A Deliberate Program to Alter Demographics of the United States

Mexico is Deliberately Aiding Illegal Aliens

July 15, 2014 By Alan Caruba - Tpnn.com

It no doubt strikes a lot of Americans as odd that a U.S. Marine reservist, Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi, a 25 year old California native who had served two tours of duty in Afghanistan, was arrested in March for illegally entering Mexico when he made a wrong turn in Tijuana. Being in possession of registered firearms, about which he informed the customs officials, didn’t help. He is still in jail while awaiting a court judgment.

The fact is that Mexico’s illegal immigration laws are a lot tougher than those of the U.S. Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison. Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be jailed for ten years. Visa violators can be sentenced for six-year terms and Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered to be criminals.

It doesn’t end there. Under Mexican law, foreigners can be deported if they are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests”, violate Mexican law, are not “physically or mentally healthy”, or lack the “necessary funds for their sustenance.” This applies to their dependents as well.

Somehow, though, thousands of “migrants” from nations to the south of Mexico are passing through to get to our border and are, in the process, no less illegal in Mexico than here. That has changed, however. On July 9, the Examiner reported that Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto had met with Guatemalan president Otto Perez Molina and they held a joint press conference to “officially announce an agreement to make it easier for those making the illegal journey to the United States from Central American, to cross into Mexico.” They will be issued a “Regional Visitor’s Card” that allows them to stay in Mexico for 72 hours, just long enough to make it to the U.S. border. The arrangement will include Belize as well. No doubt it will be extended to San Salvador and Honduras.

I have no doubt this has the blessing of the White House. The result is a deliberate program to alter the demographic map of America, increasing the number of Hispanics. It is an illegal assault on the nation, a “transformation” few Americans could ever imagine.

The popular notion is that it has been Mexico’s rural poor that have been eager to come here. The fifth largest country in the Americas, it has a population of more than 113 million and one of the world’s largest economies as the tenth largest oil producer in the world and the largest producer of silver. Mexico is home to the sixth largest electronics industry in the world and it produces the most automobiles of any North American nation. General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler have had plants in Mexico since the 1930s and Nissan and Volkswagen built plants there in the 1960s.

Mexico is regarded as a firmly established upper middle-income nation, but somewhere between 35% to 46% of the population, about 52 million persons, are regarded to be living in extreme to moderate poverty. It is that population that represents the bulk of the illegal aliens who enter the U.S. They send remittances back to Mexico estimated to be $25 billion, but that represents 0.2% of its GDP.

In 2004 the Center for Immigration Studies released a study that found that illegal alien households were estimated to use $2,700 in services than they pay in taxes, creating a fiscal burden of nearly $10.4 billion on the 2002 federal budget. That, no doubt, has increased over the past decade. Among the federal costs are Medicaid, treatment for the uninsured, food assistance programs, the federal prison and court systems, and federal aid to schools. Illegals generally lack a level of education and hold jobs that represent low levels of skill.

To put it mildly, Mexico is happy to export its own citizens to become illegal aliens in the United States and now, thanks to President Obama’s policies, so do Honduras, San Salvador, and Guatemala. It’s worth noting that the children of illegals are awarded American citizenship at birth under current law.

In 2005, writing in The Washington Times on “Border policy perplexities, Stephen Johnson, a senior policy analyst for Latin America at the Heritage Foundation, noted that “Mexican oligarchs see free movement northward as a safety valve to relieve pressure from a million workers entering Mexico’s labor force with no job prospects. Rather than liberalize their economy to end corrupt monopolies, strengthen property rights and establish the rule of law, they would rather keep things as they are and merely ship their jobless, poorly educated throngs north.”

With 92 million Americans out of work or who have ceased looking, it is little wonder that there is little sympathy for Mexicans and others who illegally enter the nation. Even so, there is outrage that so many are now children and that President Obama could not stir himself from a schedule of fund raisers to visit the border or one of the detention centers to house them.

According to a 2012 estimate of the Homeland Security Department, there were approximately 11.5 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. by the end of 2011. As reported in The Washington Times in March 2012, “Of the current illegal population, only 14% have entered the U.S. since 2005. That means the vast majority have been in the country for years, putting down the kind of roots that immigrant-rights advocates say should earn them the change to achieve citizenship. Those favoring stricter enforcement balk at that, saying it amounts to rewarding those who have broken the law the longest.”

Mexicans still account for most of the illegal aliens at 6.8 million or 59%. If they were living illegally in Mexico, they would be deported. Moreover, illegals from other nations such as China and from the Mideast are also passing through without the Mexican legal system taking any notice of them.

