Statement from Conservative Leaders on Pending Immigration Legislation in the House of Representatives

American Conservative Union, November 5, 2013

American Principles in Action and the American Conservative Union, along with more than fifteen conservative leaders, released a statement today regarding the upcoming immigration debate. The statement reads in full:

America needs immigration reform. With over 76 million “Baby Boomers” retiring by 2030 and only 46 million Americans poised to take their place in the workforce, it’s clear we need a forward-looking market-based immigration policy which allows for a growing economy and a labor blueprint that plans for the future.

In addition, we are faced with the reality that our current immigration system is dysfunctional: it encourages illegal immigration, does not meet the labor needs of our economy and does not adequately enforce our laws or secure our borders. Conservatives support immigration reform that spurs economic growth and the creation of good jobs for Americans, protects families, promotes the patriotic assimilation of immigrants and ensures that another wave of illegal immigration does not happen again.

{snip} A conservative package of immigration bills should provide legal status to undocumented immigrants, but not a special path to citizenship; should establish market-oriented mechanisms to meet the demand our economy has for foreign workers at different levels of our labor market; and should set border security triggers that are based on precise measurements that can be verified independently.

{snip}

Signers to the letter include: Alfonso Aguilar, Executive Director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles;Jeff Bell, Policy Director of the American Principles Project; Frank Cannon, President of the American Principles Project; Al Cardenas, Chairman of the American Conservative Union; Lawson Bader of the Competitive Enterprise Institute; Brad Bailey of the Texas Immigration Solution; Diana Furchotgott-Roth of the Manhattan Institute; Ed Gillespie, Former RNC Chairman; Robert Gittleson of Conservatives for Immigration Reform; Carlos Gutierrez, Former U.S. Secretary of Commerce; Deal Hudson of the Pennsylvania Catholic Network; Niger Innis of Congress of Racial Equality; Tamar Jacoby of ImmigrationWorksUSA; Dr. Richard Land of Southern Evangelical Seminary and Bible College; Mario H. Lopez of the Hispanic Leadership Fund; Rosario Marin, Former U.S. Treasurer; Rev. Sam Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference/Hispanic Evangelical Association; and Thomas Winter of Humanevents.org.

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.
  • Jesse James

    Once again I am cranking out emails to my Republican legislators. If they want to see millions of white conservatives stay home on future election days just keep pushing this amnesty suicide.

    • Spartacus

      “Once again I am cranking out emails to my Republican legislators.”

      ———————————————————————————————————–

      If I were you, I’d be making plans to move to Craig Cobb’s little town in ND .

      • Jesse James

        Nope I was born in Georgia and I will be happy to die here. If things ever get so bad that it looks like I can’t hold my place I hope I have the time to burn it all to the ground so I don’t leave a single thing for the communist looters and the savages.

        • Spartacus

          In that case, why not do what Cobb is doing in Georgia ?

          • DonReynolds

            Even better.

    • RisingReich

      It’s stories like this that have me completely convinced you’re wasting your time with these letters, although there’s a part of me that says keep going.

      In the face of all facts, the Stupid Party STILL thinks more immigration will save them from the grave they have dug for themselves.

      Stupid is as stupid does, I suppose. Although, I think even simple Forest Gump would say, “Huh?”

      • Jesse James

        RR I am torn sometimes about the whole issue of voting and attempting to influence legislators but then what difference does it make – just a bit of lost time for me and at least I feel like I am trying to do something. Even if it does feel like “Horton Hears a Who”. I don’t think the Republican establishment thinks that immigration will save them because I don’t think that most of the consultants and political types are concerned at all with the long term. They just need to make enough money and connections to set themselves up for their own retirement. Just getting elected to the Senate sets you for life financially. Most of us understand at some level that the American two party system is an illusion, a puppet show. Play ball, be nice and you will keep getting invited to the right parties and you will be offered the opportunities that are reserved for the globalist elites highest servants.

        Both parties serve the same system, the same elite. The Republicans like McCain in the 2008 election aren’t in it to win it they are there to lose gracefully or if they screw up and win, continue to move in the same direction as a slightly more sedate speed. People like me and many my age know this deep in our bones but we just don’t want to admit it. It doesn’t fit with our childhood, small town civics classes and our memories of the Cold War, being proud and patriotic citizens of the “Free World”. We know the Republican’s can’t possibly be as stupid as they appear to be to us because we know that the yardstick that we are measuring their actions by is not the same yardstick that they are using. I am sure if we really knew their end goals we would find that their actions are perfectly logical.

