s estimated 12 million illegal immigrants.

Yet even as the GOP conference has shifted to the right, there’s a growing chorus of Republicans projecting a softer position on the “amnesty” issue—particularly since the party was walloped by Hispanic voters at the polls in November. And a number of those voices are in new positions of power that put them at the front lines of the coming immigration reform debate.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), for instance, is the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s Immigration subpanel. While Gowdy has not made immigration a focus of his two years on Capitol Hill—most often toeing the party line without fanfare—he recently rejected the notion that the government should round up and deport the millions of illegal immigrants living in the country.

{snip}

Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas), the new vice chairman of the Immigration subcommittee, has also expressed a new openness to reform, announcing his support last month for a guest-worker program that drew immediate fire from conservative groups that consider it amnesty.

“It’s time for Republicans to take the lead on immigration reform,” Poe wrote in a Politico op-ed.

In another shift, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who is among Congress’s most fervent opponents of “amnesty” provisions, lost his leadership spot on the Immigration subcommittee this year, with both Gowdy and Poe moving ahead of him.

Lynn Tramonte, deputy director of America’s Voice, a group that advocates for comprehensive immigration reform, said King’s demotion is a clear sign that GOP leaders view his hardline position—and often controversial statements—as a political liability that undermines the party’s effort to attract more Hispanic voters.

{snip}

Still another immigration hardliner, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), also has less power to control the debate this year. The chairman of the full Judiciary Committee for the last four years, Smith was replaced this Congress by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), whose background is in immigration law.

When Smith headed the committee, Tramonte said, everyone knew “he wasn’t going to move anything beyond enforcement measures.” With the new cast of characters in place, “it’s an open question,” she said.

{snip}

Rosemary Jenks, director of government relations at NumbersUSA, which advocates for tougher immigration laws, characterized Goodlatte as a “very solid, pro-enforcement” voice who picked “very solid, pro-enforcement” lawmakers to represent his Immigration subcommittee.

“There’s not a chance the House will introduce or move a comprehensive bill,” Jenks said Thursday in a phone interview. “Congress has tried comprehensive reform. It didn’t work in 2007. It’s not going to work this time around.”

{snip}

Obama has made immigration reform a top priority of 2013, and Congress is lining up behind that effort. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has said he’ll hold hearings on the issue in February. And Goodlatte’s House panel has slated a hearing for early next month, according to a GOP aide briefed on the schedule.

“We are a nation of immigrants and our immigration system has contributed to the greatness of the United States,” Goodlatte said Thursday in an email. “However, we are also a nation of laws. It is clear that our immigration system is in desperate need of repair and is not working as efficiently and fairly as it should be.”

{snip}

Not that anyone thinks reaching a bipartisan consensus will be easy. Indeed, one big sticking point seems to be that Obama and the Democrats want comprehensive reforms, while most Republicans favor a piecemeal approach.

Highlighting another hurdle, Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho), a member of the House Immigration subcommittee who’s positioning himself as a GOP point man on the issue, says he’s opposed to any “amnesty” provisions for those now in the country illegally.

Still, in a statement that would hearten reform advocates, a Labrador spokesman said Thursday that, taken on the whole, the Tea Party favorite is much closer to Luis Gutierrez on immigration than he is to Lamar Smith.

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • Yes, John Boehner can stack all these leadership positions with his open borders cronies. But the fact of the matter is any legislation that passes the House still must get 218 votes. Most House Republicans won’t vote for anything that smells like amnesty or open borders, and many House Democrats won’t vote for any Republican amnesty-lite plans out of pure partisan jealousy.

    • The__Bobster

      Since almost all of the Dems take marching orders from Nazi Botoxi, it won’t take many Republican turncoats to swing the vote in favor of the invaders. Look for them among the cheap labor cohort that Sheldon Adelson likes to bribe.

      • The__Bobster

        The usual suspects are currently conspiring to betray Traditional Americans.

        From the Washington Post:

        Senators nearing agreement on broad immigration reform proposal

        By Rosalind S. Helderman and David Nakamura, Friday, January 25, 9:36 AM

        A working group of senators from both parties is nearing agreement on broad
        principles for overhauling the nation’s immigration laws, representing the most
        substantive bipartisan effort toward comprehensive legislation in years.