The current “humanitarian crisis” has sharpened the political divisions between those who want to build a big wall to keep out all illegals and those who want to extend amnesty to those who have been living here for several years. The recent defeat of the House Minority Leader, Eric Cantor, (R-VA) has signaled the growing opposition to policies that facilitate illegal immigration.

What is clear, however, is that Mexico, in addition to its double standard regarding aliens who enter it, is now actively engaging what should be called an act of war.

America is already in deep financial debt. It cannot afford to absorb and pay for thousands of illegal aliens. Laws have to be changed. Fences need to be built and the border needs aggressive patrol. The alternative is to begin referring to the United States of America as the Estados Unidos.

Immigration Lawlessness Begets More Lawlessness

Obama’s ‘Man-Caused’ Disaster

.By Rich Lowry - Nationalreview.com  July 11, 2014

The administration’s response to the border crisis is yet another misstep on immigration.

As a defender of the nation’s borders, President Barack Obama is a hell of a pool player.

The president enjoyed a game at a bar in Denver with Colorado governor John Hickenlooper the other day, without the noir atmosphere of his furtive visits to pool halls with his grandfather as a kid, when he felt “the enticement of darkness and the click of the cue ball, and the jukebox flashing its red and green lights.”

Obama’s game the other day was bright and cheery, as one would expect of a president who didn’t have any depressing visits to frightened ranchers, overwhelmed border agents, or desperate migrants on his future itinerary.

The first rule in a crisis for any executive is put on his windbreaker and boots and get out on the ground. President George W. Bush didn’t do it soon enough after Hurricane Katrina and, politically, could never make up for it, no matter how many times he visited New Orleans subsequently. Obama’s bizarre resistance to visiting the border on his fundraising swing out West fueled talk of the influx as Obama’s “Katrina moment.”

The Katrina analogy is both over the top and too generous. It is over the top because the border influx isn’t a deadly catastrophe swallowing an American city. It is too generous because Bush didn’t do anything to bring on Hurricane Katrina, whereas Obama’s policies are responsible for the influx of immigrants from the border. It is, in the argot of his administration, a “man-caused disaster.”

According to the Los Angeles Times, the number of immigrants younger than 18 who were deported or turned away from ports of entry declined from 8,143 in 2008 to 1,669 last year. There were 95 minors deported from the entire interior of the country last year. At the same time, the number of unaccompanied alien children arriving from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras exploded from less than 4,000 several years ago to 40,000 since last October.

The White House brushes off criticism that Obama is avoiding the border as mere “optics,” in contrast to its highly substantive focus. But it is still not taking the crisis seriously.

In a letter to Texas governor Rick Perry, White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett downgraded the erstwhile “humanitarian crisis” on the border (the president’s words) to an “urgent humanitarian situation.” 

When pressed on the shift in verbiage, ever-judicious White House press secretary Josh Earnest explained that it is both a crisis and a situation. Yes, it’s that bad.

The nearly $4 billion the president is requesting for the border is not fundamentally about enforcement that will reverse and end the tide, but about managing the influx.

A devastating critique of the request by the Center for Immigration Studies notes that about half of the money goes to the Department of Health and Human Services “for acquisition, construction, improvement, repair, operation, and maintenance of real property and facilities.” The enforcement portion of the request, according to CIS, “is not truly geared toward removal,” but instead to “recouping costs for temporary detention and subsequent transporting of aliens.”

The administration’s reaction to the crisis is just another in a long series of acts of bad faith on immigration. It is asking Congress for more money for its priorities at the same time the president is promising, in effect, to suspend yet more immigration laws in response to the failure of “comprehensive immigration reform.” 

Republicans in Congress should crumple up the president’s border request in a ball and start over, with an emphasis on holding migrants near the border and working through their cases quickly to address the short-term crisis, and provisions for interior enforcement to address illegal immigration more broadly.

Of course, even if such a bill were to pass and to be signed into law, that’d be no guarantee that the president of the United States would enforce it. That speaks to an entirely different man-caused disaster.

Total Transformation by Phone & a Pen

Illegal Alien Amnesty is Just Days Away!

Conservative Daily August 19, 2014 Dear Conservative,

This is not a drill. We have just learned how Barack H. Obama may plan to skirt Congress to give amnesty to illegal aliens.