      • NM156

        Wasting no time. Amnesty of one form or another has been shot down in flames by an angry public in 2001, 2006, 2007, and 2010. This year is not some magic number year for the barbarians at the gate who believe their own propaganda. The public pulls the knives out from the drawer whenever amnesty talk comes around again like a drunken lech who didn’t learn his lesson the last four times he got grabby.

      • Jefferson

        The pro-amnesty “conservative” politicians no longer care about winning elections, they just care about cheap labor.

        Don’t forget that a lot of politicians are entrepreneurial business owners who have Illegal Immigrants on their payroll.

        • DonReynolds

          There are no pro-amnesty conservative politicians.
          It is a contradiction in terms.
          Like a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

    • Sick of it

      We’re past willing to work for peanuts and have entered the ‘we’re sorry, we just don’t have enough jobs for everyone no matter how little pay you will take’ territory.

      • Jesse James

        Yes which it what makes the continued high levels of immigration, legal and illegal, both maddening and frustrating. It is so obviously bad for all current Americans – including those who have just gotten here and yet there seems to be very little that any of us can do to stop it. But we have to keep trying.

        • DonReynolds

          Surrendering to the invaders is NOT one of the choices.

  • kjh64

    “America needs immigration reform. With over 76 million “Baby Boomers” retiring by 2030 and only 46 million Americans poised to take their place in the workforce,”

    Spare me the nonsense. There are millions of Americans who are out of work or underemployed. Let’s say there are 76 million baby boomers retiring, that would leave far more than 46 million people to take their place, there would be a least four times that taking their place. This is a lie and a ploy to drive down wages. The republicans are in the pocket of big business.

    • Rhialto

      What you say is true. I can think of other reasons.
      1-Old people are healthier and can work longer. Many are doing this now to supplement their inadequate retirement income.
      2-The massive environmental destruction these immigrants will cause, even if they show the same level of environmental care as the native white population.
      3-The social disruption that these (mostly) non-Western immigrants will impose.
      4-If Americans cannot supply the brain power in specific situations, tele-outsourcing could allow the importation of this brain power without the supporting protoplasm.
      5-Automation is starting to kick in, big time, and is eliminating more jobs than it creates.

      I correlate this article with the article “Which Nations Think over the Long Term”. Massive immigration is not a long term solution to anything, except maybe the destruction of White men.

      Also, these “Conservative Leaders” strike me as just paid propagandists for the multi-Billionaires.

      • DonReynolds

        This is a PR hit piece…..casting a bunch of banditos in sombreros as somehow they are Gringo conservatives……nothing but a media event, for the Liberal press. Bet they laughed their azzes off.

      • Erasmus

        We had best start to qualify calling someone a conservative.

        Most would call Frum and Krauthammer conservative, but claiming The United States is only a propositional nation should rule out any conservative bona fides supporting a strong military usually brings. Similarly, Tamar Jacoby’s breathless panting for open borders, against the best interests of the country’s citizens, and dual loyalty should erase any misconception that she’s a conservative; and one can hardly call business leaders willing to throw the nation under the bus in search of higher profits conservative. Greedy, unscrupulous bastards is a more accurate designation for them.

      • cablegirls

        The flow of the money to the top has accelerated pedal to the metal over the past few years. Those pulling the strings in Congress — the top 10% — are doing extremely well. The richest 400 Americans have more of the money than the entire bottom half of the population. Congress has knelt to them, cutting their taxes, as if they need that, and has turned its back on the middle class. Current policy is obscene.

    • mobilebay

      Immgration reform = immigration surrender!

    • JohnEngelman

      The republicans are in the pocket of big business.

      – kjh64

      The business community has dominated the Republican Party ever since it was founded in 1854. Back then factory owners in the North wanted to outlaw slavery, so that former slaves would move north, and compete for factory jobs, lowering wages.

