May 16, 2006

Reactions to the Bush immigration speech

The blog is covering the Senate as it shoots down common-sense amendments to the Hagel-Martinez 103 Million Legal Immigrants act.

Mickey Kaus is on fire.

That John Stuart Mill of the 21st Century, JPod, is concerned about intellectual intolerance over immigration policy: "The Inability to Stomach Dissent." Irony is not JPod's strong suit, as Eunomia points out.

A reader of Manhattan Transfer objects to the word "temporary" in Bush's "Temporary Worker Program."

Economist Tyler Cowen tries to justify his LA Times op-ed counseling insouciance about the effects of low-skilled immigration. He writes:

"David Card and others have plenty of data on how well the second and third generations of Latinos do in assimilating and entering the mainstream of American life. I find the overall portrait a reassuring one. I will look for data on Mexicans per se and let you all know if I find anything useful."

Mean Mr. Mustard points out that letting millions of Muslims into Europe also seemed like a good idea at the time.

Alexander K. McClure on PoliPundit defends the speech and concludes, stirringly:

"If you think that is amnesty, then you are either a moron or a liar. If you ar truly a Republican to begin with, if you are truly a conservative, then you will applaud this speech and support the reforms he has articulated. Otherwise, you are not a Republican. You are not a conservative. You are a LIAR. A LIAR"

Udolpho summarizes Bush's speech (and offers what is, in my completely objective opinion, a practical and idealistic suggestion for how to respond):

"Well I would like to address your concerns. Here is how I will prove to you that you can trust me: by repeatedly saying you can trust me. Would I say it while looking so sincere if it weren't really true? Look, my underlip is quavering."

Dennis Dale responds to the NYT article on the Mexican government's protest to Bush and comments on the NYT article about how Bush has (unlike other conservatives they could mention) always been nice to Mexicans:

"What I love about this quote is how it reveals just how completely subsumed is the ritual of a Caucasian proving his moral worth by engaging his dark-skinned brethren." [More]

Chris Roach at BrainWash is not impressed.

Andrew Sullivan thinks Bush's speech was fine.

Thrasymachus speculates on why Bush so much wants to Mexicanize America:

Maybe a nation where the wealthy elite lord it over a poor peasant class appeals to him. Servants are cheaper and better behaved in Mexico. It's always clear just for whom the laws exist and are enforced in Mexico. Bush looks south and sees a paradise.

Mac Johnson notes in Human Events:

The President’s promise of enforcement as part of a “comprehensive” plan is thus simply unbelievable in light of past performance. But worse yet, it is now just plain irresponsible. Every one of the President’s proposals for increased security could be passed quickly, if they were not tied to a guest worker amnesty. Indeed, all of them could have already been passed and signed into law if they weren’t being used as sugar to coat the bitter pill of legalization for millions of illegal aliens. But the President and Senators John McCain and Teddy Kennedy (as well as others) want the amnesty giveaway so badly that they refuse to allow the Senate to vote on the enforcement measures as a separate bill, as the House of Representatives has done.

PrestoPundit points out that even Hugh Hewitt is expressing skepticism over the President's sincerity.

Pytheas comments on the Senate's rejection Tuesday of Sen. Johnny Isakson's sensible amendment to postpone a guest worker program until the border is secure.

Surfeited with Dainties writes:

So now they are not guests but "temporary workers." I'm sure this poll tested better. So what is temporary about it? Does the program wrap up at some point? When do the workers return to their home country - or rather - who returns them?

No one. It is not a temporary worker program - it is an American replacement program. Bush is obviously tired of us so he's importing as many people who don't read the NY Times as he can find - whether by multiplying the number of legal immigrants by five or by opening up a new stream of immigrants called "temporary workers."

Gideon argues that keeping the border open bails out Vicente Fox, and that that's a good thing.

My published articles are archived at -- Steve Sailer

No comments: