On Jun 11, 10:41 pm, Walmart Greeter was-steely-from-
wrote:
http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/070611_regime.htm

Amnesty / Immigration Surge Bill: The Regime Against The Nation

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Last week, in one of the great uprisings of modern politics, Middle
America rose up and body-slammed the national establishment.

The Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty for 12 million to 20 million illegal
aliens, and for the businesses that have hired them - a bill backed by
La Raza and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, The Wall Street Journal and
The Washington Post - went down to crushing defeat.

Majority Leader Harry Reid fell 15 votes short (45 to 50) of shutting
off debate. Like the rout of the Dubai ports deal, the victory was
achieved by a firestorm of public protest, reflected in millions of
phone calls and e-mails, and citizens marching to town meetings.

The capital's capitulation to the country was unprecedented and
astonishing. Not two weeks earlier, the amnesty provision of the bill
had been supported by more than 60 senators.

But opponents of this bill, which would reward mass criminality with
mass amnesty and eventual U.S. citizenship, ought not rest.

For President Bush is coming back to resuscitate the monster, and this
bill has more support in the Senate than the 45 votes it got Thursday.
Some Republicans and Democrats who voted not to shut off debate are
privately committed to amnesty, if they can be given political cover
and face-saving amendments to take home.

Sen. John Kyl is not necessarily wrong when he says,

"All we have to do on the Republican side is sit down with those who
have amendments, get those amendments in a reasonable package, not too
many, but enough so all of the members can say they had their chance."

Kyl reads his party right. For the GOP is the political instrument of
K Street and Corporate America-the folks who fund the party and
finance the campaigns. And the No. 1 issue of Corporate America is
Bush-Kennedy-McCain. For not only does it give blanket amnesty to
businesses for hiring illegals, it legalizes the illegals and ensures
Corporate America an endless supply of cheap immigrant labor.

The fundamental reason this bill is not dead is that its authors and
backers will never quit. For this legislation is part of a larger
agenda of a large slice of America's economic and political elite.

What is that agenda?

They have a vision of a world where not only capital and goods but
people move freely across borders. Indeed, borders disappear. It is a
vision of a "deep integration" of the United States, Canada and Mexico
in a North American Union, modeled on the European Union and tied
together by super-highways and railroads, where crossing from Mexico
into the United States would be as easy as crossing from Virginia into
Maryland. It is about the merger of nations into larger transnational
entitles and, ultimately, global governance.

This immigration bill is but a piece of a great global project already
far advanced. In 1993, a majority of Americans opposed the NAFTA trade
deal with Mexico because they did not believe the propaganda and
feared that, as Henry Kissinger said, it represented the architecture
of a new world order.

More than a dozen years have elapsed. And the results? Contrary to the
promises, our trade surplus with Mexico did not grow. It vanished. In
13 years, we have run $500 billion in trade deficits with Mexico. Last
year's $60 billion was the largest ever. Mexico now exports more cars,
trucks and auto parts to the United States than we export to the
world.

What NAFTA did was enable U.S. companies to close their plants here,
fire their American workers, and move their factories and jobs to
Mexico, while Mexico continued to export its poor to the United
States.

What is the hidden agenda of the global companies, which evolved out
of what were once great American companies?

They want a limitless supply of low-wage immigrant labor and an end to
penalties for hiring illegals. They want the freedom to shut factories
here and move them to nations where wages are low, benefits
nonexistent and regulations lax. They want to be able to move products
back to the United States free of charge. They want to be rid of their
American workers, but keep their American consumers.

They want to be able to go out to Asia and hire bright kids and bring
them to the United States to replace middle-aged U.S. workers who cost
too much. They want to be able to outsource their white-collar jobs to
India at a fraction of the wages they pay Americans.

It is about globalism - and about greed. And, as the Bible says, love
of money is the root of all evil. But they have a problem. The nation
has begun to awaken to the reality that the vision of the global
corporation and the transnational elite cannot be realized without the
death of the American republic. And so they are in a fight that is
long overdue.

----------------------
America needs a populist movement.

greg

On Jun 12, 9:48 am, wrote:
On Jun 11, 10:41 pm, Walmart Greeter was-steely-from-

wrote:
http://www.vdare.com/buchanan/070611_regime.htm

Amnesty / Immigration Surge Bill: The Regime Against The Nation

By Patrick J. Buchanan

Last week, in one of the great uprisings of modern politics, Middle
America rose up and body-slammed the national establishment.

The Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty for 12 million to 20 million illegal
aliens, and for the businesses that have hired them - a bill backed by
La Raza and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, The Wall Street Journal and
The Washington Post - went down to crushing defeat.

Mexico now exports more cars and trucks and auto parts into the United States than we export to the
world.

