Several years’ worth of amazing articles about immigration were posted at the blog site, “www.CafeConLecheRepublicans.com”. A bunch of my articles were posted there too. Here are some of them. Unfortunately the website has been deactivated. So the record of them that remains is on the “Wayback Machine” at www.web.archive.org.
(If you go to https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/* you can find 104 webscreens/pages of articles containing 5,167 entries.. Each screen or page has several links and saved pages. Each link has a summary with it. But not all the links are to articles; many are to search results, and to other technical data. So it takes a lot of time to click on each one, see if it is an article, and if it is to extract a summary, the headline, the author, the date, and the archive link. I started at the beginning and found all the links were to technical data, so I started at the end and scanned pages #99-104. If you will help scan #1-98, I will pay you twice what I get paid.)
Articles are grouped below in the following categories: Overview <> Undocumented Economists / Quotas: Arbitrary <> Amnesty <> Bible <> History <> Republicans & Democrats <> Refugees <> Unsustainable Population <> Birthright Citizenship <> Miscellaneous
Libertad Divertido – the Fun of Freedom
By Dave Leach – November 10, 2014 – BILINGUAL 10-PART SERIES WITH VIDEO
Each link is to an article that was published in Iowa Latino newspapers. Several are presented on Youtube.
Part One: Freedom: more fun than Soccer! Can we make it more entertaining than a Quinceañera, to meet together to strategize how to to gain liberty for immigrants and visas for relatives? Video (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, December 11, 2014, page 6.)
Parte Uno: Libertad: Más divertido Que el Futbol. ¿Podriamos hacer que sea más entretenido que una quinceañera, reunirse para crear una estrategia de cómo curar la ley de inmigración? Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Diciembre 11, 2015, página 6.)
Part Two: The Thrill of Victory There is nothing more entertaining than seeing our enemies fall under our attack. Nothing. The promise of victory makes even the hard work an adventure. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, December 18, 2014, page 4.)
Parte Dos: La emoción de la victoria No hay nada más divertido que ver a nuestros enemigos caer bajo nuestro ataque. La promesa de la victoria hace dura de trabajo sea una aventura. (Publicado en El Enfoque, Diciembre 18, 2014, página 4.)
Part Three: The Economy and Undocumented Economists Every economist at the Senate hearings agreed more legal immigration would slash the deficit by a quarter trillion and grow the economy by one percent/year. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, December 25, 2014, last page.)
Parte Tres: La Economía y los Economistas Indocumentados Ningún economista se mostró en desacuerdo con del Dr. Holtz-Eakin que con mas de inmigrantes podrian reducir nuestro déficit nacional por más de un tercio. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Diciembre 25, 2014, última página.)
Part Four: What an economist told the Senate about immigration The Undocumented Economist testified as if Dr. Holtz-Eakin, who previously was director of the CBO didn’t know what he was talking about! (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, January 1, 2015, last page.)
Parte Quatro: Qué economista dijo al Senado sobre la inmigración La Economistas Indocumentados él testificó como si el Dr. Holtz-Eakin, quien previamente era director de la CBO no sabía lo que estaba hablando! Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Enero 1, 2015, última página.)
Part Five: The path to immigration victory I want to give you a picture of what we must do, together, to completely heal immigration law. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, January22,2015, page 8.)
Parte Cinco: La Ruta a la Victoria de Inmigración Quiero darle una imagen de lo que debemos hacer, juntos, para sanar completamente la ley de inmigración. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Enero 22, 2015, página 8.)
Part Six: Republican presidential candidates invade Des Moines. Iowa’s clearest glimpse so far of what Republican presidential candidates think about immigrants was seen Saturday at the Hoyt Sherman Auditorium in Des Moines. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, January 29,2015, page 9.)
Parte Seis: Los candidatos presidenciales Republicanos invaden Des Moines.La visión más clara de Iowa hasta ahora de lo que los candidatos presidenciales Republicanos piensan acerca de los inmigrantes fue visto el sábado en el Auditorio Sherman Hoyt en Des Moines. Se indica cómo hay de trabajo por hacer para sanar la ley de inmigración. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, Enero 29, 2015, página 9.)
Part Seven: Economists know immigrants don’t take citizens’ jobs Real economists emphatically dispute the claims of Undocumented Economists (who have no economics degree) that immigration hurts any part of the economy. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, Febrero 5, 2015, page 8.)
Parte Sieta: Los Economistas saben que los inmigrantes no le quitan el trabajo a los ciudadanos. Los Economistas Reales enfáticamente niegan las afirmaciones de Economistas Indocumentados (que no tienen título en economía) que la inmigración perjudica a cualquier parte de la economía. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, febrero 5, 2015, página 8.)
Part Eight: Rick Perry’s Compassionate Threats. Rick Perry cares so much for refugees from “the face of evil” that he is determined to kick them back into its jaws.(The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, Febrero 19,2015, page 13.)
Parte Ocho: Amenazas compasivas de Rick Perry. Rick Perry se preocupa tanto por los refugiados que vienen ahuyentando de “la cara del mal” que está decidido a ponerlos de vuelta en sus mandíbulas. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, febrero 19, 2015, página 13.)
Part Nine: Questions for Senator Grassley. Iowa’s Senator Grassley controls the Senate’s Judiciary Committee, through which all immigration legislation must pass. He invites questions. I have one. (The Spanish translation was published in El Enfoque, March,2015, page .)
Parte Nueva: Preguntas para el senador Grassley. El Senador Grassley de Iowa controla el Comité Judicial del Senado, a través del cual toda la legislación de inmigración debe pasar. Invita preguntas. Yo tengo uno. Cine (Publicado en El Enfoque, marzo, 2015, página .)
Part Ten: Governor Jindal wants “a lot” more legal immigration. Governor Bobby Jindal may be the most friendly to immigrant concerns of any presidential candidate, Republican or Democrat but I have questions
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160914174627/www.CafeConLecheRepublicans.com/Libertad-divertido]
by Dave Leach January 29, 2016
An overview of the immigration research of Dave Leach
A win-win solution, as much a blessing for citizens as for immigrants. Response to all the paranoid claims and concerns of reductionists. A solution inspired by the Word of God, who loves citizens and immigrants.
Contents: General links to my articles <> E-Verify <> Economic Impact of Immigration <> Birthright Idiotship <> 3 litmus tests of “Conservative”: is it what America’s Founders thought or did? Is it Biblical? Does it work? Then how did restrictionism get called “conservative”? <> Legal Challenge <> The Card I showed candidates
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160315232106/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/immigration-resources/ ]
Conservative Principles & Gang-of-Eight Immigration Reform
by Bob Quasius May 13 2013
A great debate is raging among conservatives these days. One camp argues the gang of eight immigration reform is amnesty, contrary to conservative principles, amnesty encourages more illegal immigration, and immigrants vote Democrat so why bother?