        The six members have met quietly since the November election, most recently
        on Wednesday. Congressional aides stressed there is not yet final agreement, but they have eyed next Friday as a target date for a possible public announcement.

        The talks mark the most in-depth negotiations involving members of both
        parties since a similar effort broke down in 2010 without producing a bill.

        “We have basic agreement on many of the core principles,” Senate
        Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Chiapas), a member of the group, said this week.

        “Now we have to draft it. It takes time.”

        “The group we’ve been meeting with — and it’s equal number of Democrats and Republicans — we’re real close,” added Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-Israel), another member of the group.

        … “What has been absent in the time [since] he put principles forward is a
        willingness by Republicans to move forward with comprehensive immigration
        reform,” White House press secretary Jay Blarney said Friday. “He hopes that
        dynamic has changed and there are indications what was once a bipartisan effort to push forward. . .will again be a bipartisan effort to do so.”

        Past efforts begun amid similarly high hopes have sputtered. But members of
        both parties increasingly see changes to the nation’s troubled immigration
        system as an area most likely to draw bipartisan agreement at a time when
        Congress is deeply divided on gun control, spending and taxes.

        The optimism is spurred by the sense that the political dynamics have shifted
        markedly since the last two significant bipartisan efforts failed. In 2007, a
        bill crafted in the Senate died after failing to win support of 60 members
        despite backing from then-president George W. Bush. Many Republicans, and some centrist Democrats, opposed that effort because it offered a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

        In 2010, extended negotiations between Schumer and Sen. Lindsey O. Graham
        (Scalawag-S.C.) broke down without producing legislation.

        Sen. John McCain (RINO-Ariz.), a veteran of the 2007 effort who is part of the
        current working group, said Republican attitudes have dramatically shifted since
        the party’s defeat at the polls in November. Obama won more than 70 percent of
        the vote among Latinos and Asians, and a growing number of GOP leaders believe action on immigration is necessary to expand the party’s appeal to minority groups. …

        Also included in the new Senate group are Schumer, who chairs the key Senate
        subcommittee where legislative action will begin; Graham; Robert Pumpkinhead Menendez (Pervert-N.J.); and Marco Rubio (Reconquista-Fla.). Two others, Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.), have also been involved in some talks.

        Their timetable would aim for a bill to be written by March or April and
        potentially considered for final passage in the Senate as early as the summer.
        Proponents believe adoption in the GOP-held House would be made easier with a strong bipartisan vote in the Senate.

        The working group’s principles would address stricter border control, better
        employer verification of workers’ immigration status, new visas for temporary
        agriculture workers and expanding the number of visas available for skilled
        engineers. They would also include a call to help young people who were brought to the country illegally as children by their parents become citizens and to normalize the status of the nation’s 11 million illegal immigrants.

        But obstacles abound. For instance, Rubio has said he believes immigrants who
        came to the country illegally should be able to earn a work permit. But he has
        said they should be required to seek citizenship through existing avenues, and
        only after those who have come to the country legally.

        Democrats and immigration advocates fear that approach could result in
        wait-times stretching for decades, creating a class of permanent legal residents
        for whom the benefits of citizenship appear unattainable. They have pushed to
        create new pathways to citizenship specifically available to those who achieve
        legal residency as part a reform effort.

        It is not yet clear if the Senate group will endorse a mechanism allowing
        such people to eventually become citizens — something Obama is expected to
        champion. Schumer said it would be “relatively detailed,” but would not “get
        down into the weeds.”

        A source close to Rubio said he joined the group in December at the request
        of other members only after they agreed their effort would line up with his own
        principles for reform, which he outlined in an interview with the Wall Street
        Journal three weeks ago.

        His ideas have since been embraced by conservatives, including some longtime
        foes of providing legal status to those who have come to the country
        illegally.

        As a possible 2016 presidential contender widely trusted on the right, Rubio’s support could be key to moving the bipartisan effort.

        And while Rubio and other Republicans have said they would prefer to split up
        a comprehensive immigration proposal into smaller bills that would be voted on
        separately, the White House will pursue comprehensive legislation that seeks to
        reform the process in a single bill.

        “I doubt if there will be a macro, comprehensive bill,” said Sen. Johnny
        Isakson (R-Ga.), who supported the 2007 effort. “Anytime a bill’s more than 500
        pages, people start getting suspicious. If it’s 2,000 pages, they go berserk.”