All this month, President Obama has been meeting with big businesses and billionaires to discuss how to hand out amnesty to the millions of illegal aliens living in the United States.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerburg and Microsoft’s former CEO Bill Gates are among the billionaires who are trying to force Obama to suspend deportations altogether. These tech giants want Obama to open the border for even more illegal aliens because their jobs can benefit from an influx of cheap, legal labor.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is even lobbying for amnesty because it believes that such a surge of workers would help the American economy. The only problem is that it would destroy the American workers!  Now, we have learned from our sources that Obama’s much anticipated amnesty executive order will be an attempt to give everyone in the country illegally a work visa!

Before we even discuss the economics of it, I can’t begin to say how dangerous it would be to legalize all 12+ million illegal aliens in one swoop. The visa application process is designed to weed out the ‘undesirables.’ Yes, that might be a harsh term, but all throughout our history, this is the term that the United States used to describe anyone that shouldn’t be allowed into the country.

Today, ‘undesirables’ are anyone who is a felon, a carrier of an infectious disease, a terrorist, or unemployed/unskilled and a drain on society. It is important to restrict legal immigration in this way because the last thing that we want is to have immigrants go right on the public dole, collecting Medicaid and food stamps!  However, either Obama doesn’t understand this logic or he simply doesn’t care!

That’s why his Department of Education is allowing illegal alien children to enter our school systems without proof that they’re vaccinated! That is why the administration has instructed Border Patrol to ‘catch and release’ any illegal alien they come across, even the ones with criminal records!

Obama and the Democrats don’t work for you and me. Hell, neither do the RINOs, either… They all work for the billionaires who wrote the checks to get them elected. And now, the liberal billionaires are calling in their favors. They are demanding that Obama hand out amnesty because they want to take advantage of the cheap labor. Forget about the fact that unemployment rose in 30 states this past month… do you know how high the unemployment rate is for African Americans in the inner cities? Black unemployment is well over 12% and in some cities, it is as high as 30%!

If you think that you are the only one that Barack Obama is letting down, don’t forget how he is screwing over the African American community!  African Americans have been taken for granted by Democrats for decades. Now, they've reached a boiling point with this whole crisis on the border and a lot of them have started speaking out. They realize that with a stroke of a pen, Barack Obama can make it even harder for all Americans to get jobs.

The great irony is that the companies that are donating to the Democrats and pushing for illegal alien amnesty are also laying off American workers. Cisco, a company that sells networking equipment, is a strong proponent for open borders and illegal alien amnesty. Cisco believes that the influx of cheap labor will be good for the American economy. What the company neglects to mention is that it just laid off more than 6,000 American workers.

Bill Gates, the former head of Microsoft, has been a vocal supporter of amnesty and has even called for an unlimited number of guest workers. Well, Microsoft also announced that they were laying off more than 18,000 American workers.  We have been conditioned to believe that amnesty will not hurt us economically. We have been told time and time again that the jobs these illegal aliens take are open because Americans don’t want to do the work.  But no one wants to call attention to the fact that the very companies lobbying for amnesty are also firing Americans at record paces!

On top of the fact that these illegal aliens don’t deserve a damn thing, we MUST stop this amnesty executive order because it will spell the end of the American worker!  We aren’t just talking about picking fruits and vegetables… some of the largest tech companies in America believe they can take advantage of the cheap labor and they are laying off Americans to prove it!  In addition to the fact that Obama is a traitor and tyrant for even contemplating amnesty by executive order, he is also an idiot for not realizing what this would do to the American citizens!

Amnesty is coming… This isn’t a joke and it isn’t a drill. If you think that Obama left his vacation early just to talk about Iraq and what is going on in Ferguson… think again!  He promised to go around Congress with an executive order by the end of the summer and that date is fast approaching!

Obama thinks you are too weak and stupid to stop him. The President thinks that he can surrender the United States of America without a fight.  It is our duty to inform him, and his allies in Congress, that they are gravely mistaken!  Join me in demanding that Congress stop King Obama from surrendering this country to the illegal aliens! This could be your last chance to put an end to Obama’s amnesty scheme once and for all! 

Discretion - An Executive Ideological Stamp

Is the President Incompetent or Lawless?

7/31/2014 - Judge Andrew Napolitano Townhall.com

It has been well established under the Constitution and throughout our history that the president's job as the chief federal law enforcement officer permits him to put his ideological stamp on the nature of the work done by the executive branch. The courts have characterized this stamp as "discretion."

Thus when exercising their discretion, some presidents veer toward authority, others toward freedom. John Adams prosecuted a congressman whose criticism brought him into disrepute, an act protected by the First Amendment yet punishable under the Alien and Sedition Acts, and Thomas Jefferson declined to enforce the Acts because they punished speech, and pardoned all those convicted. Jimmy Carter asserted vast federal regulatory authority over the trucking and airline industries, and Ronald Reagan undid nearly all of it.