The other camp, led by Senator Marco Rubio and Grover Norquist, argues our legal immigration system has been broken for decades, and we effectively have de facto amnesty because it’s simply not practical, humane, nor economically wise to deport 11 million. They believe our present immigration system, with its arbitrary quotas and massive bureaucracy, is inconsistent with conservative free market principles. They reject the notion that immigrants invariably vote Democrat, and see opportunity to win more New American votes, as proven by Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, and recently by Canada’s Conservative Party.
A May 2011 poll by Pew Research found staunch conservatives split 49%/49%.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160816225845/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/conservative-principles-and-gang-of-eight-immigration-reform/]
WND Debate: When Immigration Really Did Reform
By Dave Leach
I have waited for years for leaders of the opposite sides of the immigration reform political jungle to listen to each other and respond to each other in a public forum. Now it is happening in America’s leading independent internet news source, WorldNetDaily News. The initial once-weekly rounds are between Steven Camarota, researcher at the restrictionist (they want to further restrict legal immigration) Center for Immigration Studies, and Bob Quasius, founder of Cafe con Leche Republicans. Camarota went first, Quasius second, Camarota third, and now we are waiting for Quasius. But meanwhile, I want to throw in my two cents about Steve’s last post.
If there is any level of legal immigration which Camarota considers beneficial he doesn’t say what it is. He alleges that immigration is bad for our economy, culture, and politics. The only number that he explicitly says will hurt America is the doubling of our current roughly one million immigrants we allow to come legally each year. But his argument would apply to any legal immigration at all. And the statistics he uses to indicate the levels of immigration that concern him count naturalized citizens, as if they, too, in his mind, threaten our economy, culture, and politics!
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140521220218/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/when-immigration-really-did-reform/ ]
Robert Rector & other Undocumented Economists: Why it Matters
March 30 2015 by Dave Leach
There is a deep, dark, musty secret kept by the “researchers” who assure restrictionists that immigrants take citizens’ jobs, drive down wages, drive up our national debt, trash the economy, export our currency, bankrupt hospitals , give us measles, conceal terrorists, and rape our daughters: these “researchers” are not authorities on these subjects; they have no more credentials than I do to call themselves “experts”.
I have a college degree in teaching music and playing trumpet. That makes me as much an authority on the economic impact of immigration as any of them. I confess, I didn’t care enough about understanding the economy to make that my major in college. Neither did they, but they don’t confess it. Their leading “researcher”, apparently, says in his bio, “Camarota has testified before Congress more than any other non-government expert on the economic and fiscal impact of immigration.” But he didn’t major in economics. His degrees are in Political Science and Public Policy Analysis…..
[Read more – https://web.archive.org/web/20151101062037/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com: 80/robert-rector-undocumented-economists-why-it-matters/]
Questions for Senator Grassley
by Dave Leach – March 3, 2015
Now that Republicans control the U.S. Senate, Iowa’s Senator Grassley controls the Senate’s Judiciary Committee, through which all immigration legislation must pass.
He will be near Des Moines this Saturday, March 7. He will be at the Truro Public Library at 11:30 am, and at the Norwalk Public Safety building, 1100 Chatham Avenue, at 1:30 pm. He says “bring a friend, and bring questions”. I would love to see his answers to this question:
“When your committee holds hearings on immigration laws, will senators hear most from economists about how more legal immigration will help the U.S. economy, or from Undocumented Economists about how immigrants take jobs from citizens and drive down wages?”
Read more here. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160304125535/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/questions-for-senator-grassley/] En Espanol. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160304192212/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/ preguntas-para-el-senador-grassley/ ]
Whose Expertise Inspired Our Immigration Laws?
by Dave Leach Marcy 19, 2016
Who are the expert witnesses who advised Congress to create the scores of different visas with their thousands of requirements in the U.S. Code, agency regulations, and case law, that are too complicated to apply for without an immigration lawyer? What science persuaded Congress that is the best system for citizens?
It would be reasonable to assume Congress weighs heavily what economists say about the impact of immigration, since most of the claims that support today’s immigration restrictions are economic claims. Viz., “They take jobs from citizens”, “they drive down our wages”, “they drive up our national debt”, “they deplete our welfare budgets”. The science, and the college major most focused on it, that is most qualified to investigate economic claims, is called Economics.
Two Documented Economists out of 39 Senate witnesses
By Dave Leach, December 10, 2015
Of the 39 “expert witnesses” testifying about S744, “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act”, sprinkled across six hearings in 2013, only two were documented economists: Grover Norquist, and Douglas Holtz-Eakin.
I explain the significance of this in several other articles; this article contains only a list of the 39 and their university credentials.
33 more “expert witnesses” testified over the following two years, 2014-2015. Only one was an economist, and he didn’t testify about the economic impact of immigration. 7 more expert witnesses, none of who was an economist, testified about the economic impact of H1B visas after that; see their college majors, contrasted with their claims about immigration, here.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20151210045925/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/two-documented-economists-out-of-39-senate-witnesses/]
“Brain pool shortage”, not “labor shortage”, should drive immigration levels
By Dave Leach, January 7, 2014
It is a stubborn myth, that only a “labor shortage” can justify allowing more legal immigration. The only “shortage” that ought to dictate immigration levels is our “brain pool shortage”. “Labor shortage” is not even a logical factor in setting immigration quotas. “Labor shortage”, per se, doesn’t even have a meaning precise enough to enable any two congressmen to agree when it exists.
It is just as much a myth, whether the existence of a “labor shortage” is denied to justify restricting legal immigration, or is alleged to justify expanding legal immigration.
But Steven Camarota, in his 2nd entry in the immigration debate hosted by WorldNetDaily News, makes the alleged lack of a “labor shortage” the evidence that legal immigration should be reduced, not expanded.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140105173638/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/brain-pool-shortage-labor-shortage-drive-immigration-levels/]
Grover Norquist – “People are an asset, not a liability”
By Bob Price, May 10, 2016
The immigration reform bill, sponsored by U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) has sparked a lot of discussion around the country bring about the kind of national debate we have needed for a very long time. Recently, Americans for Tax Reform founder, Grover Norquist, testified before the Senate about the pending legislation and why immigration reform is needed. He opened his testimony with the statement, “People are an asset, not a liability.”