        But in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on Friday, Republican Jeb Bush,
        the former Florida governor, strongly supports a single comprehensive bill,
        writing that “Congress should avoid quick fixes.”

        Schumer said Friday that a single package will be key for passage. “We’ll not
        get it done in pieces,” he said. “Every time you do a piece, everyone says what
        about my piece and you get more people opposing it.” …

        “The president needs to lead, and then the Republicans have a choice: Are
        they going to do what they did in the last term and just be obstructionists?”
        said Eliseo Medina, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International
        Union, which spent millions recruiting new Hispanic voters this year. “Well,
        that didn’t work too well in November. Do the Republicans want the president not
        to get the credit? The best way to share the credit is for them to step up and
        engage and act together with the president. But it’s their choice.”

        • The GOP is committing suicide. But, I couldn’t care less about their self-destruction. What ails me is seeing that my country is going to be destroyed in the process.

    • We don’t have the resources to take care of our own citizens, so why in the f**k should anyone think we’ve got the resources to take care of another country’s poor and destitute?
      Americans are being told to embrace austerity, and still our “leaders” are being prepared to add tens of millions of third worlders to the welfare roles. Why in the hell would any principled conservative continue to support a party, the GOP, that sells itself out for political gain. If the GOP had been the party of the American middle class, it would have been in good shape now. Instead it became the Bush party of Wall Street fat cats, exporting jobs and signing on to whatever war the neocons wanted.
      If the GOP wants to come back, it needs to become again the party of the middle class. If it becomes the democrat-lite party, which is where it appears to be headed, it will help amnesty tens of millions of illegal aliens and succesfully alienate what’s left of its base and win tens of millions of new voters for the dems. It’s not for nothing they’re called the stupid party, and yet they can’t seem to see their way out.
      Pitiful.

    • I still remember the summer of 2007 when we melted down the switchboard on Capitol Hill. The a**hat dubyah **blech**, who tried to ram through amnesty twice, was so po’ed that he got drunk in Tokyo and had to cancel his dinner with the Japanese prime minister.

      When dubyah urinated away the last of his political capital on something as hare-brained as amnesty for illegal aliens, it was then I knew without question he was/is a very sick man.

      • The version I buy is that with the blue wave of 2006, and Nancy Pelosi becoming Speaker, and Harry Reid becoming Senate Majority Leader, it “freed” Bush to become the open borders and amnesty freak that he was all along, (or so he thought). That and from the day, he became a de facto Democrat. Which is why I count January 3, 2007, not January 20, 2009, as the day we fell off the fiscal cliff. Numbers demonstrate it.

  • Enar_Larsson

    —“It is clear that our immigration system is in desperate need of repair
    and is not working as efficiently and fairly as it should be.”—

    I have yet to hear anyone even attempt to articulate what exactly it is that’s so desperately broken about our system. I constantly hear that it’s broken that it needs to be reformed, etc. and Republicans have never challenged that. So what is it that’s wrong? We are aren’t allowing enough non-whites in? We have rules on the books that aren’t being enforced?

    • Greg Thomas

      The only thing “broken” is our will to enforce immigration laws as well as defend our sovereignty.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    “Obama has made immigration reform a top priority of 2013, and Congress is lining up behind that effort. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has said he’ll hold hearings on the issue in February.”

    ====

    To underscore how radically unqualified Patrick Leahy, a senator from a New England state like Vermont, is to set immigration policy for southern and western states that have been inundated with diversity, consider these stats on Vermont Demographics from the Census Bureau:

    White persons, percent, 2011 95.5%

    Black persons, percent, 2011 1.1%

    Asian persons, percent, 2011 1.4%

    Persons of Hispanic or Latino Origin, percent, 2011 1.6%

    That’s ALL — apart from news media/entertainment media pap — most Vermonters know about diversity.

    • bigone4u

      All roads lead to Vermont. That’s what I plan to tell my Hispanic compadres. Vermont, the land of milk and honey it is.

      • La tierra de leche y miel.

  • Barrack Osama

    Even if there’s no amnesty, the result will probably be the same. A bunch of latinos will get in because no one in a leadership position is doing anything about it, and they outbreed whites. Eventually, the country balkanizes. Same result, just takes longer. I don’t really care anymore. All I care about is raising racial awareness amongst whites.