The president has discretion to adapt law enforcement to the needs of the times and to his reading of the wishes of the American people. Yet that discretion has a serious and mandatory guiding light -- namely, that the president will do so faithfully.

The word "faithfully" appears in the oath of office that is administered to every president. The reason for its use is to assure Americans that their wishes for government behavior, as manifested in written law, would be carried out even if the president personally disagrees with the laws he swore to enforce.

This has not always worked as planned. President George W. Bush once famously signed into law a statute prohibiting federal agents without a search warrant from reading mail sent to persons other than themselves -- and as he was literally holding his pen, he stated he had no intention of enforcing it. That was a rejection of his presidential duties and a violation of his oath.

But today, President Obama has taken the concept of discretion and so distorted it, and has taken the obligation of faithful enforcement and so rejected it, that his job as chief law enforcer has become one of incompetent madness or chief lawbreaker. Time after time, in areas as disparate as civil liberties, immigration, foreign affairs and health care, the president has demonstrated a propensity for rejecting his oath and doing damage to our fabric of liberty that cannot easily be undone by a successor.

Item: He has permitted unconstitutional and unbridled spying on all Americans all the time, and he has dispatched his agents to lie and mislead the American people and their elected representatives in Congress about it. This has resulted in a federal culture in which the supposed servants of the people have become our permanent and intimate monitors and squealers on what they observe.

Item: He has permitted illegal immigrants to remain here and continue to break the law, and he has instructed them on how to get away with it. His encouragement has resulted in the flood of tens of thousands of foreign unaccompanied children being pushed across our borders. This has resulted in culture shock to children now used as political pawns, the impairment of their lives and the imposition of grievous financial burdens upon local and state governments.

Item: His agents fomented a revolution in Libya that resulted in the murder of that country's leader, the killing of the U.S. ambassador and the evacuation of the U.S. embassy. His agents fomented a revolution in Ukraine that resulted in a Russian invasion, an active insurgency, sham elections and the killing of hundreds of innocent passengers flying on a commercial airliner.

Item: He has dispatched CIA agents to fight undeclared and secret wars in Yemen and in Pakistan, and he has dispatched unmanned drones to kill innocents there. He has boasted that some secret reading of public positive law permits him to kill whomever he wishes, even Americans and their children.

Item: His State Department has treated Hamas -- a gang of ruthless murderers whose stated purpose is the destruction of Israel -- as if it were a legitimate state deserving of diplomatic niceties, and this has encouraged Hamas to persist in attacking our only serious ally in the Middle East.

Item: His Department of Veterans Affairs has so neglected patients in government hospitals that many of them died, and it even destroyed records to hide its misdeeds. His Internal Revenue Service has enforced the law more heavily against his political opponents than against his friends, and it has destroyed government computer records in order to hide its misdeeds.

Item: He has relieved his friends of the burdens of timely compliance with Obamacare, and he has burdened his enemies with tortured interpretations of that law -- even interpretations that were rejected by the very Congress that enacted the law and interpretations that were invalidated by the Supreme Court.

He has done all these things with a cool indifference, and he has threatened to continue to do so until the pressure builds on his political opponents to see things his way.

The Framers could not have intended a president so devoid of fidelity to the rule of law that it is nearly impossible to distinguish between incompetence and lawlessness -- and I am not sure which is worse. Archbishop Fulton Sheen often said he'd prefer to deal with a smart devil than a stupid one.

But the Framers did give us a remedy, and the remedy is not a frivolous lawsuit that the federal courts will no doubt reject as a political stunt. The remedy is removal from office. This is not to be undertaken lightly, as was the case when this remedy was last used. But it is the remaining constitutional means to save the freedoms the Constitution was intended to guarantee.

The choice is between two more years of government by decree or two years of prosecution. It is a choice the president has imposed upon us all.

Border With Mexico - A Planned Event Not An Accident in History

OBAMA'S PLANNED CHAOS IN SOUTHWEST

Exclusive: Tom Tancredo flays president for using kids as 'pawns in political warfare'

You have to be extraordinarily ignorant or gullible to believe that the chaos on the southwest border is an accident of history or the unexpected byproduct of a well-meaning act of Congress back in 2008. Just the opposite is true.

The current “surge” in border crossings by families and unaccompanied children is about as unexpected and unplanned as the expansion of Medicaid enrollments under Obamacare. Both are the logical and predictable results of Obama policies.