This week, Norquist sat down with TexasGOPVote to expand on his thoughts on immigration reform, and I asked him about this comment and what it means in the context of immigration reform….
I asked Norquist about the “professional anti-immigrant” groups like FAIR, NumbersUSA and the Center for Immigration Studies who routinely slant their statistics to reflect their hidden leftist agenda of radical environmentalism and population restrictions.
“Not only were they created by men and women of the left who are from the pro-abortion, zero population growth, radical environmentalist worldview,” Norquist explained. “Their arguments today are still the same arguments, they don’t use conservative arguments, they take the labor union argument that more people mean wages go down, not that more stuff would be created. They take the radical environmentalist position that total numbers of people are bad things, that people are like pests, instead of created in the image of God, to create more things and people.
“Each of these were set up as the other one got sort of outed for what it was. They set up some other group, but the control remains with the radical environmentalists, the pro-abortion people, that’s why Numbers is called Numbers. They’re just worried about the number of people, they think it’s bad when you have a child, they think you’ve done something bad to the country. They would be happy with a million more abortions, or a million more car accidents or a million fewer immigrants. They really do view people like Malthus did, but the economist was wrong and these folks look at Paul Ehrlich, the zero population guy, who told us that more people and we would all starve to death, but what they forgot is that more people more solutions, more people more good ideas, more people more job creating businesses. And those left of center groups have come inside the anti-environmental movement and some of them have pretended to be conservatives. Their arguments are not Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp conservatism, their reasoning isn’t, and their goals aren’t. Which is why they don’t mind having loud anti-Hispanic, anti-Asian voices associated with the right is devastating politically in the Republican Party because they don’t care about the Republican party because they are not Republicans.
“We need to remind those people who think that somehow speaking ill against immigration is a conservative position, no it’s not. Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, and in today’s world, both President Bush’s, and successful governors Jack Kemp and Governor Walker of Wisconsin, Perry of Texas, are all open and immigrant friendly folks and have recommended policies that yes secure the border, but if you’re going to have walls you want to have large doors.”
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160816231427/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/grover-norquist-interview-on-immigration-reform-people-are-an-asset-not-a-liability/ ]
“Personal” to Ted Cruz
By Dave Leach, April 18, 2016
Ted Cruz sent me an email today asking for money. What was different was that it begins: “Ted Cruz Personal Email — May Include Privileged Communication”
Dreaming about really writing a personal letter to Cruz, now that I was equipped with his personal email address, I wrote the rest of the day. Until more email with the same message came, with a variety of return addresses. It must mean “Personal FROM Cruz’s hidden email address to everybody with five dollars.” So here is my equally “personal” reply.
The questions I ask of him, I ask of you, dear reader. I question assumptions so entrenched in public discussion that evidence I offer is often treated as irrelevant. Some conclusions are so unacceptable that it becomes irrelevant whether they are true.
“…speaking of Robert Rector, on the same side of that card I handed you, I showed that the research relied on in immigration discussion to back up the claims of economic harm (taking jobs, driving down wages, etc) from too much immigration are produced by only half a dozen men, including Rector, none of whom have university credentials in economics. They are Undocumented Economists. Meanwhile, real economists are so much more positive in their assessment of the impact of immigration that the most pessimistic real economist is more optimistic than any of the Undocumented Economists who quote him.
“I have shown you this information several times, although of course each time was maybe a minute. Is it wrong? You never suggested it is wrong. You just got busy with the next person waiting in line for a selfie with you. If this is wrong I am desperate for evidence that it is. Do you think it doesn’t matter that economists almost universally say more immigration will benefit Americans most while only Undocumented Economists say we will benefit from fewer immigrants? I have posted several Immigration Resources with the information on that card and much more.”
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160423022100/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/personal-to-ted-cruz/ ]
Naturalized citizens are a problem, says Camarota
By Dave Leach – December 27, 2013
Naturalized citizens are more of a problem for Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies than I thought. Looking again, I see Camarota’s concern with naturalized citizens is more serious than I thought while writing Part 1. (This is part 2.)
…Does he say what he thinks “the problem of illegal immigration” is? He complains about the alleged problems of immigrants in general, with whom he counts legal immigrants and naturalized citizens. This raises the question, what “problem” does he see with “illegals” that he does not see with naturalized citizens? Well, later he points to this year’s Heritage Study to prove that legal immigrant families drain our economy by $4,000 a year while undocumented families drain it by $14,000. It is amazing that Camarota still believes this study, which was scandalous enough to cause its author, Jason Richwine, to resign, and to cause the Heritage Foundation to lose much of its support among Congressmen. Alex Nowrasteh said it used “a statistical method that no other economist would use…and they predictably reached terrible results.” The study “failed to account for potential economic growth once undocumented immigrants are granted citizenship”, according to the article linked above.
The very title of his article based on the percentage of the U.S. population which is “foreign-born” is “Aliens’ fiscal drain on America”! He is calling naturalized citizens “aliens”!!!
He makes this implication explicit by writing “lowering legal immigration would be good”.
(This has been Part 2 of my response to Camarota’s article linked topside.)
Part 1: “When immigration really did reform”
Part 3: “America needs Latina women”
Part 4: “Brain pool shortage”, not “labor shortage”, should drive immigration levels”
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140101070234/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/naturalized-citizens-problem-says-camarota/]
America needs more Latina women!
By Dave Leach – December 17, 2014
America’s need for more Latina women is the takeaway from today’s analysis of Steve Camarota’s 2nd entry – installment #3 – in an immigration debate hosted by WorldNetDaily News.
…Obviously, for the sake of our nation’s future, if we can recognize population decline as any kind of threat, we need four things: (1) a lot more Latina women; (2) to rescue a lot more Latina women from the Democratic party where they are taught to love abortion; (3) to outlaw abortion in general; and (4) to reduce the influence of restrictionist organizations like FAIR whose media spokesman, Ira Mehlman, said “certainly limiting the size of the U.S. population is a stated objective of [FAIR].”…
(This has been Part 3 of my response to Camarota’s article linked topside.)
Part 1: “When immigration really did reform”
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140101070230/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/america-needs-latina-women/ ]
Fixing our national debt by importing taxpayers
By Dave Leach – May 21, 2014
What does immigration have to do with fixing our national debt? Would importing millions more taxpayers, through legal immigration, make our crushing federal deficit more manageable, as several economists indicate? Or take away our jobs and load us up with welfare bums, as restrictionists argue? The right answer would be very helpful as America faces enormous decisions about debt and immigration over the coming weeks.
