Prez. Hopeful Sen. Sanders Criticizes Disney For Replacing American Workers

An interesting article from http://www.vdare.com about Bernie Sanders and visas. This follows this post about Hillary Clinton's open borders. This follows this post about this year's black vote. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Prez. Hopeful Sen. Sanders Criticizes Disney For Replacing American Workers

https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax

Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vt.), criticized Disney for using H-1B visas to replace American IT workers with cheaper, foreign labor last year during a campaign rally yesterday in Anaheim, Calif.
Walt Disney World laid off around 250 American workers last year after the workers were forced to train their replacements in order to receive their severance pay.

"Meanwhile the CEO of Disney made $46.5 million in total compensation last year. That is what we're talking about in a rigged economy,” Sen. Sanders told the crowd.

During a Senate Subcommittee hearing in March 2016 Leo Perrero, a former tech worker at Disney World, broke down when telling his emotional story of how it felt to sit there and train the person who is taking your job.
“I started to think what kind of American was I becoming? Was I going to become part of ruining our country by taking severance pay in exchange for training my foreign replacement? How many other American families would be affected by the same foreign worker that I trained?” Perrero told the subcommittee.
Read more on this story at Politico.com.

high tech workers

Legal Immigration

• Log in to post comments

MSNBC Spikes Video of Pro-Abortion Bill Clinton Asked About Woman He Reportedly Raped

An interesting story from www.lifenews.com about Bill Clinton. This follows this post about botched abortions. For two very interesting books click HERE.
Please follow me here.

MSNBC Spikes Video of Pro-Abortion Bill Clinton Asked About Woman He Reportedly Raped

National   Tim Graham     Washington, DC

Share this story:

Conservative journalists simply won’t play by the liberal media’s bizarre rules about being vague on Bill Clinton’s sexual misconduct – especially when asking him a question. On Thursday in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, the Daily Caller’s Kerry Picket (an MRC alum) asked the former president directly several times how he felt about “Juanita Broaddrick’s reemergence.” He refused to utter a word. Broaddrick tweeted “It never goes away” about her charge of being assaulted by Clinton in 1978.

NBC’s Kristen Welker asked in a much vaguer way if his “past” would hurt Mrs. Clinton. David Rutz at the Washington Free Beacon reported while MSNBC aired Picket’s questions live in mid-afternoon, MSNBC played by Clinton rules and sliced Picket out in re-airings:
In an Alex Pappas article headlined “Bill Clinton Avoids Reporter’s Question About Reemergence of Juanita Broaddrick,” the Daily Caller posted the full video of the exchange that played on MSNBC at 2:29 ET. Clinton answered NBC reporter Kristen Welker’s questions, which did not mention Broaddrick, about the effect of his past on his wife’s campaign, but Clinton ignored Picket’s queries with the actual name of the accuser.
When asked how he would handle Trump’s playing the Bill card, he told Welker, “I don’t have any response. If he wins the Republican nomination, we’ll have plenty of time to talk.I have no interest in getting involved in their politics or doing anything except trying to help Hillary.”
SIGN THE PETITION! We Oppose Hillary Clinton!
When MSNBC re-aired Welker’s package in the 3pm and 4pm hours, Picket’s questions about Broaddrick are skipped over. Only Welker’s question was shown.
Journalistically, editing out Kerry Picket’s naming of Broaddrick can be an easy call – because Clinton refused to acknowledge the question, there’s no real exchange.  On the other hand, it strongly suggests that Clinton can veto the airing of questions he doesn’t like by refusing to answer. In the Reagan years, the media used to run footage of President Reagan failing to answer questions over helicopter noise. They implied Reagan was denying “the people” those answers to the media.
Since 1999, Clinton has never had to give a direct answer to the Broaddrick accusation of rape. He merely referred reporters to his lawyer, who issued a statement calling it “absolutely false.”
LifeNews.com Note: Tim Graham is the director of media analysis for the Media Research Center, a media watchdog group. He was a White House correspondent for World magazine in 2001 and 2002. This originally appeared on the NewsBusters web site.

Share this story:

Editorial: DEM Side - Will Hillary lose Iowa & NH?

Editorial

On the GOP side, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are two of the best candidates the GOP has fielded in a long time. They energize the base and show that they are willing to fight for conservative issues. Mr. Trump didn't fold in spite of all of the boycotts, and Mr. Cruz has been a stalwart conservative in the Senate. Most of the other GOP candidates are also fair and worth at least some consideration in this election.