This chaos is having only one unexpected consequence – it is generating a spontaneous public backlash against Obama’s immigration policies and has taken amnesty “off the table” for this session of Congress. To be sure, that was unplanned and unexpected. But the arrival on our border of hundreds of thousands of families and unaccompanied children was both expected and invited by Obama’s policies. They planned this “humanitarian crisis” with the expectation it would add pressure on Congress to pass amnesty legislation.

If anyone doubts this, just ask this question. Did the Obama administration take even a single step between January and June to discourage this mass invasion or to ask the governments in Central America to halt their facilitation and encouragement of this “migration”? No, they did not. Every statement by President Obama or DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson was to encourage families in Central America to believe their children would be accommodated, not deported.

Even now, as public opposition mushrooms into outrage, and as a growing number of state governors declare their sovereign lands off limits to the planned federal dumping of 100,000 children into local communities, the Obama administration is still accommodating the arrival of the new populations, not stopping it.

Obama is asking Congress for $3.7 billion NOT to halt or turn back the wave but to warehouse the children. Less than 10 percent of that proposed funding would go to the Border Patrol to actually strengthen border security. Fortunately, for once, Republican leaders in the House appear to be balking at this ridiculous proposal and insisting on more efforts aimed to turning back the flow, not making it more “manageable.”

The mushrooming citizen revolt against the government’s complicity in the invasion is reminiscent of the spontaneous revolt against the Bush amnesty proposals of 2004-2007. The defeat of two Senate amnesty bills in 2006 and 2007 was due to a grass-roots revolt, and that is happening again. When the Minutemen posted 2,000 volunteers on the southwest border and shamed the media into covering the story of our porous borders, the American public woke up. When the people began to make their views known, the amnesty plans so carefully prepared by the political elites in Washington were shelved.

This is not the first time the “plight of poor children” has been used by the amnesty lobby as pawns in political warfare. The amnesty lobby not only welcomes this wave of humanity crossing our border, they encourage and facilitate it with federal grant dollars to churches and other nonprofits who are asked to take in the new arrivals. Never mind that the money could have gone to other urgent humanitarian purposes where true victims of butchery and civil war have sought our help.

The ugly truth is that the open borders advocates in both parties have been shameless in their manipulation of “humanitarian values” to push the amnesty agenda. They have time and again used the plight of poor children in Central and South America as a ploy to generate sympathy for illegal border trafficking. They work hard to obscure the fact that the large majority of the children crossing the border in 2014 are not orphans, not homeless, and not fleeing political persecution. They are arriving because they have been led to believe they will be accepted and not deported.

Yes, it is true: We all understand that by American standards, there is horrible poverty and lawlessness in many Latin American countries. It is understandable why people would want to flee those conditions and why mothers and fathers in those places would like to see their children grow up in a better place. But those same conditions exist in dozens of countries across Africa and Asia.

Must we accommodate the 100 million or more children who soon will show up on our borders if we begin accommodating them in the name of humanitarian values? We should be thankful that commercial airlines place conditions on international travel by unaccompanied minors, or our 200 international airports, from Orlando to Spokane and Oakland to Detroit, would see a similar wave of arrivals from Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, Ukraine, Lebanon, Singapore and Nairobi.

But, hold on. The “solution” to this “crisis” begins with honesty. This “crisis at the border” is a planned event, not an accident of history. This is not about an unstoppable wave of human migration; it is about the plans and desires of Barack Obama and the America left to make the United States look more like the rest of the world.

Americans are already delivering a resounding “No!” to that agenda, and by “No!” they mean establishing genuine border security as a precondition for serious immigration reform.

Selective Law Enforcement - Asking For Trouble!

Amnesty Isn't Free

8/7/2014  - Conn Carroll Townhall.com

The Washington Post's intrepid reporter Greg Sargent scored a big interview with one of the architects of President Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, former-Department of Homeland Security general counsel John Sandweg. Here is how Sandweg explains the legal justification for Obama's infamous temporary-amnesty program:

The president is doing what every single law enforcement agency across the country does: Put in place rational priorities to ensure that limited resources are focused on the populations that pose the greatest threat to public safety and border security. Every single law enforcement agency in America struggles with the fact that their resources are not conditioned to cover every single violation of the law. What prosecutors and police chiefs have done for years is implement enforcement priorities. That’s what the president has done.

So Obama's entire legal justification for his DACA program rests on the premise that a broad based invitation for illegal immigrants to apply for temporary amnesty ensures "that limited resources are focused on the populations that pose the greatest threat to public safety and border security."

But we already know, for a fact, that DACA did the exact opposite. Instead of conserving limited resources, DACA stretched DHS capabilities and degraded its ability to enforce good congressionally approved immigration law.