The “scary” won’t leave our debt problem as long as 1.7 taxpayers support one entitlement recipient on average. No matter what we do with the rest of government, that ratio is “unsustainable” according to the GAO
Importing enough taxpayers to bring that ratio to 2.4 would wipe out our current deficit. Importing more, or wasting less, would then enable us to reduce our debt. That is, if legal immigrants benefit our economy like natural born citizens.
There could hardly be less national consensus about that critical question.
The debate is well encapsulated in the battle of articles between “Who Got Jobs During the Obama Presidency?” and the tag team of “Immigrants did not take your job” and “Nativist Group Releases Hopelessly Flawed Report on Immigrants and Job Creation”.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140521220245/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/fixing-our-national-debt-by-importing-taxpayers/ ]
Let the U.S. tank to save jobs for dropouts
By Dave Leach – Sept 22 2014
“Political realists” in Washington are ruling out massive new legal immigration because although that would boost the wages of almost every category of citizens, and would give our federal government the additional taxpayers it desperately needs to control its deficit, it might reduce the wages of high school dropouts by as much as 10%.
At least that is the nub of the strongest objection the Center for Immigration Studies was able to make to more legal immigration.
“There is good research showing that [legal] immigration displaces natives from the labor market. But there is not a consensus.” So concluded the CIS just before the election. All CIS’s “good research” was about the effect of immigration on the wages of high school dropouts. The most dramatic negative effect alleged was alleged by George Borjas.
Congress is about to reform immigration. We certainly don’t want more legal immigrants, if they will just take jobs from citizens.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140922004239/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/let-the-u-s-tank-to-save-jobs-for-dropouts/]
Quotas – Arbitrary
Setting Immigration Quotas – the Mystery of the Wages
By Dave Leach – March 10, 2016
What is the science that documents that our immigration quotas are the magic number, below which all immigration blesses us and above which all immigration destroys us? Are quota levels ever questioned? Missing from the national discussion is any realization that quotas are set without reference to any measure of how many immigrants we can take in before their blessing to us becomes a threat to us and our nation. In fact, no such measure exists, or has ever been alleged to exist, or has ever been proposed, or can exist.
Current levels allow about a million a year to come legally. Allowing another million a year to come would cut today’s federal deficit by a quarter of a trillion dollars (half our current deficit) according to Senate Testimony in 2013. Why then is no one talking about allowing two million more to come, so we can wipe out our deficit?
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160315232131/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/setting-immigration-quotas-the-mystery-of-the-wages/ ]
Ronald Reagan and his take on Immigration Amnesty
May 2 2013 by Victor Medina
Amnesty is defined as forgiveness, a very Christian concept, but the term has been tainted in the extreme rhetoric that is the immigration debate today. Ronald Reagan, however, understood that many of the foreign nationals who come here undocumented or whose legal residency lapsed were inherently honest and good, just desperate for a better way of life. It is why he fought for an amnesty plan that forgave many undocumented immigrants. Unfortunately, Congressional Democrats never followed through on free-market-based reforms that would have solved the underlying problem. It is one of the reasons why the problem persists today. It is not because Reagan chose to forgive these immigrants, but because the red tape and bureaucracy is still part of the system. You can read more about Reagan’s views on immigration by clicking right here.
[Read more – https://web.archive.org/web/20160314221100/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/ronald-reagan-and-his-take-on-immigration-amnesty/]
FAIR Opposition to Gang of Eight – Part II
by Bob Quasius – July 9, 2013
Editor’s note: part II of a continuing series about the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR) and their constant lies about the gang of eight immigration reform plan. From FAIR’s April legislative update:
“GANG OF EIGHT BREAKS PROMISE TO BAR CRIMINALS FROM RECEIVING AMNESTY – A close analysis of the Senate Gang of Eight’s Amnesty bill (S.744) shows that its authors have broken their promise to bar criminals from receiving amnesty, called “registered provisional immigrant” status (RPI status).”
Really..? Let’s see….
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20131117080042/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/fair-opposition-to-gang-of-eight-part-ii/ ]
Just Say No to Just Immigration Amnesty
By Bob Quasius – April 15, 2013
The anti-any-immigrant lobby, led by the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA, and the Center for Immigration Studies, all founded by the notorious population reduction liberal and bigot John Tanton, are calling the bill amnesty.
What exactly is amnesty? Merriam-Webster definitions:
Amnesty: the act of an authority (as a government) by which pardon is granted to a large group of individuals
Pardon: the excusing of an offense without exacting a penalty
Penalty: the suffering in person, rights, or property that is annexed by law or judicial decision to the commission of a crime or public offense
True Conservatives aren’t fooled by the “amnesty” ruse
By Carl Ruby – December 1, 2013
….in 1977 Jimmy Carter granted unconditional amnesty to over 100,000 American draft dodgers. Gerald Ford had suggested a conditional pardon for draft dodgers, but Carter removed all penalties and welcomed draft dodgers back to the United States with no measures of accountability for their actions. That’s amnesty.
No one that I know of is promoting this kind of unconditional pardon for those who have overstayed their visas or entered the country illegally. Those who are loudly protesting against amnesty for immigrants are either misinformed or trying to distract and mislead us. I fear it is usually the latter.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20131202065623/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/true-conservatives-dont-fooled-amnesty-ruse/ ]
Legalization or Amnesty for Unlawful Immigrants – An American Tradition
By Alex Nowrsteh – July 28, 2014
Legalization of unlawful immigrants, commonly referred to as amnesty, has been hyperbolically described as an affront to U.S. national sovereignty, the rule of law, and even our Constitutional Republic. However, the U.S. government has a long history of successfully legalizing violators of immigration laws.
In 1929, the year the Immigration Act of 1924 went in effect, Congress passed an amnesty to allow for the voluntary registration of all unlawful immigrants who wished to legalize their unrecorded entry. Beginning a familiar pattern, Congress combined this 1929 amnesty with severe legal penalties on unauthorized immigrants who entered the United States without inspection after the amnesty was complete.[i]
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20151028144638/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/legalization-amnesty-unlawful-immigrants-american-tradition/ ]
Republicans – Worse than Obama?
By Dave Leach. Posted November 26, 2015, Thanksgiving
It is hard to imagine any greater threat to our nation than Obama’s 8 years, until you consider that had Republicans been in charge, we would be under E-Verify and Real ID by now.