On the DEM side, Mrs. Clinton is the current front-runner. However, even many Dems don't know whether she'll change her position on any issue at any time. Mr. Sanders, even if you don't agree with him, seems like you know where he stands in his Socialist positions. Would it be better for the GOP, or even the USA, if Mr. Sanders, rather than Mrs. Clinton got the DEM nomination?

http://www.dickmorris.com/hillary-hints-at-defeats-in-iowa-and-nh/

An interesting article from www.numbersusa.com about the AFL-CIO and immigration. This follows this post about Matt Bevin winning the Kentucky governor's race. This follows this post about immigration enforcement in North Carolina. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Texas Union Leader Challenge H-2B Visas

 

Texas AFL-CIO union leader, Michael Cunningham, challenged H-2B visa applications, saying that there are Americans who can fill these positions. H-2B visas are temporary work permits given to low-skilled foreign workers to fill seasonal positions. They're typically used by landscapers, hoteliers, and resort areas.
After a change in immigration law in 2006 required companies seeking foreign workers to inform local labor unions, many unions were flooded with certified letters about the job opportunities being offered to foreign workers. Some companies were looking for a few temporary construction workers while others wanted to hire 100 or more foreign workers, whose wages varied from $3-$10 less per hour than what American construction workers were making.
The companies claimed that they needed the visas to meet the labor needs for jobs that Americans didn’t want to do. Yet, Cunningham claims that most of the time American workers often do not know about these employment opportunities.
The federal government offers 33,000 H-2B visas twice a year, but a surge of U.S. applicants or other disruptions can force a company’s visa application to the back of the line. Cunningham has studied the visa rules and regulations and challenged many applications on simple errors like timeliness and proper job posting language, or on whether the jobs are actually temporary.
He also encourages local union leaders to prove there are enough U.S. workers to fill the job positions. If a company is looking for 100 H-2B visas for foreign welders the local union members will flood the company’s fax machines with resumes from American workers.
One immigration lawyer, Jacob Monty, says a companies’ need for foreign workers is like “getting them on crack”. This addiction can be interrupted when unions challenge visa applications forcing many to the back of the line.
Jordan "Gig" Ritenour, Director of marketing for the international roofers' union and business manager in Texas said, "we were all so amazed that so many contractors are applying for foreign workers when we have thousands of roofers looking for work all the time." He noted that one foreign worker request was looking for a roofer for $8 an hour in comparison to a union member who is paid $22.84 an hour and a non-union member who is paid about $14 an hour.
"The reason employers want to use H-2B workers is because they can get a workforce that they can pay less and who will gladly work under adverse working conditions that are often better than what they can get at home," says Bill Beardall, Director of the Equal Justice Center, which represents workers on H-2B visas.
Last week Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) introduced legislation in both the House and the Senate that would increase the number of H-2B workers accepted into the U.S. each year.
Read more on this story at the Houston Chronicle.

 

 

Democratic Hopefuls offer little hope for American workers during first debate

An interesting article from www.numbersusa.com about the Democratic presidential candidates. This follows this post about visas to displace American workers. This follows this post about the candidates for U.S. House Speaker. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here

Democratic Hopefuls offer little hope for American workers during first debate

https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax

hile the first two Republican debates showed that the large field of GOP Hopefuls are mostly split on the issue of immigration, the Democratic Hopefuls share similar positions during the Party’s first debate on Tuesday evening. There was agreement among the five Hopefuls on the issues of amnesty, in-state tuition, and eligibility for taxpayer funded health care, and no mention of protecting American workers from new massive waves of foreign workers.
There were three major takeaways from Tuesday’s debate. First, all five Hopefuls agree that 11 million illegal aliens should receive legal status and work permits to compete with American workers before any enforcement provisions are implemented. Second, it remains unclear if any of the Democratic Hopefuls would even support enforcement provisions with the possible exception of former Virginia Senator Jim Webb. Third, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley stood out as the Hopeful that would give the most to illegal aliens.

Tens of millions of people on the move around the world heard a debate of one of America's major parties in which the message was repeated over and over that if they come to America illegally they will be welcomed, celebrated, made citizens and promised all kinds of special health care and college education possibilities. Democrats used to say that illegal immigration had to end after the next amnesty. Not a word tonight about the legitimacy of immigration laws in protecting the workers, the wages and the quality of life of the American people. Blue-collar Americans had to be weeping at what has become of the Party of Labor.
-- NumbersUSA President & Founder Roy Beck

Gov. O'Malley was the first to mention immigration when he touted the passage of Maryland's DREAM Act through voter referendum during his tenure. The measure offers in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens who graduate from Maryland high schools. CNN debate moderator Anderson Cooper noted that Sen. Bernie Sanders also supports in-state tuition for illegal aliens and asked former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton if she shared the same opinion.