How do we know this? Well for starters, just look at the DACA application* which requires a $465 filing fee. If DACA is such a saver of DHS resources, then why is Obama charging generally cash-strapped illegal immigrants $500?

More importantly, we know from subsequent reporting that Obama under priced the cost of administering his temporary amnesty program. The New York Times reports:

Many thousands of Americans seeking green cards for foreign spouses or other immediate relatives have been separated from them for a year or more because of swelling bureaucratic delays at a federal immigration agency in recent months.

The long waits came when the agency, Citizenship and Immigration Services, shifted attention and resources to a program President Obama started in 2012 to give deportation deferrals to young undocumented immigrants, according to administration officials and official data. …

Until recently, an American could obtain a green card for a spouse, child or parent — probably the easiest document in the immigration system — in five months or less. But over the past year, waits for approvals of those resident visas stretched to 15 months, and more than 500,000 applications became stuck in the pipeline, playing havoc with international moves and children’s schools and keeping families apart.

(emphasis added) In other words, instead of ensuring that limited resources were saved so that the DHS could better enforce good immigration law, Obama's DACA program shifted existed resources away from those programs thus degrading DHS's immigration law enforcement capabilities.

Amnesties are never free. They take huge sums of cash and employee time to administer. If DACA's legal justification is built on the premise that it enables DHS to better enforce the law by conserving limited resources, then it is built on a lie.

*Never before has any president ever created an application process to apply for deferred action, which all presidents before Obama used sparingly.

Lost - America's Most Treasured Attribute

The Brazil of North America

7/18/2014 - Pat Buchanan Townhall.com

To observe the decades-long paralysis of America's political elite in controlling her borders calls to mind the insight of James Burnham in 1964 -- "Liberalism is the ideology of Western suicide."

What the ex-Trotskyite turned Cold Warrior meant was that by faithfully following the tenets of liberalism, the West would embrace suicidal policies that would bring about the death of her civilization.

The crisis on our Southern border, where the left, and not only the left, is wailing that we cannot turn away desperate people fleeing wicked regimes and remain true to our liberal values, is a case in point.

To assert that we cannot take all these people in, that we must send them back and seal out border for our survival, is to be called a variety of names -- racist, xenophobe, nativist -- all of which translate into "illiberal."

But as we continue our descent to Third World status, perhaps we should explore more deeply the "diversity" that has of late come to be regarded as America's most treasured attribute.

In 1960, we were not nearly so diverse. Nine in 10 Americans professed a Christian faith. Nine in 10 Americans traced their ancestry back to Europe. E Pluribus Unum. We were one nation and one people.

Since then, we have become the Brazil of North America, a multiracial, multilingual, multiethnic, multicultural "universal nation" unlike any that has existed in the history of the West. And if we look abroad at those Western nations traveling along this perilous path with us, we can see clearly now our future.

Before the 1960s, Europe never knew mass immigration. And after the terrible ethnic cleansing of Germans after World War II, most of Europe's nations were ethnically homogeneous.

Several were not. Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, the USSR. At the end of the Cold War, with freedom, all three came apart. Where we had three nations, suddenly we had 24 and such sub-nations as South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Transnistria.

Now Scots are seeking to break away from England, Catalans from Spain, Corsicans from France, Venetians from Italy and Flemish from Belgium, though these peoples have lived together for centuries.

Crimeans have gone back to Russia, while Chechens and other peoples of the Caucasus are fighting to break free of Russia. The roots of these secessionist movements may be traced to economics, ethnicity, history, religion, language, culture and borders.

Then there are the rising millions of Muslims in Europe who are not assimilating, as Catholic Irish and Catholic Germans did in a Protestant USA, but are replicating within the West the countries and cultures whence they came. They are separating themselves, by ethnicity, culture and faith, from the Western societies into which they have migrated.

Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Dominicans, Somalis and Arabs in America also build replicas of the countries and cultures whence they came. Thus, we take on the aspect of an empire. And empires fall apart.

The melting pot, rejected by our elites as an instrument of nativist bigots, is history.

Libya, Syria and Iraq are coming apart, as did Sudan and Ethiopia. The Kurds seek to carve a nation out of Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria. A Sunni-Shia sectarian war impends.

Christians are being persecuted, martyred and expelled from Islamic nations. In Myanmar, Muslims are brutalized by Buddhists. In Western China, ethnic Uighurs resort to terrorism in a war of secession to establish a new East Turkestan.

Disintegration, separatism and secessionism, for racial, religious, and cultural causes, are a phenomenon common now to Europe, Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Are we somehow immune?