      • Jesse James

        Well they certainly got their wish. Though I have doubts that they actually wanted blacks to move north. If so why did so many northern states try and restrict black immigration? I believe that Oregon, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan and Illinois all placed either outright bans or strong restrictions on black immigration. Lincoln frequently openly stated that he was for free WHITE labor and did not

        • JohnEngelman

          The most important class conflict during the nineteenth century was not between workers and capitalists, or between slaves and slave owners. It was between northern factory owners and southern cotton and tobacco producers. The South produced the best cotton and tobacco at the lowest prices in the world. Plantation owners favored free trade.

          Factories in Europe produced better goods at lower prices even when the cost of shipping the goods across the Atlantic was factored in. Northern factory owners and their employees need tariffs in order to stay in business.

          One of the reasons northern factory owners wanted to free the slaves was that it would reduce the wealth, and consequently the political power of Southern plantation owners. This would make it more difficult for them to oppose tariffs.

          Tariffs were a transfer payment from the South to the North. They required Southerners to pay more for manufactured goods in order to help Northern manufacturers.

          • Jesse James

            Finally John I find that you have written an entire post with which I agree completely. Very well put and thought out, thanks.

          • JohnEngelman

            After emancipation the South still produced the best cotton and tobacco in the world at the lowest prices. Free Negro sharecroppers worked harder than slaves because they shared in the profits. Nevertheless, it was not possible for the South to reduce tariffs until the Roosevelt administration.

          • Jesse James

            I was reading some old newspapers while doing some research in Edgefield SC roughly the period between the 1880s and the 1920s. What surprised me was the bitterness of some of the white editorials addressing the issue of blacks leaving the South in general and Edgefield county in particular. One that I remember very clearly accused the blacks of being ungrateful for how the whites kept them from starving at the end of the Civil War. What was going on was that the whites still owned much of the land but didn’t have the labor to work it to its greatest yield. This was of course before mechanized tractors and other machinery had reduced the need for physical labor. It was this mismatch between ownership of the land and the labor to work it that resulted in the creation of sharecropping and tenant farming. Southern land owners were desperate to keep the blacks on the land during that time period.

          • DonReynolds

            Those who wanted to abolish slavery in the pre-Civil War period were Abolitionists and they were a tiny minority that virtually everyone else despised and thought were looney. They were the “radical liberals” of their time. Think John Brown. When Lincoln announced the Emancipation Proclamation, several regiments of Union troops quit the war and went home. They were willing to fight to preserve the Union, but utterly refused to fight to free the Negro.

          • JohnEngelman

            The abolitionists wanted to free the slaves for moral reasons. Factory owners wanted to free the slaves for economic reasons.

            Until the Civil War became a war to end slavery the Confederacy had the better argument. Nothing in the Constitution said that states could not leave the United States if they wanted to.

          • rowingfool

            While it may be true that “Nothing in the Constitution said that states could not leave the United States if they wanted to.”, this is not the whole story.

            Much of the language and reasoning of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were borrowed directly from the writings of John Locke e.g. “life, liberty and property” in Locke became “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”.

            Both Locke and the founders imagined that the State was established by the Social Contract wherein men (generic) voluntarily bonded together in order to secure their peace and tranquility. The role of government was to guarantee those rights through legislation and the system of justice. The mechanism for expressing the will of the people was majority vote. This was the prevailing doctrine and they could imagine no other way to reconcile disparate factions. Since the South was a minority and new immigrants settled primarily in the North, it was likely that the South would never legally be able to vote itself out of the Union.

          • DonReynolds

            The exact language, taken from the Declaration of Independence is not ambiguous:

            “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

          • rowingfool

            Correct Don. I’m trying to point out that the mechanism for expressing the “consent of the governed” was majority vote. Locke stated this explicitly. And I think I’m on firm ground when I assert that the southern leaders perceived that they would never attain a majority in Congress. Thus, in their minds, they had no alternative but to succeed.

            I’m neither condemning nor condoning their behavior. What I feel doesn’t count. I’m just trying to get it right.