  • bigone4u

    My immigration reform plan is simple:
    1. Reduce all legal immigration to zero.
    2. Do what it takes to reduce illegal immigration to zero.
    3. Over a five year period, kick out all illegal immigrants.
    4. Encourage legal immigrants to return to the land of their births, such as with cash payments from the US Treasury.
    I know what that makes me: Racist, right? Guess what? I don’t care.

    • UK Expat

      As a legal immigrant, I comment that since legal immigration is reciprocal in terms of numbers (for Western Europe, where I am from), that would be a zero sum game. Also, I am now married to a US citizen, so what to do? I came here with a Ph.D. from an Ivy equivalent in the natural sciences … actually because a job fell through at the last minute and I thought what the heck … I tried the US and fell in love with the South (I tried a couple of other regions too … CA was a shock!).

      Illegal immigration is a problem for both the US and Western Europe … my home, England, is falling apart because of it and so is the US. It certainly does not make one racist to want to keep the structure, traditions, essence of the society in which they live, and I do not understand why the leaders see it as advantageous for them to promote illegal immigration, unless it results in a benefit to the elite (albeit for the short term).

    • Katherine McChesney

      I support that 100%. I’m for deporting them especially if they commit a crime. We all know that Mexico released criminals from their prisons and those have entered the U.S. illegally. They are also bringing diseases like Chagas disease, tuberculosis, leprosy, whooping cough, polio among others.

      I agree with you don’t care if I’m called a racist.

  • JohnEngelman

    Years ago I read a column by Thomas Sowell that said that Hispanics who vote Republican do so for different reasons than other Hispanics vote Democrat, and that the Republican Party should find out what those reasons are and give Hispanic Republicans more reason to vote Republican.

    There are Hispanics whose social conservatism extends beyond hostility toward homosexuals. They attend church regularly. They are worried about crime. They don’t want their daughters to get pregnant before they get married. They came to this country legally and do not want those who came illegally to be rewarded with amnesty.

    • George White

      Hispanics HATE the GOP and they HATE white people. How do I know? Because I’ve worked in the Latino community for 25 years. They will NEVER vote GOP, not only for the two reasons I just gave you, but they want to continue to get the free stuff that the DEMS always deliver. There is no way that the GOP can out spend the DEMS in terms of giveaways. Forget about it. I know many many Latinos, and not ONE of them is against amnesty. Not one. They stick together like glue. If the GOP agrees to amnesty, it will absolutely be the end of the GOP, period. Not only will those 12 million plus freeloaders vote Democratic, but the millions of angry cheated whites will leave the GOP, never to return. Count me in that group.

      • JohnEngelman

        The Hispanics I know like me.

        • George White

          Your comments are ridiculous. We’re not talking about individuals, but GROUP behavior. As a GROUP, they are generally low IQ peasants and they want free stuff. That’s the awful and clear truth of the matter. They have imaginary historical grievances against us. I hear this crap on a DAILY basis. I “took their land away from them.” They claim that they are “indigenous” and that I should learn spanish or go back to Europe. And the thing is, they’re NOT KIDDING. They are arrogant beyond the imagination. Go to youtube and check out some videos of Latino activists in California, the Brown Berets, LaRaza, Mecha, etc., they are truly hate filled anti-white bigots. They make the Klan look like Boy Scouts, and they have big NUMBERS. You can’t understand until you’re in a situation where you are the single and only white person and everyone else is non-white. In such a situation, the non-whites will choose to gang up against the white person every time, without mercy. I have notebooks FILLED with stories of daily abuse as a white minority in Los Angeles. The rest of America has no idea what they are in for if we don’t get this under control very soon. I had a student walk into a classroom the other day, took one look at me and said, “After what your people have done to my people, i shouldn’t even let you live.” THAT is what they are thinking. I’m the canary in the coalmine for white people. We’re headed for extinction like the whites in South Africa if we don’t TAKE A STAND NOW.

          • Nathanwartooth

            Great post! You should start a blog and post the stories that you have written down. I would love to read them.

