Gingrich: Current Immigration Woes Due to America's Success
"For four hundred years, since the first European immigrants landed at Jamestown, America has attracted energetic, ambitious people from all over the world. If we adopt the right economic policies and the American economy continues to be the most productive and prosperous, we will continue to draw people from around the world.This is a good challenge. It is better to be the country people want to join than the country people want to leave. It is better to have the highest standard of living in the neighborhood than the lowest. It is better to have hardworking, energetic, ambitious people clamoring to join you than to have them seeking desperately to leave," says Newt Gingrich in his latest book. "However, this opportunity requires a level of honesty from our political elites that they have not delivered. There has been more demagoguery and less honest dialogue about immigration than about any other topic in the last six years."
Mexico's Interference in U.S. Immigration Policy Continues
"If you're a regular reader of my blog, you know I have written countless times on the incessant meddling of the corrupt government of Mexico in the internal affairs of the United States and, moreover, that I have pointed more than once to the growing, far-flung network (and its sinister influence as a "Fifth Column") of Mexico's Consular offices, both stationary and mobile, here in our country. Indeed, the influence of Mexico in all avenues of American life has become pervasive. But the patent, utter hypocrisy of Mexico increasingly knows no bounds and this story, published at Examiner.com, should further unsettle American citizens already disgusted with the Bush administration's refusal to take Mexico to task for its unabashed insinuation into U.S. domestic affairs," says A Certain Slant of Light.
The Examiner story reported that, "A delegation of nine state legislators from Sonora [Mexico] traveled to Tucson to make the case against Arizona's new employer sanctions law,The lawmakers say it will have a devastating affect on the Mexican state."
Maryland Gov's Reversal Another Sign That Politicians Can't Ignore Public Opinion
"Another liberal Democratic governor has backed off an illegal immigrant-friendly challenge to the new federal Real ID law. Yet in their coverage of Gov. Martin O'Malley's (D-Md.) reversal, the Baltimore Sun and Washington Post failed to note how drastic the Democratic governor's reversal was, nor to consider if low polls numbers and public disapproval were driving factors for the change of plans," says Ken Shepherd with Newsbusters. "While the low poll numbers alone may not explain O'Malley's 180-degree turn, it's hard to believe they are not a relevant factor, particularly if O'Malley and Democratic legislators started to get angry phone calls from voters already giving the Gov little love in the polls. After all, this is a political minefield for liberal Democrat politicians, as Hillary Clinton's ensnarement on the issue last year can attest. Clinton backed Gov. Spitzer's plan to issue licenses to illegals. Days later Spitzer reversed himself and noted public disapproval of the plan as a key factor in his change of heart."
"Federal authorities raided the Georgetown branch of the D.C. Department of Motor Vehicles yesterday and arrested an employee suspected of illegally selling driver's licenses, District officials said. The employee was one of six people arrested yesterday on charges involving the illegal production of documents, FBI spokeswoman Debbie Weierman said. One of the six is a juvenile, she said," the Washington Post reports. "Yesterday's instance was not the first in which FBI agents have raided the city's DMV satellite office at the Shops at Georgetown Park. Three times between August 2003 and August 2004, authorities arrested and charged DMV employees with running scams."
While attention to immigration policy in the U.S. has been exclusively focused on the illegal variety, passing almost unnoticed is the spike in legal immigration. Invariably, almost apologetically for taking a firmer position against illegal immigration, politicians, pundits and others add that they favor legal immigration. It sounds nice, but it is really just a throw-away line that has no thought behind it.
We're all in favor of legal immigration as a concept, but rarely is anyone asked to define the legal immigration system that they profess to support. How much legal immigration? What criteria should be used for selecting immigrants? Who should legal immigrants be entitled to bring with them? These are not insignificant details; rather they go to the core of what legal immigration is about.