Republicans shuddered at an embryonic version of the same threat 22 years ago when Hillary pushed a national ID card through her “HillaryCare”. Republicans, conservatives, and radio prophets did not hesitate then to link national tracking with “Big Brother” (the friendly name for the electronic international tracking system envisioned in George Orwell’s book 1984) and the Mark of the Beast prophesied in Revelation 13-14, the only sin of which the Bible warns that every person who accepts it will go to Hell.
Republicans, and even Democrats, were so horrified in 1993 at the threat to freedom from national tracking, that it was a major campaign issue that propelled the Republican party to control over both the U.S. House and Senate for the first time in 40 years. What has happened to the GOP (“Grand Old Party”) in these 22 years?
Shining the Gospel Outside the Bushel
By Dave Leach, July 6, 2016
As comforting as it is to be able to blame others – especially Democrats – for the world’s problems, a neglected portion of “The Gospel” tells us to correct those who create problems.
We are supposed to “rebuke” them: talk to them – reason with them. It is not “love” to leave a neighbor’s sin unchallenged.
Leviticus 19:17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him. [“so that he may be stopped from doing evil”, it says in the Bible in Basic English ]
That is not a popular thing to do in America today – to reason with those who disagree. We are more inclined to hate those who disagree – even dehumanize them, and dismiss them with something like “it’s no use talking to you. You are never going to change your mind anyway.” 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to be “always ready” to reason with people who challenge our stands, but we are more inclined to lob conversation killers at them, like anonymous personal attacks that seem to excuse us from taking their need to know seriously.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20161108101804/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/shining-the-gospel-outside-the-bushel/ ]
Numbers USA’s Bible study doesn’t quote the Bible
By Dave Leach – January 2, 2014
Numbers USA’s head, James Robb, posted his great news that “Leading Evangelicals Show that Bible Has Been Misinterpreted”. That is, he means, by people like me, who don’t see alligator-infested border moats in the Bible.
“This year, churchgoers are fortunate to have access to a much different explanation of scripture, thanks to the emergence of a group called Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration, and to a fascinating panel recently sponsored by the Heritage Foundation to inform congressional staffers and the media. Kelly Monroe Kullberg, who has organized Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration, is a highly respected evangelical leader. She founded the Veritas Forum at Harvard University in the 1990s, which has since grown into a world-wide movement. Her critique of the sloppy handling of Scripture used by some clergy is irenic [conciliatory] yet wide-ranging.”
I would love to tell you all the Bible verses that Kullberg quoted on her EBI website, and in her talk at the Heritage forum, to show God’s disfavor of S744. I would love to quote all those verses, and address them one by one. Unfortunately, she didn’t quote any, and I don’t want to put words in her mouth…..
Update: right after I posted this article, NumbersUSA’s Mark Krikorian responded to it! With a vengeance!
Read more at the reposted article at Talk2me.saltshaker.us. [http://talk2me.saltshaker.us/numbers-usas-bible-study-doesnt-quote-the-bible/] See my response to Krikorian’s tweet: “It’s easier to attack the Bible’s defenders than the Bible ”
It’s easier to attack the Bible’s defenders than the Bible
By Dave Leach – January 4, 2014
It must have something to do with the article I posted: “Numbers USA’s Bible study doesn’t quote the Bible”. Number’s USA’s article had claimed the Bible is on the side of restricting legal immigration. It quoted an “evangelical leader” whose website on the subject likewise didn’t quote a single verse on the subject.
I imagine Krikorian found it fairly hard to attack God’s authority to speak on a subject for which His support is alleged, so Krikorian picked the much more vulnerable target: me.
I, likewise, find myself on much shakier ground defending myself, than defending God, so I would like to get the focus back on God.
Read more. [http://talk2me.saltshaker.us/its-easier-to-attack-the-bibles-defenders-than-the-bible/] This is reposted April 29, 2018; here is the original 2014 post. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140127132826/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/easier-attack-bibles-defenders-bible/]
Saving the GOP from Modern Know-Nothingism
by Alex Nowrasteh November 30, 2016
Many in the GOP are jockeying for the soul of the party ahead of an anticipated 2014 midterm election victory. Social conservatives are eager to reassert their influence after repeated defeats over gay marriage. Fiscal conservatives make the case for a greater emphasis on runaway spending. And then there are the nativists, who contend that the future of the Republican Party lies in opposing immigration reform. Conservative radio host Laura Ingraham, for example, said last month that,
“Immigration could be to 2016 what ObamaCare was to 2010.”
Not if history is any guide. Consider the experience of California and Texas
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20150920111635/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/saving-gop-modern-know-nothingism/]
Americans: shall we celebrate Cinco de Mayo, or burn flags?
by Bob Quasius May 5 2014
…However, there are good reasons for all Americans to celebrate Cinco de Mayo besides Mexican culture. Many don’t realize that the Mexican victory at the Battle of Puebla was good for America too, and if it weren’t for our own civil war we would probably have helped Mexico defeat the French as part of long-standing U.S. policy.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20150918060545/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/americans-celebrate-cinco-de-mayo-or-burn-flags/ Quasius]
Reality: Somewhere Between Assimilation & Multiculturalism
By Alex Nowrasteh and Marian Tupy, March 28, 2016
Immigrants aren’t the ones voting themselves a welfare state that will destroy us. We are.
…Assimilation stands in contrast to multiculturalism. Multiculturalism, at least in so far as it was practiced over the last few decades in Europe, refers to government promotion of multiple cultural traditions within a single jurisdiction. …
Famed baseball player Joe DiMaggio, who was born in California to Sicilian parents and who began to play for the New York Yankees in 1936, is a prime example. By 1939, DiMaggio was generally considered a great center fielder. That year, Life, the magazine with the largest U.S. circulation at the time, ran an article about DiMaggio. It paid the baseball player the ultimate compliment, noting that DiMaggio “is well adapted to most U. S. mores. Instead of olive oil or smelly bear grease he keeps his hair slick with water. He never reeks of garlic and prefers chicken chow mein to spaghetti.”…
Yet, assimilation is seldom a one-way street. Immigrant culture does occasionally “rub off” on the dominant culture. As such, American “culture” has always been in a state of flux. Just consider how DiMaggio became an American—by eating Chinese food! Chinese food was brought to the United States by immigrants to the gold fields of California in 1848. Their food, customs, and race were so strange and threatening that labor unions and parochial nationalists united in their support for the first blanket ban on an immigrant group, the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882….
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160822083428/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/the-real-threat-to-america-is-not-immigrants-but-ourselves-2/]
Illegal Immigration Surged Because We Curtailed Legal Worker Migration 50 Years Ago
By Alex Nowrasteh – October 27, 2015
Today marks the 50th anniversary of President Lyndon Baines Johnson signing the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. It removed the atrocious racial barriers in immigration law but also restricted economic migration—especially from the Western Hemisphere.