          • liberalsuck

            It won’t wake up my naive white friends–both liberals and conservatives–who live in white towns and white states and only have dealt with the token black or mexican growing up. They think, “Oh, this one black guy I know is sooooo nice” or “Oh, there are some hispanics that work at my job here and they are really nice.” I say, “You are judging them living in a predominately white conservative environment where they fear the conservative good ole’ boys might be packing a shotgun in their truck or a pistol in their pocket. Go to places even in this country where they are the majority and run things. You won’t have the same white guilt and compassion for them.” I should know. I used to be one of those naive, self-hating whites a few years ago.

          • liberalsuck

            In Mexico, there is a white minority population there that, despite being unarmed and being less than 10% of their population, the Mestizos can’t overthrow them. How then do these Hispanic bigots plan on overthrowing a larger, well armed and more pissed off white population here that is just about this…close…to…snapping? Not only that, but the blacks and Mexicans are killing each other. The Mexicans, if they do take back California, will have to fight the Chinese for it as well. No race is going to take over this country, at least not completely. We will all be fighting with each other and/or break off into separate nations.

          • anarchyst

            Hopefully, some day Mr Engelmam will be a recipient of the rage that the browns and the blacks have for us whites. Whether that will be enough to “reeducate” him will remain to be seen . . .

          • Katherine McChesney

            When I lived in Santa Monica, LaRaza in San Diego were claiming they’d ‘kill a white a day’.

            BTW, I’m actually OlderWoman. I don’t know why this alternative i.d. keeps cropping up when I have to sign in to Discus. Hopefully, I’ll figure out a way to change back to my original i.d.

        • George White

          Go to youtube and do a search for the mexicans marching/protesing on Cinco DeMayo, etc., HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF THEM, demanding their “rights” while waving mexican flags. It’s beyond belief. I’m in situations daily where I look around and I feel like I’m in a foreign country. I feel like I’m in Tijuana. I want out desperately but I’m not in the position to make a move as yet. I’m not saying that I hate them. I don’t hate anybody. But they are TOO MANY OF THEM and they have TAKEN OVER. it’s wrong on so many levels. I don’t want to live in mexico. i don’t want my country turning into mexico. It’s ludicrous. It’s hard to believe that our government has allowed this to happen. it’s an outrage and it makes me sick to my stomach.

          • anonymous

            When are most white men going to physically and violently revolt over all of the BS going on right now? They are being taxed to death. They are supporting people here and abroad who hate us and want us dead. They are having their rights taken away everyday. When and what will it take to light a hot fire underneath millions upon millions of white people’s butts to get them to take action?

        • Michael_C_Scott

          Move to Mexico.

        • Sherman_McCoy

          Now THERE’s a surprise!

        • They say they like you.

        • liberalsuck

          A bee once got close to me and didn’t sting me, too.

        • David Ashton

          Chinese, Vietnamese, Zionists, Hispanics…how endless is the list?

          • JohnEngelman

            The most fascinating friend I ever had in my life was a black college professor who taught at Howard University. I have been out of touch with him for years. If he reads this, I hope he contacts me.

      • Greg Thomas

        12 million? More like 30 million. We have 10 million alone in California.

      • Liberalsuck

        I will never respect people who break in here illegally, who won’t speak English, who I have to pay their bills for with my taxes, who tell me they’re going to take over my country and then call me a racist. F–k that!

    • The__Bobster

      There are Hispanics whose social conservatism extends beyond hostility toward homosexuals.
      __________

      Thanks for the “helpful” advice. Your conservative Hispanics are less than 30% of the Hispanic voters. Thus it makes little sense to bring in more of them. It reminds me of the money-losing bakery that wanted to increase output to make up the loss in volume.

      ____________________

      Do We Need More Hispanics?

      By Jared Taylor on January 10, 2007 at 1:00am

      Hispanics who are in the country legally and can get welfare and go on unemployment seem to lose their storied willingness to take any available job. In 2004, for example, Hispanics were about 50 percent more likely to be unemployed than whites,[7] and in the same year, fully half of all Hispanic households used at least one form of welfare, compared to 47 percent of blacks and 18 percent of whites.[8]

      Hispanics are a high-crime population second only to blacks. They are 2.3 times more likely to be in prison than whites (blacks are 6.8 times more likely), and are four times more likely than whites to commit murder, robbery or assault.[9] Given that Mexico is our largest supplier of marijuana and cocaine, and our second-largest supplier of heroin,[10] it is no surprise that Hispanics are nearly six times more likely than whites to be locked up for drug offenses. These problems are sure to get worse: Hispanics are no less than 19 times more likely than whites to be members of youth gangs (blacks are 18 times more likely).[11]