The world is boiling with racial, tribal, cultural and moral conflict. People carry in their hearts the seeds of these conflicts. The notion that they will come here and be converted into Ozzie-and-Harriet Americans may be a bit utopian.

America is becoming a microcosm of a world on fire.

Why are we doing this? Why are we inviting the world into the USA? Was there some grievous flaw in the America of Ike and JFK that must be expunged? Some sin for which we must do penance?

What is coming is predictable, and has been predicted.

By 2042, Americans of European ancestry will be a minority in a country built by Europeans. "Anglos" are now a minority in California, New Mexico and Texas. Hispanics will soon be the majority in all four border states with Mexico.

And should Hispanics decide not to give their electoral votes to any presidential candidate who does not promise to erase the border with Latin America, that would mean the end of the United States as we know it.

Americans are already deep in a culture war over morality -- marijuana, abortion, same-sex marriage. We are already racially polarized over affirmative action and income inequality.

And when we have ceased to be an English-speaking, Christian country and become instead an Asian-Hispanic-African-American-white nation, with large Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, agnostic and atheist minorities, and no defined borders, or common faith and culture, what holds us together? 

And when did we vote for this future?

What is The Motive or Ultimate Agenda?

Obama’s Immigration Fiddling Creates Immigration Nightmare for the Country

6/19/2014 - Bob Barr Townhall.com

“A seemingly endless surge of immigrants.” That is how the L.A. Times recently described the situation in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley, described by one local government official as “the hottest spot in the nation” for border crossings. The surge of illegal immigrants at the border, largely composed of “unaccompanied alien children” (UACs) from Central America, is creating chaos at the border and turning processing stations and military bases into veritable refugee camps as border officials struggle to handle the surge. And, with the number of UACs expected to climb to more than 90,000 by then end of September, U.S. authorities are quickly losing ground.

However, this chaos at the border is just the beginning of the disastrous consequences stemming from Obama’s whimsical immigration “policies;” a mixture of ignoring current immigration laws, manufacturing new policies based on his “Executive authority,” and blaming Republicans for creating gridlock in Congress forcing him into taking these actions (or lack thereof). And, given that this Administration has yet to approach the negotiating table in good faith with real solutions, it is addressing the crisis in an equally haphazard way, endangering America’s national and economic security in the process.

Were Obama a competent leader, surrounded by competent subordinates, some immediate actions might have included taking all illegals currently in U.S. custody at the border, and shipping them back to Mexico, the country from whose territory they crossed into the United States. Such swift action would have sent an immediate message to others thinking about coming into the U.S. illegally that our borders are, in fact, not open to lawbreakers. Instead, our Homeland Security and Health and Human Services folks are responding with a “public relations campaign” to tell folks in Mexico it is dangerous to trek through the desert, as if those illegally immigrating were doing so because they did not understand the risks already.

Regrettably, the Administration appears to be following its standard protocol for crisis management: ducking responsibility and blaming the resulting mess on external factors beyond its control; in this case, violence and worsening conditions in Central American countries. Of course, we know not to take this Administration at its word, especially when its public image is at stake in yet another Executive failure. The true catalyst for this surge in illegal immigration stems not from external factors, but is a direct result of the President creating a patchwork immigration enforcement system that has done nothing if not encourage individuals from Mexico and Central America to “come on in.”

For example, frequent grandstanding by Obama and his allies in the Congress about the need to welcome the children of illegal immigrants (“DREAM kids,” in the current liberal jargon) has – not surprisingly – become a clarion call to those south of our border simply to take us up on our offer, and flood our border with UACs. To make matters worse, the Administration has ordered border officials to shelter and process all these illegals, including child members of violent gangs, not because the law dictates they do so, but because Obama has decided this will be a part of America’s immigration policy.

Obama officials like Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson claim the Homeland Security Act of 2002 requires them to act in the “best interest” of the child, which “very often means reuniting that child with the parent in the United States.” However, the law clearly states that the “interests” -- it makes no mention of “best” interests – are only be “considered” in deciding how to care for the children while in U.S. custody. Furthermore, the law defines UACs as those children with “no parent or legal guardian in the United States,” making Johnson’s excuses for the Administration even more absurd.

The Keystone Cop mentality driving Obama’s bush league immigration policies is a well-established hallmark of those who head the many federal agencies under Obama’s control. A less-established characteristic is why, in the face of such obvious dangers to America’s national and economic security, this Administration continues to push such patently ineffectual policies. Is it incompetence, pure and simple, or some crudely disguised liberal master plan to let illegals flood into our homeland, then quickly grant them amnesty in time for the 2016 election? Is it a ploy to create a “crisis” in order to force the Congress to pass his coveted “comprehensive immigration reform” legislation? The latter scenario very well might appeal to a number of Democrats in Congress who face brutal election prospects resulting from the many blunders by a President whose party label they share.

Regardless of the motivations or ultimate agenda behind the failure of protecting our borders, Republicans must act swiftly before our already strained border resources – and those in communities and military installations across the country having to cope with the child immigrants being shipped into their care as a result of Obama’s edicts -- collapse under a new rising tide of illegal immigrants.

Amnesty = Total Transformation of The U. S. A.

Stop the Coming Obamnesty!

8/1/2014  - Pat Buchanan Townhall.com

According to Rep. Luis Gutierrez, Obama intends "to act broadly and generously" on behalf of the "millions and millions" of illegal immigrants in the United States today. Gutierrez, who meets often with the president, is implying that Obama, before Labor Day and by executive order, will grant de facto amnesty to five million illegal immigrants.

They will be granted work permits and permission to stay. With his pen and his phone, Obama will do what Congress has refused to do. There is a precedent. Obama has already issued one executive order deferring the deportation of "dreamers," children brought into the United States illegally by their parents before 2007.

Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions is on to what is afoot. "We must prevent the president's massive amnesty from going forward," he says, and urges legislation to block an executive amnesty. But this divided Congress is not going to pass any such law. Nor would Obama sign it.

Still, would Obama dare deliberately ignite a nationwide firestorm by declaring an executive amnesty for 5 million illegal immigrants? Why not? Consider the risks -- and the potential rewards. On the downside, an Obama amnesty would polarize the country, imperil red-state Democrats and cause even allies to conclude he had become a rogue president who adheres to the Constitution and rule of law only so far as they comport with his agenda.

And what is his agenda? As he has said: to transform America.

Obama wants history to rank him among the transformational presidents like Lincoln, FDR and Reagan. And what better way to transform America than to ensure her evolution from a Western and predominantly Christian country into that multicultural, multilingual, multiethnic, borderless land Teddy Roosevelt inveighed against as nothing but a "polyglot boarding house for the world"?

Obama did not like the America we grew up in. As he told that closed-door fundraiser in San Francisco in 2008, that America was too full of life's losers who "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiments."

What would be the political benefits to Obama of an amnesty? It could weld Hispanics to the Democratic Party, would be wildly popular with the ideological and Christian left, and quietly welcomed by those 

Chamber-of-Commerce Republicans who have silently supported amnesty and secretly want immigration off the table in 2016. An Obama amnesty would instantly become the blazing issue of 2014, replacing his foreign policy fecklessness, diffident leadership, and IRS, VA, Benghazi and Obamacare foul-ups and scandals.

Among Republicans, a roar would arise from the base to impeach Obama, no matter the consequences. But while impeachment would divide Republicans, a Democratic call to arms to save the first black president from impeachment would unite his party and bring the money rolling in. Every Republican running for the Senate would face the question: How would you vote on convicting the president, if the GOP House votes to impeach him for high crimes and misdemeanors?

In the long run, an amnesty that puts 5 million illegal immigrants, most of them from Third World nations, along with their progeny, on a certain path to citizenship, would complete the process of turning America blue. How would such a blanket amnesty affect our country's future?

After this second amnesty, word would go out to the world that if you can get into America, by whatever means necessary, and lay low for a while, there is a near certainty you will be able to stay. The children pouring in from Central America, we are told, are fleeing repressive regimes. But billions of people in Asia, Africa and Latin America live under repressive regimes.

If all are entitled to come, they will come. And they will remake the West and America in their own image, Obama's image, the image of that Tower of Babel, the United Nations General Assembly. How many more tens of millions of poor and uneducated people can we absorb before we exceed the carrying capacity of the republic? How much more diversity can we handle before there is no unity left?

As we boast of our ethnic, cultural and religious diversity, what still makes us one nation and one people? For it is not religion. Not culture. Not custom. Not history. Not tradition. Not language. Not ethnicity. Is it only a Constitution and Bill of Rights -- over the meaning of which we fight like cats and dogs.

What problems of America -- from sinking test scores, to collapsing roads and bridges, to endless borrowing to save our social safety net, to income inequality, to culture wars -- will be more easily solved with tens of millions more of the world's destitute arriving? The only problem that will surely be solved by the next 50 million immigrants, who follow the 50 million legal and illegal immigrants who have come since 1965, will be the problem presented by the continued existence of the Republican Party.

Americans should let Obama know what they think of his amnesty now, before he imposes it upon us.