We continue to struggle with its mixed legacy, particularly now that a spotlight is shining on our dysfunctional immigration system.
The 1965 Act replaced a series of eugenics-inspired and labor union-backed immigration restrictions from the Immigration Act of 1924. That law intentionally discriminated against immigrants from outside of North-Western Europe and reinforced bans on immigrants from entire continents in a system called “national origins.
If the 1924 Act was meant to exclude people based on their supposed racial inferiority, why did it rely on a national origins system instead of just banning races outright? Henry Pratt Fairchild, American Eugenics Society president, sociologist, and 1924 Act supporter, explained that a national origins system accomplished roughly the same outcome as an explicit race-based system without the “endless confusion and intolerable litigation. So Congress substituted [in] the term nationality” for race. In other words, a national origins system was easier, cheaper, and involved fewer lawyers.
Removing the discriminatory features of immigration law also meant subjecting immigrants from Western Hemisphere countries to more regulation. There was no numerical quota on any immigrants from the Western Hemisphere prior to 1965—so long as they met the other criteria for a green card. Legal Hispanic immigration to the United States was impeded by the 1965 Act.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20171004184340/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/illegal-immigration-surged-because-we-curtailed-legal-worker-migration-50-years-ago/]
The Enemy of my Enemy is my Friend –Immigration Reform for Republicans
By Raoul Lowery Contreras – June 3, 2014
President Ronald Reagan was fond of stating that “a man who agrees with me 80% of the time is not my enemy.” Makes sense to me.
Another famous statement through American history: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” That also makes sense to me.
…Senator Rubio is being attacked by “true conservatives” for “abandoning true conservative principles” for supporting immigration reform he had much to do with constructing.
What “principles?” When “true conservative principles” ran this country from 1790 until 1924, immigration for non-Asian and non-Blacks was totally open with only visible illness being the reason for stopping anyone from immigrating here. It wasn’t until pure “bloodline” eugenics fanatics convinced an all-White Congress (one woman and one Black) to slam the door shut on Jews, Roman Catholics and Southern European and Eastern European immigrants that immigration was restricted.
Shutting down immigration of Southern/Eastern Jews and Catholics wasn’t all that Congress did, for the first time in history the border was shut down on Mexicans and other Latin Americans. 1924…was a hell of a year for people with pure Nordic, Northern European blood.
“Conservative principles?” Racial and ethnic hate implemented by Congress is true blue Americanism? The attacks on Senator Rubio reveal more about the “true conservatives” than about him.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160807173609/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/the-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend-immigration-reform-for-republicans/ ]
David Farragut – War Hero, First Admiral, and Son of Hispanic Immigrant!
By Bob Quasius – January 13, 2013
Damn the torpedoes! Four Bells! Captain Drayton, go ahead! Jouett, full speed! – David Farragut at the battle of Mobile Bay, August 5, 1864
Often paraphrased as “Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!”, this famous quote came from Admiral David Farragut, famous war hero of the civil war, America’s first admiral, and first generation Hispanic immigrant!
David Farragut Family Background – George (Jordi) Farragut – father of David Farragut
David Farragut, originally named James Farragut, was born in 1801, near Knoxville, Tennessee. James Farragut was the son of Jordi Farragut, an immigrant from the island of Minorca, Spain, and Elizabeth Shine from North Carolina. Jordi Farragut was a Spanish merchant captain, who immigrated to America in 1766 and joined the American revolution, as a naval lieutenant during the Revolutioary War, serving first with the South Carolina Navy, then the Continental Naval forces. Jordi Farragut anglicized his name to George Farragut.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20170613233341/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/david-farragut-war-hero-admiral-and-hispanic-immigrant/]
Republicans & Democrats
Republican and Democrat Platforms on Immigration: Similar
By Dave Leach – April 18, 2016
Side by side comparison of how the Republican and Democrat parties say they want to change immigration law reveals no clear, substantial difference. That is, the party platforms (the formal positions voted for by a majority of activists within each party) provide no clear assurance that either party would better serve the goals either of voters hoping for more liberty for their immigrant families, or of voters hoping for less competition for their jobs. Of course there are clear differences between the legislative agendas of individual candidates in both parties. But those differences aren’t reflected in the majority positions of the parties. And there is plenty of vague rhetoric from candidates.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160423022105/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/republican-democrat-immigration-platforms-similar/ ]
Restrictionist Democrats not so Strange
Oct 15 2014 Leach
How strange is a restrictionist Democrat? (Who wants to further restrict legal immigration.) Democrat-supporting immigrant groups think it is very strange. Is it, really?
America’s voice posted this:
“Can you believe this ad came from a Democrat? Alison Lundergan Grimes is running against Republican Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, but she’s running one of the most anti-immigrant ads this election cycle, calling immigrants “illegal aliens” and vowing that she’ll never support “amnesty or benefits for illegal immigrants.” (Fact check, Ms. Grimes: that’s not what immigrants are looking for.)
“It’s a desperate move. Democrats should leave it to Republicans to be the anti-immigrant party. Read more here.”
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20161209220758/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/restrictionist-democrats-strange/]
Obama’s mixed legacy on immigration
by Alex Nowrasteh
President Obama has a mixed record on immigration. On one hand, he is the most stringent enforcer of immigration laws in American history — far outstripping the deportation numbers of the George W. Bush and earlier administrations. On the other hand, his executive actions have helped shield large swaths of illegal immigrants from deportation.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160729104117/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/president-obamas-mixed-legacy-on-immigration/]
Obama slammed for ignoring immigration in 2nd term
By Bob Quasius – October 29, 2014
National pro-immigrant group Cafe Con Leche Republicans today slammed President Obama for failing to include immigration reform in his second-term economic plan titled “A Plan for Jobs & Middle-Class Security.” In May 2011 Obama described immigration reform as an “economic imperative” and yet incredibly Obama fails to include immigration reform in his economic and jobs plan!
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160601032454/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/pro-immigrant-group-slams-obama-for-immigration-fakery-in-omitting-immigration-reform-from-second-term-plans ]
How Immigrants Vote
By Alex Nowrasteh, December 9, 2016
An enduring argument against reforming the immigration system is that new immigrants will become a solid voting bloc for the Democratic party and support liberal economic policies. Neither of these assertions is true. New evidence shows that immigrants have, or come to have, about the same political views as long-settled Americans.