      Hispanics have a reputation for “family values.” But one wonders why. Their illegitimacy rate is 45 percent—nearly double the white rate but lower than the 69 percent rate for blacks. Hispanic women are 2.7 times more likely than white women to have abortions,[12] and are slightly more likely to get a divorce.[13] Hispanics are also much more likely than whites to beat women. One study found Hispanic women are nine times more likely than white women to report domestic violence.[14]

      Of all the major population groups, Hispanics are least likely to have medical insurance: 33 percent as opposed to 11 percent for whites and 20 percent for blacks.[15] The majority of immigrants from Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala have no insurance, which means they get treatment at public expense. They avoid routine care and often show up only when they have reached the point they need expensive treatment.[16]

      Hispanics are three times more likely than whites to die of AIDS, and four times more likely to die of tuberculosis.[17] Illegal immigrants come to America without health screening, and some bring diseases we thought we had eradicated: polio, typhoid, tuberculosis, plague, leprosy, and dysentery.[18] Immigrants—probably Hispanic—brought bedbugs back to New York City.[19]

    • Sherman_McCoy

      They are Cubans who applaud the GOP’s traditional stand against the Castro regime. That’s about it.

      • anonymous

        Those Cubans might even look white, but they hate whites. Kind of like the other people who are from the ‘J’ group that we can’t mention on here.

  • Greg Thomas

    Why is enforcing our immigration laws and being against those who violated our laws as well as sovereignty a “thorny issue?”

    • Because no one in Washington has any balls…or principles. Washington is the biggest obstacle toward citizens solving their country’s problems.

      • It’s now the richest metro area in the country. A literal boom town because they have tax collectors with really big guns, and for awhile, a good enough credit rating. Nothing more. And the highest rate of consumption of bottles of wine that cost at least $100 of any metro area in the country.

        • Seeing the arrogance of Washington, I can no longer find any good reason to oppose secession.

    • Bill

      Because Dems want them here to replace whites in the voting booths. And Republicans want them here (illegals) because the Chamber of Commerce wants cheap slave labor rather than white Americans.

  • The GOP is again going to throw its base under the bus. With an amnesty of tens of millions of illegal aliens, they’re going to further alienate their base and win for the democrats millions of new voters.

    If they really care about government spending, they’d oppose bringing in millions of people most of whom will be dependent on government and whose relatives will be dependent on government when we bring them into this country.

    We don’t need any g__damn immigration reform. We need to enforce the f***ing laws we already have on the books. What part of that don’t they understand?

  • shattered2012

    If there’s no difference between the parties, and both are bad, why vote for them?

  • ATBOTL

    I notice that National Review Online is trying really hard to ignore immigration right now. They have noting about it on their front page among dozens and dozens of articles.

  • mobilebay

    How many Latinos will it take to turn this country into Los Estados Unidos?

  • scutum

    I see the hand of John Boehner here. Stack all the committees with pro open borders Republicans to guarantee the results the Republican establishment wants. It’s informative that the committeee putting to gether this plan is composed of Amnesty John McCain, Jeff (Open Borders) Flake, and Marco Rubio who need no intruduction. This country is finished and I urge all of you to make sure that your sons and now your daughters do not join the armed forces or fight for this corrupt Government. Wait until the country breaks up, which it surely will. That will be the time to prepare to fight for hearth and home.

  • Katherine McChesney

    Wonder when this continent will become the North America Union and begin using the Amero? After the crash? Canadas borders aren’t yet open. I understand from a friend she was required to present her passport when entering Canada.

  • Leon Haller

    We had all better stop complaining on the ‘net, and start contacting our congressmen to voice our opposition to ANY amnesty – or our cause and country are permanently finished. Then we will have to switch to the fight for secession and racial sovereignty (what we want anyway, but getting there will be much harder when negotiating with another 30 MILLION amnestied illegals, plus – what? – 100 MILLION relatives brought in as “reunified” family members).

  • At this very moment there is a sharp increase in the numbers of Central Americans working their way through Mexico and on their way here now.

    The “drug war” has turned their countries into chaos.

    This migration is just getting started and is expected to send several million more before it is over. Will they be included in this amnesty or in the next amnesty? Will they vote Democrat or Republican?