          • DonReynolds

            I believe you are willfully ignoring all of the compromises and agreements made in American pre-Civil War history, which preserved the balance of power in the central government, meaning no section….North or South…..would dominate the other. (The Missouri Compromise of 1820 banned slavery from most of the Louisiana Purchase. The Compromise of 1850, while less than perfect, kept the peace for a decade, after a circus of proposals and counter-proposals regarding territories formerly claimed by Mexico, that lasted four years.)
            Due to the failure of the Democrat party in 1860 to run a single candidate for president, the vote was so fragmented that Lincoln was elected with 39.7% of the popular vote (!) and his purpose was to upset the balance of power in the central government…..so that the North would forever dominate the South. So no, this was not about the South ever having control of the Federal government, this was about the end of repeated agreements that North and South would have a balance of power in Washington.

          • rowingfool

            Today’s intellectuals have embraced the “fairness” doctrines formulated by John Rawls. Rawls imagines a hypothetical scenario in which individuals choose freedom and restrictions on inequality based upon their anticipation of rewards and disadvantages accruing to them in a sort of blind guessing game the outcome of which is not apparent to any of the participants. Part of his motives for coming up with this was dissatisfaction with Locke’s notion of majority rule. Rawls wanted to put the onus of choice on the individual apart from any attachments he may have had to any group, whether religious, ethnic, or nationality. In other words, a group was to neither to benefit nor suffer from its position in society.

            This type of thinking is an extension of Game Theory into political philosophy. The suppositions are that people choose as individuals and that they choose rationally to advance their self interest.

            Most of the views held by people who come to this site, who read and comment here hold views that are antithetical to this radical individualism. People here (and at related sites like the The Occicental Observer) argue that individuals work to optimize group interests and not only their own and that the group works through the individual to perpetuate its larger interests. This is not just an accurate description, but a desired end. Anthropology and sociobiology support this point of view. Groups of primates fight each other to secure territory and retain access to the food that comes with it. Questions about open borders and such are not just issues pertaining to the “Rights of Man” in the abstract but have their roots in organic clans fighting for access to food supplies against rival clans.

            To my way of thinking, Rawls sacrifices the group’s right to survival on the altar of Duty to an abstract principle. Hobbes believed that no power on Earth or Heaven has the right to force a person to take action that will result in their own extinction. Self preservation, he held, is THE fundamental Natural Law. The same may be said of Groups. That Rawls’ formulations enjoy their current popularity is not surprising given the centrifugal tendencies operating in America today.

          • DonReynolds

            I agree that self-preservation is THE fundamental Natural Law for a society and an individual may endorse this necessity by laying down his own life in defense of that society, on behalf of his fellow countrymen, family, children, and friends.
            Had you mentioned it, I would have also agreed that an inseparable idea is self-defense, for the society and the individual, a right so universally recognized that no one would question it.
            So the question becomes, can an individual (and a society) satisfy their necessary right of self-preservation and self-defense by abandoning the places they occupy to flee from an invader?
            (This would mean running away and abandoning their homes to the foreign invaders and either become landless nomads, chased from one county and state to another, OR to push individuals (and societies) weaker than themselves (or more sparsely settled) off other lands as may be required.)
            The pacifist would say better to avoid conflict, by surrender or running away. But I would say, self-preservation is a right but not a duty. The defenders of the Alamo had a right to run away and live to fight another day…..that would be self-preservation. AND they also had a right of self-defense, and the defense of Texas against the invader. What they did was noble and no greater sacrifice could ever be asked of any men.

          • rowingfool

            Well, I believe you answered your own question in your accurate quote from the Declaration above; “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, ….”

            It may be their right, but as you say, if they don’t assert themselves, the other faction is certainly not going to back down.

            Here’s more Locke. “For the essence and union of the society consisting in having one will, the legislative, when once established by the majority, has the declaring and as it were, keeping of that will. The constitution of the legislative is the first and fundamental act of the society, whereby provision is made for the continuation of their union, under the direction of persons and bonds of laws made by persons authorized thereunto by the consent and appointment of the people.”

            “For the society can never, by the fault of another, lose the native and original right it has to preserve itself…” “To tell people they may provide for themselves by erecting a new legislative, when by oppression, artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power, their old one is gone, is only to tell them that they may expect relief when it is too late, and the evil is past cure. This is in effect no more than to bid them first be slaves, and then to take care of their liberty…..This…is rather mockery than relief and men can never be secure from tyranny if there be no means to escape it till they are perfectly under it. And therefore it is that they have not only a right to get out of it, but to PREVENT it.”