My plan would support any state that takes that position, and would work with those states and encourage more states to do the same thing.
If their states agree, then we want more states to do the same thing.
-- Sec. Clinton

In-state tuition wasn't the only reward for illegal aliens that the Democratic Hopefuls want taxpayers to fund. Gov. O'Malley wants to also give away subsidies on the health care exchange; a position that Sec. Clinton stopped short of supporting.

I want to open up the opportunity for immigrants to be able to buy in to the exchanges under the Affordable Care Act. I think to go beyond that, as I understand what Governor O'Malley has recommended, so that they would get the same subsidies . . .
. . . I think that is -- it raises so many issues. It would be very difficult to administer, it needs to be part of a comprehensive immigration reform, when we finally do get to it.
-- Sec. Clinton

Sen. Webb was more ambiguous in his answer, saying that he "wouldn't have a problem" with illegal aliens accessing the health care exchanges, but didn't say whether or not he thought they should be eligible for the subsidies. He did use the opportunity, however, to make the night's only reference to reducing illegal immigration.

No country has -- is a country without defining its borders. We need to resolve this issue. I actually introduced an amendment in the 2007 immigration bill.
-- Sen. Webb

Former Rhode Island Governor Lincoln Chafee didn't have a chance to speak during the limited immigration portion of the debate, and Sen. Sanders only had one chance when he was asked by CNN Espanol anchor Juan Carlos Lopez about his opposition to the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill in 2007.

I voted against that piece of legislation because it had guest-worker provisions in it which the Southern Poverty Law Center talked about being semi-slavery. Guest workers are coming in, they're working under terrible conditions, but if they stand up for their rights, they're thrown out of the country. I was not the only progressive to vote against that legislation for that reason.
-- Sen. Sanders

No one cared to mention that Sen. Sanders supported the Gang of Eight's amnesty bill in 2013 that would have issued four-times more guest worker visas than the McCain-Kennedy bill in 2007.
On our Worker Protection Immigration Grade Cards, four of the five Hopefuls who participated in last night's debate have Fs and none of them said anything that would change their ratings. Sen. Webb is slightly better with a D+, and again, was the only one of the five to mention enforcement.
Despite a lot of other talk throughout the debate about income disparity and a struggling middle class, not one candidate indicated that they would remove the pressures placed on the middle class by high immigration levels.
CHRIS CHMIELENSKI is the Director of Content & Activism for NumbersUSA

Tags:

2016 elections

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. The views expressed in blogs do not necessarily reflect the official position of NumbersUSA.

American Workers Replaced By Foreign H-1B Workers File Discrimination Complaint

An interesting article from www.numbersusa.com about visas to displace American workers. This follows this post about Columbus Day. This follows this post about the candidates for U.S. House Speaker. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

American Workers Replaced By Foreign H-1B Workers File Discrimination Complaint

https://www.numbersusa.com/petition?ID=17040

American IT workers who have been replaced by H-1B workers are claiming discrimination based on national origin and taking their case to court. These court cases are responses to the increasing practice of organizations, especially in the IT industry, of laying off American employees after they have trained their H-1B visa replacement. American workers are forced to train their foreign worker counterparts as a condition of their severance pay.
Currently, there are at least seven IT workers at Disney who are pursing federal and state discrimination complaints over their layoffs. These complaints are the first step to litigation. There are also ongoing court cases against two of the largest India-based IT firms, Infosys and Tata Consultancy Services for discrimination based on citizenship.
Sara Blackwell, a Florida attorney, who is representing seven of the Disney workers at its parks and resort division said the the Disney IT workers "were terminated because they were American citizens and all their replacements were foreign-born Indians."
These layoffs have received national attention, prompting federal interest in examining this practice. The U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices was asked by 10 U.S. senators in April to examine the IT layoffs at Southern California Edison (SCE) and to determine whether SCE or its contractors were "engaged in prohibited citizenship status discrimination."
Read more at Computerworld.com.

A pair of timely posts about from www.vdare.com about Jorge Ramos, #BlackLivesMatter, and Donald Trump. This follows this post about refugees being placed in America. This follows this post about Pope Francis.
You can follow me here.

