It’s been a giddy few days for criminal aliens, their running-dog politicians and lap-dog media.
The people who we’re told are hard-working, but poor, somehow found the time to pour into the streets of our major cities and demand the right to come here illegally and have citizenship bestowed upon them, after they’ve symbolically wiped their feet on the flag and the laws of our land.
But before demonstrators hit the pavement, the left’s propaganda machine was hard at work. The New York Times, which could easily be mistaken for the newsletter of the National Council of La Raza, was advising Bush on how to commit political suicide with a dull hari-kari knife.
In an April 9 editorial, the Times shrilled: “If President Bush wants serious immigration reform [read: an amnesty for 11 million] as badly as he says he does, he had better step up soon and get his party behind him. Otherwise the best hope [for Teddy Kennedy and the Democrats to mint new voters] to fix the immigration system will end up legislative road kill, steamrollered by partisanship and pecked at by crows cawing, ‘No amnesty!’”
The editorial tantrum concluded: “It now falls on Bush to keep the pressure on. … He must insist that lawmakers get behind a comprehensive solution, and that filibusters and poisonous amendments [nods of the head toward border security and English] not be allowed to crush the possibility of real reform.” Real reform? Nobody, but nobody, can sling it like the New York Times.
Then came the paper’s front-page editorials: “Senate’s Failure to Agree on Immigrant Plan Angers Workers and Employers Alike” (April 9) and “Across the U.S., Growing Rallies for Immigration” (April 10).
By “immigration” the Times means border-jumpers. “Workers” is Times-speak for infiltrators and trespassers — an army of occupation, a fifth column deployed to facilitate El Reconquista. The robber barons who benefit from illegal labor (shifting part of their costs to the taxpayers) are the aggrieved “employers.”
Amazingly, in several thousand words of coverage, the Times couldn’t find one dissenting voice to interview — not one American who is fed up with criminals lecturing us on morality — a horde of arrogant mendicants demanding their rights, if you please. But that’s the way the mainstream media skews the debate.
(For me, the high point in coverage of the Mexican hat dance in our streets came on CNN, of all places, which showed a lone man — who looked like an ordinarily staid member of Middle America — screaming at a group of demonstrators: “It’s my country — and I’m not going to let you have it!” He spoke for millions of us.)
But after looking high and low, the Times simply could not find an American nauseated by this spectacle.
That’s understandable. After all, only 59% of the public opposes allowing illegal aliens to apply for legal, temporary-worker status (NBC-Wall Street Journal Poll, March 2006). Only 62% of us are against making it easier for illegals to become citizens (Quinnipiac Survey, February 2006) And a mere three-quarters of the American people say Washington isn’t doing enough at the borders to keep out the Rio Grande synchronized wading team (Time magazine poll, January 2006). In this debate, the New York Times has decided that the sentiments of 60% to 75% of the American people aren’t worth its notice.
How much does the issue matter to us? In the latest Associated Press poll (conducted April 3-5), roughly the same number named immigration as our top national problem as the economy (13% vs. 14%), though less than the percentage who see the Iraq war as our chief concern.
For the Times, an amnesty now would be a triple-play.
It will result in another surge of illegal immigration, furthering the multiculturalists’ goal of deconstructing America. Angry conservatives will stay home in the fall, assuring that Republicans lose Congress. Then, with a Democratic majority in both Houses, the left can move to impeach the president next year.
Try to imagine Hillary doing something opposed by most congressional Democrats, and which would totally alienate her base, because the New York Post told her to do it.
After the Times laid down cover fire, the open-borders brigade hit the streets: 500,000 in Dallas, 200,000 in San Diego, 7,000 in Miami, with 4,000 each in Birmingham and Boise — and more to come.
Following the initial anti-Americanism of these celebrations of criminality and national dissolution, the huddled masses got some savvy PR advice. (Cool it with the Mexican flags, and the “Gringos-go-home” signs.) Rep. Luis Gutierrez revealed that he has pleaded with demonstrators leave their national flags at home (lest viewers get an idea of where their loyalties really lie) and wrap themselves in Old Glory instead.
Still, the racism and anti-Americanism could not be completely suppressed.