In a new paper published by the Cato Institute, we show that immigrants and their descendants are not more supportive of economic policies that favor big government, high taxes, or an increase in the size of the welfare state. Immigrants’ political and ideological opinions will not shift American policy in a big-government direction.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20161209220834/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/the-melting-pot-meets-the-voting-booth/]
President Obama’s Immigration Reform Irrelevance
Jan 31 2013 by Raoul Lowery Contreras
Senators Chuck Schumer (D), John McCain (R), Dick Durbin (D), Marco Rubio (R), Robert Menendez (D) and Lindsey Graham (R) and by statement, “Gang” members Senators Jeff Flake (R) and Mike Bennett (D) were absent — addressed a jammed press conference (110 reporters in a room for 24) and a nationwide cable audience on Monday afternoon.
Gang of eight immigration reform
That was 24 hours before Obama’s “rip-roaring” 25-minute Immigration speech in Las Vegas at a high school full of (Obama photo-op) Hispanic students. It was a terrible speech, terribly received speech thanks to the “Gang of Eight.”
The “Gang’s” outline of a Comprehensive Immigration Reform plan torpedoed Obama’s speech. Obama mimicked the Gang’s outline for CIR but ignored a key element, the one he voted against in 2007 – a viable guest worker program. He also demanded a quick citizenship in contrast to the Senate plan of a long, extended, “probation” for background checks, possible fines and back taxes. Trouble, wiggle-room..?
Obama then suggested that if the Congress did not act quickly, he would act. That suggestion shows Obama’s irrelevance in the movement towards CIR..
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20150930160317/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/president-obamas-immigration-reform-irrelevance/]
Smoking Gun Memo Proves
Tanton network Manipulates Republicans
By Bob Quasius – November 19, 2011
Update: This memo is now being shared around Washington, alerting Republican leaders to the pattern of manipulation by the Tanton network. You can find it quoted in this Washington Post article.
John Tanton is infamous for founding numerous anti-immigrant groups, such as FAIR, NumbersUSA, the Center for Immigration Studies, and Californians for Population Stabilization, which not only seek strict enforcement of immigration laws, but also drastic reductions in LEGAL immigration. Tanton also founded U.S. English and Pro-English, which decry changes in culture and misrepresent immigrants’ willingness to learn English and assimilate, and pursue “official English” policies designed to make America less welcoming to New Americans who are going through the process of assimilation.
Among the papers that John Tanton donated to the University of Michigan, is a 2001 ‘smoking gun’ memo that shows how Tanton has manipulated the Republican Party with the bogus argument that immigrants invariably become Democrats and so immigration is contrary to the interests of the Republican Party. Direct quote:
“The goal is to change Republicans’ perception of immigration so that when they encounter the word “immigrant,” their reaction is “Democrat.”
“Our plan is to hire a lobbyist who will carry the following message to Republicans on Capitol Hill and to business leaders: Continued massive immigration will soon cost you political control of the White House and Congress, given the current, even division of the electorate, and the massive infusion of voters about to be made to the Democratic side. We are about to replay the Democratic hegemony of 1933-53, fueled back then by the massive immigration of 1890-1924.”
Tanton did indeed hire James Edwards, a lobbyist who had been a staffer for a member of the House Immigration Caucus, to persuade Republicans that “immigrant” is synomymous with “Democrat.” Tanton cites data from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), without mentioning that Tanton founded CIS and a close colleague of Tanton is the head of research for CIS, which is well known for jazzed up statistics in support of Tanton’s anti-any-immigration agenda. Tanton founded in excess of 30 organizations, most of which are clearly intended to reduce all forms of immigration, and maintain a clear European-American majority. Here’s a list from Tanton’s own papers.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160330141833/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/smoking-gun-memo-proves-tanton-network-manipulates-republicans/ ]
A 21st Century Immigration Policy: How the GOP can dominate the issue
By Aaron Alghawi – November 7, 2016
Guest op-ed (re-posted with permission of author – original link)
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160731065147/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/a-21st-century-immigration-policy-how-the-gop-can-dominate-the-issue/ ]
Texas GOP Immigration Platform: Pandering, or Progress?
By Bob Price – June 14, 2012
The Republican Party of Texas made, what many are calling, an historic step forward in the debate to solve our nation’s broken immigration system last Friday night when it adopted “The Texas Solution” as a new plank in the state party’s platform. However, the lengthy floor fight was not the end of the debate. It is, rather, a new beginning where we have proven that reasonable people can come together, with differing opinions, and come together with a solution to move forward. The question is being raised by some – Is this progress, or is it pandering?
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20120624023307/http://cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/texas-gop-immigration-platform-pandering-or-progress ]
Analyzing the Lies of Liars, The Usual Suspects – FAIR, the Federation for American Immigration Reform
By Raoul Lowery Contreras – May 6, 2013
The “usual suspects” with the Big Lie about Immigration Reform have emerged and exposed their ignorance and bigotry for all to see. It is in their “FAIR LEGISLATIVE UPDATE APRIL 29, 2013.”
Everyone must first be aware of who these people are that issued this “update.”
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) was organized by ultra-liberal population restrictionist John Tanton of Michigan.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20151002135536/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/analyzing-the-lies-of-liars-the-usual-suspects-fair-the-federation-for-american-immigration-reform/ ]
Debunking the Birthright Citizenship Magnet Myth
By Bob Quasius – June 8, 2013 – Quasius
A frequent Nativist narrative claims immigrant women come to the U.S. illegally to take advantage of birthright citizenship, having citizen babies to receive a lifetime of ‘free stuff’ and protection from deportation. This myth is almost totally lacking in facts. Many myths use a small nugget of truth, then expand that nugget using lies, half-truths, and spin to create a myth, and this myth is no exception.
Birth Tourism – Entering the U.S. Legally for Birthright Citizenship
In the U.S. there is a very small “birth tourism” industry where each year a few thousand wealthy women pay tens of thousands for a visa and delivery expenses in the U.S. Many U.S. embassies and consulates abroad already refuse visas to pregnant women, but apparently some do…
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20141024121640/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/debunking-the-birthright-citizenship-magnet-theory/]
Defusing the Population Bomb
By Bob Quasius – October 3, 2014
The “Population Bomb” and Anti-Immigrant Lobby
Lately conservatives are becoming increasingly aware of the deep ties between the leadership of the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR), NumbersUSA, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), and Californians for Population Stabilization, and Zero Population Growth, Planned Parenthood, and radical environmentalists.