What NAFTA did was enable U.S. companies to close their plants here,
fire their American workers, and move their factories and jobs to
Mexico, while Mexico continued to export its poor to the United
States.

What is the hidden agenda of the global companies, which evolved out
of what were once great American companies?

They want a limitless supply of low-wage immigrant labor and an end to
penalties for hiring illegals. They want the freedom to shut factories
here and move them to nations where wages are low, benefits
nonexistent and regulations lax. They want to be able to move products
back to the United States free of charge. They want to be rid of their
American workers, but keep their American consumers.

They want to be able to go out to Asia and hire bright kids and bring
them to the United States to replace middle-aged U.S. workers who cost
too much. They want to be able to outsource their white-collar jobs to
India at a fraction of the wages they pay Americans.

It is about globalism - and about greed. And, as the Bible says, love
of money is the root of all evil. But they have a problem. The nation
has begun to awaken to the reality that the vision of the global
corporation and the transnational elite cannot be realized without the
death of the American republic. And so they are in a fight that is
long overdue.

----------------------

America needs a populist movement.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxx

What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

We will buy nothing from China, Japan ...... Mexico,
Canada ............ Cuba ............. Europe ...... !!!!!!!!

Maybe the US is fighting the inevitable? Globalism is everywhere and
will increase as all people the world over strive to pull themselves
up, often out of poverty and misery to something above survival. And
hopefully throw off old unworkable religious superstitions and beliefs
(of all varieties). And that includes the debilitating practices of
both the Christian Right and all others.

A simple 'global' example: Recently I was repairing my Bosch (That's a
company from Germany, a highly industrialized country, a member of the
EU (European Economic Union), where workers are generally highly paid
(often at higher rates than in the US.) cordless drill.

However the drill label said "Made in Switzerland, for The machine
Tool Inc. of Chicago". (Switzerland is a very prosperous country, not
an EU member AFIK, with a very high standard of living and by
implication high wage/salary rates).

Taking a portion of it apart found that the plastic battery cases were
marked "Mexico" (Mexico is a supposedly a low wage country), the
battery cells themselves were from Japan (a very high wage and
expensive country in which to live and operate a business).

Further investigation revealed that the drill was one of a batch
manufactured and sold to "Home Depot" which is understood to be a US
based and owned company retailing in Canada.
BTW how dare they compete with Canadian companies; maybe we should
tell them 'to go home' to the USA? But I joke of course. :-). Because
'selling' stuff outside the US is just the same as the US 'buying'
stuff from outside; oil from Nigeria or the Saudis, nickel from Canada
or bamboo products from Asia! Right?

Inside the charger there are some electronic components; at least one
of which is marked "Malaysia". (Low wage country?)

Further of interest was that we had actually bought the drill a few
years ago from a Canadian company; Kent Building supplies based in New
Brunswick, Canada.

So a small saga to repair a drill became a lesson in world trade.

Also note: some of the protectionist legal manoeuvrings resulting in
US government subsidies to US companies and tariffs on imports, merely
tend to it irritate the trade partners of the US and also increase the
price of products to US consumers/customers.

There are quite a number of people in Canada who would do away with
NAFTA! Because it doesn't work fairly.

A glaring example: Despite the NAFTA treaty US restrictions and
tariffs on Canadian lumber imported under NAFTA a few miles across the
border can increase the cost of a typical US house by some $2000 to
$3000! Although in response one US poster wrote on this news group
that he would be happy to pay more for US lumber! That at least was an
honest acceptance of a higher cost and a rejection of the NAFTA
treaty, possibly also agreeing to provide a larger profit for the US
lumber industry?

Canada while similar to the US is a very large expensive to operate
and live in, high wage country with very high business and personal
taxes to support social programmes, which include universal medicare.
Despite all that and the lower value of the Canadian dollar Canadian
consumers often pay less than for the same type of item in the USA
because of less protectionist policies.

As the opinion of one person it does appear that with the US form of
government, control of it can more easily fall into the hands/
influence of 'Big Business' and associated interests and power groups;
than with a more government 'Parliamentary' style.

Under a parliamentary system the buying of political influence and
industrial lobbying can perhaps be more clearly seen, exposed to light
of day and thereby controlled?

On Jun 12, 9:31 am, terry wrote:
What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

No, simply return to controlled, legal immigration. Allowing
millions to flow into the country, uncontrolled and undocumented,
is madness.

Calvin wrote:

On Jun 12, 9:31 am, terry wrote:
What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

No, simply return to controlled, legal immigration. Allowing
millions to flow into the country, uncontrolled and undocumented,
is madness.

It is madness, but sanity costs money.

--

Best Online comic: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0001.html

In article ,
says...
Calvin wrote:

On Jun 12, 9:31 am, terry wrote:
What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

No, simply return to controlled, legal immigration. Allowing
millions to flow into the country, uncontrolled and undocumented,
is madness.

It is madness, but sanity costs money.


Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:56:42 -0400, James Beck
wrote:

In article ,
says...
Calvin wrote:

On Jun 12, 9:31 am, terry wrote:
What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

No, simply return to controlled, legal immigration. Allowing
millions to flow into the country, uncontrolled and undocumented,
is madness.

It is madness, but sanity costs money.


Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?


Virtually without costs to the corporations, which is now the "ruling
class."
Thumper

On Jun 12, 1:43 pm, Calvin wrote:
On Jun 12, 9:31 am, terry wrote:

What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

No, simply return to controlled, legal immigration. Allowing
millions to flow into the country, uncontrolled and undocumented,
is madness.

Seems reasonable that all countries; unless and until they sign
treaties that otherwise allow, to control and allow those they wish
and have a right to be, into their home-land.

Recently visited a middle eastern country; my visitors visa was 'good
for' one month. In other words I had to have a reason for being there
(visiting a North American relative working there). And they had every
right to know who I was, why I was in their country and how long I
intended to stay..

I was able to extend it for a further month for around $28 US. About
one dollar per day! There was a significant financial penalty if I had
overstayed my visa; without too much recourse for appeal apparently
(Suppose the airline on which I was booked to leave on a certain date,
had gone out of business for example. Its happened!)

If I were to visit the USA as a national/passport holder of another
country it would be perfectly reasonable IMO for the US to require me
to obtain a visa (permission, reason for and duration of my presence
on US territory) or certainly for me to prove who I was at the US
border. Also for the US authorities to take measures to remove me
forthwith if I overstayed and or contravened immigration procedures.

The idea of everyone having a valid on record, electronically
verifiable passport makes more and more sense.

On Jun 12, 2:48 pm, Thumper wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:56:42 -0400, James Beck
Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?
Virtually without costs to the corporations, which is now the "ruling
class."

Hillary will fix that.

In article ,
says...
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:56:42 -0400, James Beck
wrote:

In article ,
says...
Calvin wrote:

On Jun 12, 9:31 am, terry wrote:
What? A populist movement to close the borders? Make a 'Fortress
America'? e.g. Private Property - Stay Out.

No, simply return to controlled, legal immigration. Allowing
millions to flow into the country, uncontrolled and undocumented,
is madness.

It is madness, but sanity costs money.


Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?


Virtually without costs to the corporations, which is now the "ruling
class."
Thumper


That's not what I asked.
AND, the last time I checked, corporations don't exist without
customers, so wouldn't that make the consumer the ruling class?

Jim

BetsyB



"Calvin" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jun 12, 2:48 pm, Thumper wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:56:42 -0400, James Beck
Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?
Virtually without costs to the corporations, which is now the "ruling
class."

Hillary will fix that.

Hillary couldn't manage her own house, you expect her to control anything
big as a country?

--



BetsyB



"Calvin" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Jun 12, 2:48 pm, Thumper wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:56:42 -0400, James Beck
Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?
Virtually without costs to the corporations, which is now the "ruling
class."

Hillary will fix that.

Calvin wrote:

On Jun 12, 2:48 pm, Thumper wrote:

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:56:42 -0400, James Beck

Are you saying that the way things are now is without costs?

Virtually without costs to the corporations, which is now the "ruling
class."


Hillary will fix that.


Agreed.

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:23:20 -0400, "betsyb"
wrote:

Hillary couldn't manage her own house, you expect her to control anything
big as a country?

That's a really stupid way to evaluate a presidential candidate.
Almost as stupid as saying that because someone cheats on their spouse
they can't be a good president.

David Johnston wrote:
Hillary couldn't manage her own house, you expect her to control anything
big as a country?

That's a really stupid way to evaluate a presidential candidate.
Almost as stupid as saying that because someone cheats on their spouse
they can't be a good president.

Whoa there Dimocrat!
Are you trying to tell us that a person who lies and cheats and
engages in criminal activity would be your choice for president?
(COME ON, you KNOW that if any CEO engaged in sex with a low-level
underling it is automatic sexual harassment. The NOW gang established
the principle that a person in authority can NEVER have "consensual
sex" with an underling. Of course, NOW lost all credibility when they
did a turn about and defended Slick!)

I'd say if a person lies to and cheats on those near to him, then it's
pretty likely he'll lie and cheat on those he works for as well.

And Puleeze, don't tell us again how Dubya "stole" the election!

David Johnston wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 16:23:20 -0400, "betsyb"
wrote:

Hillary couldn't manage her own house, you expect her to control
anything big as a country?

That's a really stupid way to evaluate a presidential candidate.
Almost as stupid as saying that because someone cheats on their spouse
they can't be a good president.

My ex-wife would not be a good president. Hillary reminds every man of his
ex-wife.