Go to Michelle Malkin’s website and see America’s future in living-color — the Mexican flag flying above the Stars and Stripes, the Black Panthers giving the clenched fist salute, and the signs: “No Somos Terroristas [We’re Not Terrorists] Like You Are Bush,” “Honkies, Why Don’t You Take Your Asses Back To Europe” and “Honkies Are Illegal Aliens Too!!!!” (next to pictures of Che Guevara). Ivy Sellers, a HUMAN EVENTS reporter who covered the D.C. rally, said she wanted to interview protestors but couldn’t find any who spoke English (another, you should pardon the expression, sign of the times).
International ANSWER (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism), the Marxist surrender gang, has been a major force behind the rallies. And the New York Times forgot to tell us! Fancy that.
The Democrats are exultant. Looking like a bloated piñata (tequila-blossoms covering every square centimeter of his nose), Teddy Kennedy was the most popular speaker at the Washington rally.
The Big Enchilada addressed a series of questions to the huddled masses infesting the Mall, including: “Do you love America?” which he immediately translated into Spanish (“Amas a America?”). They love America so much that they can’t be bothered to learn the language of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution? One imagines that if he’d asked more pointed questions (Do you love food stamps? Do you adore the free medical care your kids get at U.S. hospitals?), the response would have been even more overwhelming. What’s the Spanish for “Go home!”?
The New York rally featured Hillary Rodham Clinton. “Your faces are the faces of America,” the American Evita told the throng. If she meant the faces in our jails, in youth-gang lineups, at the welfare offices, and at hiring sites for day-laborers, she would be correct.
Speaking of faces, have you ever seen a picture of the Mexican Congress? It’s whiter than the Santa Monica Yacht Club. In its entire history, Mexico has had exactly one Indian president (Benito Juarez). Mexico deliberately exports its excess population (its most uneducated and least skilled), then has the chutzpah to call us racists when we object.
Let me demonstrate the absurdity of this argument.
What if I invaded the Kennedy compound in Hyannis this evening? Say I then raided the senator’s well-stocked liquor cabinet, helped myself to any valuables, and installed myself in his guest room. By the racism-reasoning of the illegal immigrant lobby, if Señor Ted objected to my presence, that would make him an anti-Semite.
The Democrats are planning to spend millions on Hispanic outreach this fall. Timorous Republicans are caving faster than even I had thought possible.
On Tuesday, in a joint statement, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist announced that they were dropping a provision from the House bill making it a felony to be in the United States illegally — which would imply that illegal immigration is a serious matter (wouldn’t want to give anyone that idea).
Republicans could use immigration to rally Middle America and mobilize an army of angry patriots (of all races and ethnicities) in the fall. Instead, while the Democrats exploit it to mobilize their base (the alien and alienated), except for stalwarts like Representatives Tom Tancredo (R.-Colo.) and Peter King (R.-N.Y.) the party of red-state America will be in Siesta Land, while one of the most pressing threats to our security gets worse.
The felony provision gutted from the House bill would have carried a punishment of up to a year in prison. (Leftists would like to present each illegal crossing our borders with a fruit basket and a voter registration card.)
Personally, I’d like to put them to work on a chain gang, breaking big rocks into little rocks, for a few years, before repatriating their posteriors back to their respective homelands. Then I’d build a barrier on our southern border to rival the Great Wall of China. Then I’d station a division of sharpshooters along the Rio Grande.
On Monday, I was on the Adam McManus Show on KSLR in San Antonio. A lady called who said her parents immigrated from Mexico. She said her dad served in the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and she doesn’t consider herself a Mexican-American, but an American, period. She was as disgusted as this Anglo by what’s going on in our streets — proving, once again, that Americanism isn’t about blood, but belief — not what’s on the skin but what’s in the heart.
If we can find candidates with cojones, the patriots are going to have their rally in November, at the polling place. Watch out!
This article was first published by FrontPageMag.com. It was reprinted with the author’s permission.
Below are photos from Monday’s immigration rally on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. Copyright Robert B. Bluey, Eagle Publishing, 2006. MUST CREDIT HUMAN EVENTS.
Click the thumbnails to enlarge.
Sign up to the Human Events newsletter