PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
Of course they are.
1. In the mid-60s the Democrat Party decided that the American public doesn't and won't endorse their insane policies.....and decided the answer was to replace the voting populace with a more malleable one.
Democrats knew what they were doing when they passed the 1965 immigration law that altered the flow from European immigrants to the flood from third world nations.
" Prior to 1965, the demographics of immigration stood as mostly Europeans; 68 percent of legal immigrants in the 1950s came from Europe and Canada.
The proponents of the [Democrat] Hart–Celler Act argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. [Democrat] President Johnson called the bill "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions."[16] [Democrat] Secretary of StateDean Rusk and other politicians, including [Democrat] Senator Ted Kennedy, asserted that the bill would not affect US demographic mix.[17] However, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed following the passage of the law.[18][19] Specifically, the [Democrat] Hart–Celler Act allowed increased numbers of people to migrate to the United States from Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Southern and Eastern Europe." Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 - Wikipedia
2. There is an economic component here. Until America became a welfare state, there was no reason to stem the flow of immigrants.....any immigrants.
They came to work, for opportunity, not to be bought by the Democrats and told that they would be recompensed if they would just vote....illegally, and the 'right' way....as Obama told them to.
Milton Friedman was for illegal immigration.
"Friedman's considered view is that free migration without a welfare state is first best.
Welfare for all legal residents makes first-best free migration impossible. In that case, a high rate of illegal immigration is the second-best solution."
Milton Friedman's Argument for Illegal Immigration
Sooo....either open borders but no welfare in the country....or control of our borders but no welfare in the country.
Interesting economic choice?
3. It is difficult for Democrats to deny that they are for illegal immigration, open borders, when this headline appears today in their house organ, the NYTimes:
"There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders
.....a brave Democrat.....
I’m talking about opening up America’s borders to everyone who wants to move here.
...not just opposing President Trump’s wall but also opposing the nation’s cruel and expensive immigration and border-security apparatus in its entirety. Imagine radically shifting our stance toward outsiders from one of suspicion to one of warm embrace."
Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders
.....as though those of us who work and earn and pay taxes would not have to shoulder the burden.
The party that shares the aims of Karl Marx are actually demanding that American workers bind themselves with the chains that Marx promised would be removed.
Clearly, Democrats are not the party for Americans.
1. In the mid-60s the Democrat Party decided that the American public doesn't and won't endorse their insane policies.....and decided the answer was to replace the voting populace with a more malleable one.
Democrats knew what they were doing when they passed the 1965 immigration law that altered the flow from European immigrants to the flood from third world nations.
" Prior to 1965, the demographics of immigration stood as mostly Europeans; 68 percent of legal immigrants in the 1950s came from Europe and Canada.
The proponents of the [Democrat] Hart–Celler Act argued that it would not significantly influence United States culture. [Democrat] President Johnson called the bill "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions."[16] [Democrat] Secretary of StateDean Rusk and other politicians, including [Democrat] Senator Ted Kennedy, asserted that the bill would not affect US demographic mix.[17] However, the ethnic composition of immigrants changed following the passage of the law.[18][19] Specifically, the [Democrat] Hart–Celler Act allowed increased numbers of people to migrate to the United States from Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and Southern and Eastern Europe." Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 - Wikipedia
2. There is an economic component here. Until America became a welfare state, there was no reason to stem the flow of immigrants.....any immigrants.
They came to work, for opportunity, not to be bought by the Democrats and told that they would be recompensed if they would just vote....illegally, and the 'right' way....as Obama told them to.
Milton Friedman was for illegal immigration.
"Friedman's considered view is that free migration without a welfare state is first best.
Welfare for all legal residents makes first-best free migration impossible. In that case, a high rate of illegal immigration is the second-best solution."
Milton Friedman's Argument for Illegal Immigration
Sooo....either open borders but no welfare in the country....or control of our borders but no welfare in the country.
Interesting economic choice?
3. It is difficult for Democrats to deny that they are for illegal immigration, open borders, when this headline appears today in their house organ, the NYTimes:
"There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders
.....a brave Democrat.....
I’m talking about opening up America’s borders to everyone who wants to move here.
...not just opposing President Trump’s wall but also opposing the nation’s cruel and expensive immigration and border-security apparatus in its entirety. Imagine radically shifting our stance toward outsiders from one of suspicion to one of warm embrace."
Opinion | There’s Nothing Wrong With Open Borders
.....as though those of us who work and earn and pay taxes would not have to shoulder the burden.
The party that shares the aims of Karl Marx are actually demanding that American workers bind themselves with the chains that Marx promised would be removed.
Clearly, Democrats are not the party for Americans.