<

Jorge Ramos Ejected: Trump Fires Warning Shot Across Bow of BlackLivesMatter Motormouths

>

---

Steve Sailer
                                                      

Half a month ago, poor old Bernie Sanders was feebly left speechless in Seattle by two fat angry black women who screamed him off his own stage:

Tuesday, in contrast, Donald Trump decisively responded to an ethnic grievance monger trying to take control of the Donald’s news conference by having a tall security guard escort the puny interloper out of the room until the man calmed down:

Scott Adams, the Dilbert cartoonist, blogs:

Trump, that magnificent bastard, made his enemy do the perp walk on International TV while appearing 100% in charge of the situation.

In contrast, most of the English language news media in America — finding Mexicans tedious except in the abstract — is shocked that Trump would be insensitive to some poor nonwhite immigrant.
But you know and I know the race man who wouldn’t stop talking wasn’t just some BLM nobody like in Seattle, he was Haim Saban’s blue-eyed boy, Jorge Ramos, anchorman of the Spanish-language Univision network.
Here’s my 2004 VDARE book review of Ramos’ The Latino Wave: How Hispanics Will Elect the Next American President. I wrote 11 years ago:

Ramos is a stealth superstar. If you don`t speak Spanish—or read VDARE.com —you`ve probably never heard of him. …
Ramos is a man with a mission: keeping Latinos from fully assimilating into the American mainstream. He writes:
“I’m not one of those people who thinks that the common bond that unites those of us who live in the United States is the English language. No, I believe that this country’s two main characteristics are its acceptance of immigrants and its tolerance for diversity. These things are what bind us together; we’re here thanks to these unifying principles. That’s what it means to be an American. Not your ability to speak English. Talk to me in Spanish … or at least try. I sometimes go entire days without having to speak a single word of English…”
Of course, if Americans be persuaded that English is no longer the nation’s common bond, Hispanics can continue watching Univision’s Spanish-language broadcasts.
Mr. Perenchio [the Italian-American previous owner of Univision and Ron Unz’s arch-enemy during the Prop. 227 battle over bilingual education in California] must be pleased to have such a loyal lackey. Reading this book, I lost track of how many times Ramos argues that various politicians doomed their campaigns by not buying enough spots on Univision. …
Whether or not it’s bad for America, it’s good for his bank account.
Besides, what does he care? He remains a Mexican citizen even after 21 years in the U.S.
Since Ramos wrote The Latino Wave in Spanish for his Spanish-speaking fans (it was translated by Ezra E. Fitz), he can be franker than mass immigration apologists usually are when addressing an English-speaking audience. He gloats:
“But while no fighting is taking place on the military or legal fronts, there is fighting going on culturally. It’s the Reconquest. Latinos are culturally reconquering lands that once were part of the Spanish empire…”
Accordingly, much of Ramos` argument will be more familiar to readers of VDARE.com than to the gullible readers of the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page. Thus while Ramos pays lip service to “proposition nation” ideology to con non-Hispanics into allowing unlimited immigration into their country, he clearly believes that ethnicity and demographics matter. And he wants his ethnic group to win.

In 2007 Jerry Perenchio sold Univision to a consortium led by Haim Saban, who has been perhaps the biggest single contributor to Hillary Clinton’s campaigns over the years.
Of course, Trump is well aware of all these convoluted personal interests at play. Chuck Ross wrote for the Daily Caller in June:

Donald Trump’s Camp Questions If Univision Owner’s Ties To Hillary Clinton Are Behind Pageant Decision
With Univision’s decision to sever ties with the Miss Universe pageant — which is controlled in part by Donald Trump — the Republican presidential candidate and his camp are questioning the Hispanic media outlet’s move, saying that the company was reacting to pressure from Mexico and its owner, Haim Saban, who is a big Hillary Clinton supporter.
“[Univision is] put under a lot of pressure, in my opinion, by the Mexican government to get [me] to not talk about trade and the southern border,” Trump told The Daily Caller on Thursday.
“The biggest people in Univision, they’re all supporting Hillary,” he added. “I think that had a lot to do with it. They see how I’m doing in the polls,” the real estate billionaire continued, citing a recent poll from Suffolk University which shows him in second place in New Hampshire behind Jeb Bush.
“They know that I’ll beat [Clinton] if I run against her,” Trump said.