            So, he speaks about the legislature as being the one “will” of the people. This doesn’t sound like he would have supported the notion that America or any other nation could be a “proposition” nation. And if the legislature, through”artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power” no longer expresses the will of the people then they may replace it. Certainly the phrase “artifice, or being delivered over to a foreign power” bears an uncanny resemblance to the situation currently prevailing in the USA.

          • rowingfool

            Good observation. The northern factory owners lagged Europeans in quality and cost efficiency because their development had been retarded by the their status as colonies. The English would not allow them to produce finished manufactured goods in any quantities; their role was to supply England with raw materials for England’s factories. The leading lights of the northern colonies resented this and it became one of the principle reasons for the revolution.

            What many Americans don’t understand about the Revolution is that the citizens of the thirteen colonies were full British citizens and as such, expected the rights that attached to that status. Contrary to what many think, the discontent and protests preceding the open break expressed the colonist’s frustration at not being treated BRITISH enough. Initially they were not clamoring for freedom, but for equal status under the law.

        • Bossman

          The restriction was on slavery. The Union did not want to create any more slave states. Just before the Civil War, slavery was growing by leaps and bounds.

    • GeneticsareDestiny

      And even if the numbers were completely accurate, that still wouldn’t imply that we need immigrants. It would simply imply that businesses are going to have to raise wages to compete for the smaller amount of workers available.

      Ooh, what horror.

      A nice labor shortage would do the U.S. a world of good right now.

    • NM156

      Who’s gonna take care of the 30,000,000 Mexicans after their retirement? With a necessary worker-recipient ratio of 6:1 for SS/Medicare benefits, we’ll need 180,000,000 more Mexicans. GOP Inc. hasn’t noticed its hypocrisy in calling SS a Ponzi scheme while advocating for a vastly enlarged, never-ending Ponzi scheme.

      • Xerxes22

        The GOP wants to destroy Medicare and Social Security which they regard as socialist programs. They know that these third world immigrants will take far more out of these programs then they put in. It’s all part of their plan.

        • DonReynolds

          You are confused. The Democrats know that amnesty will create a permanent majority for them. It is OBAMA, not the GOP, who are determined to fundamentally change this country. The Democrat majority will never destroy Medicare or Social Security. There is no such GOP plan.

          • Xerxes22

            The Democrats may want to to fundamentally change this country but the Republicans want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. They are always talking about privatizing, reforming or fixing it. That oil driller Paul Ryan even bragged about it and then later tried to deny it. That’s one reason Romney lost so many senior citizen votes.

          • DonReynolds

            Both Democrats and Republicans alike realize that Social Security and Medicare must be fixed, reformed, or changed because it is UNSUSTAINABLE (you should know what that means) and cannot continue in its present form much longer without basic changes. Everyone, but you, seems to know that Social Security and Medicare will soon not be able to sustain the programs it currently operates.
            Will it be privatized? Will it be sold to bankers or foreign governments? I have no idea nor does anyone else. The smear lies against Romney were just campaign lies. The Democrats won the election (again) by being the best liars. Congratulations. My guess is you have a separate excuse for why Romney lost this group and wrongly won that group, all across the electorate. Give it up. Not many people are single issue voters, like yourself.

          • Xerxes22

            Do you know that the federal government borrowed over one trillion dollars from the Social Security Trust Fund? Many politicians, especially Republican ones don’t want to pay that money back. You hero George W. Bush even said so publicly. Adjustments will have to be made, but the fund isn’t broke. Millions of Whites stayed home on election day or held their noses and voted for Obama. It wasn’t Democratic lies that defeated Romney, it was Romney himself. The guy ran a very poor campaign. He wouldn’t take a firm stand on any issue. He was all over the place and Eddie Munster wasn’t any help. BTW, many people are single issue voters on issues like abortion, gun control and social security. If the Republican party continues to ignore the interests of ordinary Whites, it will continue to be the loser party.

    • Whirlwinder

      Hear! Hear!

  • Oil Can Harry

    “With over 76 million baby boomers retiring by 2030” we need to import 30 million welfare bums to join the retirees living off the young taxpayers.

    Who can argue with such brilliant logic?

  • WASP

    They are all deceivers. These RINO’s, Hispanics, Blacks are all agents for change = New World Order.

  • willbest

    By 2030 SS payments will be cut by 25% unless they can dup the young into putting in 19% of their paycheck instead of 15.3%. I have a feeling those boomers aren’t going to get to retire when they think they can.

    • DonReynolds

      If you are too young to be a boomer, you won’t retire at all. Cannot have a welfare state and open borders at the same time. Pick one or the other or go bankrupt. My bet is you will live to see this country go bankrupt. See ya.

      • Bossman

        The USA does not have open borders. If it did, there would be no such thing as an “illegal alien.” More than 50% of the so-called illegal aliens are people who entered the country legally, some were invited to come on temporary work visas and did not go back. The fact that many of them can survive many years here without proper documentation means that they already have strong connection to the country by way of friends and relatives.

        • DonReynolds

          Untrue.
          The FACT that many of them can be in this country for years (illegally), PROVES the FACT that this country has open borders and ZERO interior enforcement.
          They do not need a strong connection to friends and relatives, no matter where they live if ICE and Border Patrol are not enforcing the laws of the United States.
          They have no strong connection to this country, except like a tick on a dog’s ear.
          It is amusing for people like yourself to KNOW how many of each kind of illegal alien is in this country…….except where they are located and why they are not already deported before we end up with more anchor babies.

  • Marc Zuckurburg

    I knew all that money I was sending them would eventually amount to some good.

  • E_Pluribus_Pluribus

    Many of these “conservatives” are long-time amnesty boosters. Iconic among these would be Tamar Jacoby. The one surprise for me is Thomas Winters of Human Events. I did not know that once “conservative” publication had sunk so low.

    • Pro_Whitey

      I agree. Stopped subscribing to HE because they were going full neocon.

    • Sick of it

      Ms. Jacoby should not be a surprise to anyone.

  • Lewis33

    I don’t see a way to stop this in the long run. Between business bought rino’s and white hating dems, its a matter of when, not if.

    • Pro_Whitey

      They definitely have the money, but we have the votes, the votes they won’t get if they keep screwing around. Mittens Romney lost because he started talking like BO on immigration, the exact opposite of what he should have done. I am convinced he could have won had he pushed immigration control at least like he did in the primaries. Keep the faith. The buttmunches of signers of that letter periodically toss up these trial balloons for their own reasons. but they back down.

      • Kenner

        I agree when Romney began to waffle on immigration, he lost voters…those, and evangelicals who could not abide voting for a Mormon.

        • Evangelicals did vote for the Mormon, at the same percentage that they voted for Bush in 2004, which was at the time the all time record high for white evans voting for a Republican.

          • Kenner

            Thank you for correcting that…The media never touched on it, but pressed the ‘evangelicals vs Mormons’ during the election.

      • MBlanc46

        Whatever Romney might have said, he was a candidate of the economic elite and he was going to do what the economic elite wanted.

    • MBlanc46

      It’s hard to be optimistic about immigration because the wealthiest and most powerful groups, and hence both political parties, support throwing open the gates.

      • DonReynolds

        Then the negatively impacted Americans should throw open the gates too……..
        of the gated communities where the wealthy and powerful live…..
        and drag them out of their McMansions kicking and screaming.
        We can put a guillotine on a trailer or mount it in a pickup truck.

    • DonReynolds

      There is no PEACEFUL way to stop an invasion.
      I think you know, the invaders are not going to willingly return to their own country. Either this is our country and we defend it……
      or it is up for grabs, to whoever wants to take it.

  • Kenner

    Most of these immigrants will be low-IQ underclass. The only work they can do is low-end, low paying jobs. Even working, they will need supplemental government assistance, which suits the left to a t.

    • MBlanc46

      But a lot of them will be educated South Asian tech workers. The Indians provide the education. Silicon Valley supplies the jobs, and young Americans are left out in the cold regarding by education and jobs.

  • MekongDelta69

    The byline above is wrong…

    It says, “American Conservative Union”

    It should say, “American Traitors Union”

  • Puggg

    Mostly either black, Hispanic or Jewish.

    A bunch of smokescreen phony leaders.

    But “Marc Zuckurburg’s” money can buy a lot of those.