The roots of today’s anti-immigrant lobby can be traced to hard core nativists and progressives of the progressive era (1880-1920s), with a big boost in the 1960s due to the book “The Population Bomb” by Paul Ehrlich, also a noted climate alarmist who predicted the Earth would become covered with glaciers several miles deep, but now predicts we’ll fry due to global warming.
Obama’s science adviser, John Holdren, is also a disciple of Paul Ehrlich.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140802071033/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/anti-immigrant-lobby-defusing-population-bomb/ ]
Paul Ryan called “traitor” for agreeing with part of Trump
By Dave Leach – January 16, 2017
Paul Ryan, speaker of the U.S. House, told CNN Thursday that the “deportation force” promised by President Trump “isn’t happening”, which cannot be documented to differ from Trump’s own detail-deprived promises about how he is going to think up a policy that will “make everybody happy” and will not focus on kids brought here by their parents.
And yet, because Ryan stated his sense of what Congress would do about a detail upon which Trump has been all over the map, several conservative media called him an arrogant traitor yesterday.
So first, in this article, are quotes from Ryan, according to CNN, so you can judge whether Ryan said anything so different than Trump, or so encouraging to the forces of “amnesty”, that he can rationally be thought a “traitor” to Trump voters.
Second is my fax to Speaker Ryan, taking the opportunity of this criticism of him to encourage him and offer him information I pray he will use. This copy includes Ryan’s contact info. Please consider contacting him yourself to encourage and educate him. Or at least to educate him. (If you “snail mail”, your letter will be delayed 2-3 extra days to be irradiated against anthrax.)
Third is a copy of the “traitor” charge against him that was carried by several conservative media, so you can see the contrast between what Ryan actually said, and the fact-famished charges.
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20170613235014/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/paul-ryan-called-traitor-for-agreeing-with-part-of-trump/]
Ann Coulter – Liberal With The Truth and a Racist Xenophobe Too!
By Bob Quasius – February 21, 2013
…However, when someone seems obsessed with race, ethnicity, and national origin and keeps repeating the same falsehoods from questionable sources, it becomes apparent the labels racist and xenophobe fit Ann Coulter.
Did Ann Coulter Compare Immigrants to Roaches?
I shook my head in disbelief at Ann Coulter’s 2007 piece Bush’s America: Roach Motel. The title alone insinuates that immigrants are akin to cockroaches. After accusing the highly respected conservative Linda Chavez of race baiting, Ann Coulter promptly proved Linda right by exhibiting prejudice towards Hispanics. Examples:
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160826185548/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/ann-coulter-liberal/ ]
The Mexicans are coming, the Mexicans are coming!
By Raoul Lowery Contreras – February 22, 2014
Since the early 1990s this writer has focused attention on people who hate Mexicans, some for racist reasons, some for ethnic hatred, some for just plain white supremacy reasons. Now, these people have come out from under their rocks for all to see.
While many Americans seethe privately about Mexicans and where they come from, Mexico, as well as Mexican history, Mexican religion and Mexican economic, social and personal contact with America and Americans, few have publicly manifested their hatred and profound anti-Mexican racism in public. It wasn’t polite.
Polite American society no longer tolerates public racism like it used to before the civil rights revolution. That revolution was fueled by the United States Supreme Court decision in a critical Texas ruling (Hernandez v. Texas 347 U.S. 475) in which it ruled official governmental discrimination against people of Mexican origin was illegal.
That decision took anti-Mexican racism out of the state capitols and buried in the minds of some individuals.
Pat Buchanan Nativist
In the early 90s, however, it surfaced in public discourse with the emotional and hysterical campaign by people like Pat Buchanan, Ross Perot, Jesse Jackson, a group labeled the Halloween Coalition, that arose to fight the North American free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20160630160230/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/the-mexicans-are-coming-the-mexicans-are-coming/ ]
Welcoming Immigrants: Where does the U.S. Rank?
June 22 2013 Quasius
As we know, the U.S. has long been a nation of immigrants. Most Americans descended from immigrants, and the U.S. is world renowned for welcoming immigrants. Since 1965, when per nation quotas was repealed and replaced by an overall immigration quota, and the 1790 bar against naturalization by non-whites was repealed, we have been welcoming immigrants from every nation on Earth.
The anti-any-immigrant lobby for decades has been issuing dire warnings of the economic, environmental, and social disaster that lurks if we don’t drastically curtail all immigration. The Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform, NumbersUSA, and the Center for Immigration Studies all advocate for “traditional” immigration levels, code words for pre-1965 immigration policy. The anti-any-immigrant lobby seeks 1956 U.S. immigration levels of 250,000, a 75% reduction, and that only after a ten-year timeout of no immigration at all!
Where Does the U.S. Rank in Welcoming Immigrants?
Often we hear the U.S welcomes more immigrants than any other nation, but is that really true? The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) publishes reports on migration levels. U.S. legal immigration levels of just over million is indeed the largest in the world in absolute number, but as a percentage of population, we actually welcome half as many legal immigrants (0.34%) as other developed nations (0.60%).
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20141018221455/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/welcoming-immigrants-where-does-the-us-rank/ ]
Child Refugees: The Conservative Guide
By Joseph Laughon, July 15, 2014
This story is moving to me on a variety of levels. On a political level, my belief in free market, conservative immigration principles means I immediately sympathize with these refugees’ desire to live a better life in the United States. However for me it goes deeper than that. It has become very personal.
Both my paternal great-grandfathers (Juan Manuel Laughon and Salvador de la Cruz) came over here as minors. My great-grandfather Sal came here as an orphaned and unaccompanied immigrant whose presence in the US was not likely legal due to his pauper status. He walked nearly 1,000 miles from Chihuahua to Long Beach at the age of 9.
In addition I have spent time with abandoned children, in particular in Orphanage Emmanuel in Honduras, during my travels to Central America. I lie awake sometimes in the dread that one of my young Honduran friends could be sleeping in a detention center in the US tonight.
[Despite this very personal introduction, this long article is full of factual evidence that the interests of refugees do not compete with the interests of citizens.]
Read more. [https://web.archive.org/web/20151029051107/http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com:80/child-refugees-conservative-guide/]
Bajo la lluvia – de Ivan Duin-Obregon (opinión invitado)
La inmigración es algo de lo que esta hablando mucha gente en USA. Unos para bien y otros para mal. Dicen los entendidos que en los últimos cinco años, han llegado cerca de 8 millones de inmigrantes a los Estados Unidos. Esta estadística es alta y ha provocado un intenso debate. Pero la inmigración tiene un serie de ventajas, como bien lo ha repetido hasta el agotamiento el Alcalde de Nueva York.