The Trump campaign is like 14 years of iSteve blogging about the behind-the-scenes interests playing out in real time.
Thirty years ago, I would have felt that emphasizing the Hillary-Haim-Jorge connection was unseemly. What matters is not the grubby little conspiracies, but the principles at stake!
A commenter submitted a very interesting quote from Trump about what changed when the Cold War was won. I haven’t been able to dig it up, so I’ll just riff off my vague memory. Trump argued that during the Cold War, long-term strategizing was highly important. But in the post-Cold War era, Trump’s skill set of tactical negotiating strengths has risen in relative value.
Like everything Trump says, this was self-interested. But it’s also interesting. Trump is sort of the anti-Reagan in the sense that Reagan was, for an ex-actor, surprisingly impersonal, more interested in enduring principles than in current personalities. (It drove Reagan’s kids crazy that he seemed less interested in their troubles than in the country’s.) Movie audiences tended to responded to him most when he could play to his natural strong suit as a high-minded idealist, such as in Reagan’s big 1951 hit Bedtime for Bonzo.
Trump, in contrast, is quick to point out his opponents’ mercenary biases. When Trump bothers to enunciate principles, as in the brilliant opening to his immigration position paper, they’re generally sensible. But he seems more aware than anybody else that we’re living in Fukuyama’s End of History when history hasn’t ended, just ideological sincerity. Political actors now are motivated less by economic theories than by whatever are the personal or identity group scams they happen to be working.

[Comment at Unz.com.]

Could the Jig Finally Be Up for Huma Abedin?

A timely post about from www.jihadwatch.org about Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton's chief assistant. This follows this post about fake "hate crimes." This follows this post about Muslims refugee resettlement in the U.S., such as in Idaho. This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries. For more, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
You can follow me here.

Robert Spencer, FrontPage: Could the Jig Finally Be Up for Huma Abedin?

\ By Robert Spencer 56 Comments

In FrontPage this morning I explain why the current mini-controversy over Huma Abedin bespeaks a much larger problem with America’s contemporary political culture.

They got Al Capone for tax evasion, and they may get Huma Abedin for “violating rules regarding vacation and sick leave” and for the “possible exchange of unsecured, classified data.” To be sure, these are serious charges, and the available evidence makes it abundantly clear that there is ample warrant to investigate and perhaps even charge Abedin. However, it is a sign of a serious problem with today’s political culture that even more serious allegations regarding Abedin have never been investigated, and almost certainly never will be.

Huma Abedin’s Muslim Brotherhood connections have been fully exposed by Andrew McCarthy and bruited about for years. The facts are quite public, albeit largely ignored: Abedin’s parents are both members of the Muslim Brotherhood, but her links to the organization are not just familial. Abedin was for twelve years the assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA), which was founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef, a Muslim Brotherhood operative and al-Qaeda financier. Naseef and Abedin both appeared on the JMMA’s masthead from 1996 to 2003.

Consider that Abedin worked closely for seven years with a member of the Muslim Brotherhood who financed al-Qaeda in light of the Obama Administration’s foreign policy during the years that Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State. Everyone acknowledges that Abedin and Clinton are extremely close, and that Abedin controls access to Clinton and has tremendous influence over her. Hillary Clinton’s tenure at the State Department was distinguished by the remarkable sight of Egyptian anti-Muslim Brotherhood protestors holding signs denouncing the President of the United States for supporting terrorism, and by the Benghazi debacle, when the Secretary of State sat back and did nothing as jihad terrorists murdered four Americans, including an ambassador.

Then there was the Benghazi cover-up, during which Clinton vowed to have a man who made a video criticizing Muhammad arrested and imprisoned for supposedly provoking the riots, thereby placing herself firmly in opposition to the freedom of speech and aligning herself with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s efforts to compel Western governments to criminalize criticism of Islam (under the guise of “incitement to religious hatred”).

Is it at all possible that Huma Abedin, whose parents were active in the Brotherhood and who worked for twelve years for a journal closely linked to the Brotherhood, had anything to do with the pro-Muslim Brotherhood orientation of the Obama/Clinton State Department? In today’s poisonous political culture, it isn’t possible even to ask the question without incurring charges of “Islamophobia” – as we saw in 2012, when Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN) had the temerity to call for an investigation of possible Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the U.S. government.

Bachmann explained: “The concerns about the foreign influence of immediate family members is such a concern to the U.S. Government that it includes these factors as potentially disqualifying conditions for obtaining a security clearance, which undoubtedly Ms. Abedin has had to obtain to function in her position. For us to raise issues about a highly-based U.S. Government official with known immediate family connections to foreign extremist organizations is not a question of singling out Ms. Abedin. In fact, these questions are raised by the U.S. Government of anyone seeking a security clearance.” And that was to say nothing about Abedin’s association with Naseef and work with the JMMA.