  • borogirl54

    How can pandering to illegal immigrants will build up the economy when the only competition that the illegals have for the low skilled, low wage jobs are high school dropouts?

    • GeneticsareDestiny

      What they’re really concerned about is getting the part in the bill about doubling legal immigration passed. That way they can smash middle class wages even further into the ground than they already have and speed us along to our future as Brazil 2.0.

  • Daniel Schmuhl

    I’m going to repeat this again, the mainstream conservative/libertarian establishment is not your ally as much as you might hate the Democrats.

  • Truthseeker

    I wish I could’ve lived in America when it was controlled by Americans.

  • WR_the_realist

    What should have happened in this country over the past 40 years is that as birthrates dropped and the pool of labor started to fall, wages should have risen and there should have been a net transfer of wealth from capital to labor. I.e., from the rich and upper middle class to the working and middle class.

    Instead the floodgates of immigration were opened up, real wages for the working class have declined, and we have more economic inequality than we’ve had for the past century. The left complains about the economic inequality all the time, but they are on the same side as the Chamber of Commerce and the Koch brothers when it comes to immigration. The left is far more anti-white than it is pro-labor or pro-environment.

    • MBlanc46

      “The left is far more anti-white than it is pro-labor or pro-environment.”

      I don’t know that it’s being anti-white so much as it is going all gooey at the mere thought of a poor, oppressed person of color.

      • GeneticsareDestiny

        I think it’s both. They like to see themselves as the Great White Hero, the one noble white person who dedicates their life to letting in the poor oppressed people of color because it makes them feel morally superior to those awful racist evil whites who want to deport illegals and keep America for Americans.

        • MBlanc46

          A lot of them do have Sir Galahad complexes.

      • DonReynolds

        Either way…..that leaves us out.

        • MBlanc46

          Yeah. Unless we begin to fight back.

      • WR_the_realist

        When the left gloms onto concepts like “white skin privilege” they have crossed the line from merely being gooey about poor, oppressed people of color to being openly anti-white.

        • DonReynolds

          Of course, it is self-destructive and self-hate, since the vast majority of the Leftist Libs are themselves…….wait for it……white as milk. So for them to be anti-white is a form of suicide. Maybe you can imagine suicide to be a rational decision? I can, but only if you are in a great deal of pain or you have a terminal disease. Maybe that explains it.

        • MBlanc46

          But it’s more implicit than explicit.

  • DaveMed

    Enough. We don’t need growth; we have enough already.

    If fewer immigrants means 80s living standards and buying Corollas instead of Lexuses… we’ll survive. Then again, this is coming from a guy who doesn’t have a smartphone, so maybe I’m just behind the times.

    • Sick of it

      80s living standards would be great compared to what we have today.

      • GeneticsareDestiny

        I’d be very happy to have the same chance of finding a decent job as your average person in the 80s did.

        • DonReynolds

          I remember the 1980s very well. Started my career in 1974. Started my family in 1983. My oldest kid started school in 1989.

          • GeneticsareDestiny

            I can’t imagine how much nicer it must have been back then…I wasn’t born until the early 90s. The modern day must seem so crazy to people who can remember when it wasn’t this way.

          • Kenner

            I grew up in the sixties. I don’t remember much.

    • Jesse James

      Since our voting with ballots doesn’t seem to make much of an impact, one of the most important things we can do is vote with our dollars. Not buying the latest gee whiz wonder and avoiding consumerism as much as possible is one of the best things we can do to hurt those who are hurting us. Barter, swap meets, yard sales, making things ourselves, keeping things longer, “use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without”, avoiding malls, skipping movies, cancelling cable TV and newspaper subscriptions, eating at Chick-Fil-A, keeping Windows XP for one more friggin year, never buying the news magazines, buying used cars….and so on and so on. These are how we get back at the globalist who wish to make us all consumer serfs not citizens.

  • Dave4088

    Gee, a fair number of mestizo sounding names and surnames. I’m sure they aren’t being implicitly brown and racially self serving. It won’t stop at amnesty either. If this passes then no sooner than the ink dries than the usual suspects will be demanding special set asides, new race based programs, free housing and a greater share of the wealth whites create.

    The spineless Republicans may resist at first, but as soon as the media wages their 24/7 “Republicans are racist and intolerant” and “mestizos are the future” campaign they will knuckle under and grant the set asides. And white seniors will get thrown under the bus with deep cuts to Medicaid and social security to pay for it all.

    Thinking about it just makes me just want to wave the flag and sing patriotic songs.

    • DonReynolds

      Makes me want to fold the flag and put it away…..until this country is restored.
      If that is never……so be it.

  • Sensitivity Training

    I wouldn’t mind this anti-white treason so much if they would just come out and say, “We need to pass immigrant Amnesty so we can eradicate White privilege once and for all.”

  • MBlanc46

    The employer class sure do love that cheap labor.

    • GeneticsareDestiny

      It’s like an addiction. The more cheap labor they get, the more they want. I don’t remember them being this pushy about it when we had strong immigration laws and actually deported people. Now that tons of legal and illegal immigrants are here, they ramp up the whining for more.

      • MBlanc46

        And it’s not just slimy sweatshop owners, either; it’s Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg.

        • IstvanIN

          The treason gang, Gatezerberg.

  • DonReynolds

    Is it just my imagination or do quite a few of these “conservative leaders” have spanish names? I do not know ANY “conservative leaders” that support anmesty for illegal aliens. In fact, that is HOW I separate the sheep from the goats. Those in favor of enforcing the law, which means deporting the invaders are CONSERVATIVE. Those in favor of handing out amnesty, like candy treats at Halloween, are NOT CONSERVATIVE. I do not give a rat’s hinnie what they call themselves. NONE of these people are conservative if they are pushing amnesty, so all the illegal aliens can vote Democrat.

  • Carney3

    Shame especially on Human Events.

  • IstvanIN

    She is a “shill” for European/Christian American dispossession.

  • DonReynolds

    You are absolutely correct!
    I was born on the last day of the Korean War. In 2030, I will be 77 years old.
    .
    But I will make a bet. If I live to be 77, more than half of the people in this country will already be dead, and there will be no United States.
    I may actually outlive the US Government.

  • DonReynolds

    It is already in the Constitution…..Congress shall make uniform rules of immigration and naturalization. Our military is supposed to protect us from INVASION……and that is what I call it.

  • DLRisVH

    Have you been to Ocean City recently? It’s not too bad yet but each year it gets darker and darker. And I’m not even going to mention the mexicans.

  • Bossman

    According to some futurists, when the boomers are dead, the USA will return to the good times of the 1950s and 60s. And than will begin in the 2040s.

    • Sick of it

      Sorry Bossman, but futurism isn’t going anywhere as long as our country is run by people who’d rather we all run around naked and worship the earth beneath our feet (or even worse, worship those in power). Once the crazies are gone, yeah we can make a lot of advances, but not until then.

  • DonReynolds

    There is nowhere to run and noplace to hide.
    Either we stay here alive or we stay here dead.
    The choice is simple.

  • DonReynolds

    The last thing we need is to form ghettos for English-speaking American patriots.

  • Whirlwinder

    We do not need more immigrants into this country, period! If we need more workers in America, a good start to produce them would be to cancel abortion policies. We could save billions of dollars by sending all illegal aliens home and shut down the invasion of all peoples allowed into America by the existing immigration law. The 1965 amendments allowed everybody in the world to come to America-sad liberal, leftist policy.

  • Jackryanvb

    Let’s put together contact information of this gang of traitors (some like Tamar Jacoby aren’t really traitors to our side as she was never on our side – hideous New School of Social Research Marxistwent across the street to open borders immigration, NeoConservatives).

    These Judas fake Conservatives needed to be outed, identified, tarred and feathered. May they experience up close and personal experiences with assorted M13 gang bangers, HIV+ bi sexual Hatian rapists, cannibals,Jihadists allowed to attend flight schools in Florida. Oh, and also hoping their working class American neighbors join the Teamsters Union and White biker clubs/gangs who invade their private golf clubs and dothe sort of thinks Viking raiders once did to pacifist Christian monks in Merry Old England.

  • gregCall

    Time to find a new party, Republicans are done.
    Personally I lean toward Libertarian but would vote for a conservative party first which the republican party certainly isn’t.
    Just think if conservatives left the republican party the rinos left would be absorbed into the democrats and we’d actually have a party representing us.