Now that Abedin is suspected of mishandling classified material, Bachmann’s questions about Abedin’s security clearance are piquant in retrospect. But when she first raised them, Bachmann was ridiculed and vilified, even earning a denunciation from John McCain: “These sinister accusations rest solely on a few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family, none of which have been shown to harm or threaten the United States in any way. These attacks on Huma have no logic, no basis, and no merit. And they need to stop now.”

It was actually about more than just Abedin’s family, and a perfectly sound case could be made, in light of Obama’s foreign policy disasters, that Abedin’s Muslim Brotherhood links possibly did harm and threaten the United States. But Bachmann’s name was dragged through the mud in 2012 for talking about all this, and now none of the new allegations against Abedin raise any issue with her possible Muslim Brotherhood connections.

That few people care about those connections, and that those who do are dismissed as “far-Right bigots,” shows how myopic and foolish our contemporary political culture is. If Huma Abedin had a hand in the pro-Muslim Brotherhood tilt of the Obama/Clinton State Department, that would be a far graver offense than anything she is accused of now, just as old Capone was guilty of far greater crimes than tax evasion. But on the other hand, those tax evasion charges ended Capone’s operations for good, and so if Hillary’s infamous email server does the same to Huma Abedin, no one who values America’s historic role as leader of the free world will have any reason to complain.

Trump joins critical mass of other candidates in making LEGAL immigration numbers a big issue

An interesting article from www.numbersusa.com about reducing LEGAL immigration. This follows this post about Donald Trump's immigration policy. Remember, “Amnesty” means ANY non-enforcement of existing immigration laws! This follows this comment and this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! Also, you can read two very interesting books HERE.
Please follow me here.

Trump joins critical mass of other candidates in making LEGAL immigration numbers a big issue

https://www.numbersusa.com/sendfax

The weight of Donald Trump's front-runner status and his detailed plan released over the weekend tipped the balance among the Republicans' 2016 Presidential field so that the dominant position now is that immigration policy is a jobs and wage issue.
And he joins several candidates in raising the question in one way or another of whether LEGAL immigration ought to be reduced.
Several candidates had already been advancing the idea in recent months that federal policies on LEGAL immigration are not serving the interests of the American worker.
Trump had not been one of them. He had seemed to be siding with other candidates who fall more in the typical "illegal bad, legal good" views on immigration. That group seemed to hold slightly more sway in the debate, thus far. But then this weekend, Trump joined those who have been questioning policies on legal immigration, and he did so with perhaps the strongest statement of them all, including this passage:

We need to control the admission of new low-earning workers in order to: help wages grow, get teenagers back to work, aid minorities' rise into the middle class, help schools and communities falling behind, and to ensure our immigrant members of the national family become part of the American dream." -- TRUMP

He didn't limit his talk on cutting visas to low-skill foreign workers. He went on to decry efforts to increase work visas given to higher-skill foreign workers, setting himself up against Marco Rubio who he cat-called as the "personal senator" of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

We graduate two times more Americans with STEM degrees each year than find STEM jobs, yet as much as two-thirds of entry-level hiring for IT jobs is accomplished through the H-1B program." TRUMP

He called for changes that would force companies to:

. . . give these coveted entry-level jobs to the existing domestic pool of unemployed native and immigrant workers in the U.S., instead of flying in cheaper workers from overseas. This will improve the number of black, Hispanic and female workers in Silicon Valley who have been passed over." -- TRUMP

The claim that legal immigration admissions could be so high as to be harmful to American workers was so novel as recently as last winter that, when Scott Walker suggested it, he was met with a flurry of denunciations from journalists and Republican Party officials.
Any hope they may have had to put an end to such talk has been dashed by Walker's continuing to hold firm in insisting that:

. . . the next president and the next congress need to make decisions about a legal immigration system that's based on, first and foremost, on protecting American workers and American wages." -- WALKER

The spotlight on Walker cast more public light on Rick Santorum who has repeatedly argued that legal immigration admissions are retarding the ability of American workers to advance. Just recently, he said:

Since 2000, there have been about 6.5 million net new jobs created in this country. What percentage of those net new jobs are held by people who are in this country but not born in this country? The answer is all of them. There are fewer native-born Americans working today than there was in the year 2000." SANTORUM

Mike Huckabee in June raised questions about the argument for more highly-skilled workers which is still the battle-cry of the bulk of Republican political consultants:

When people come and take a job that an American has trained for--I mean, recently, we had numerous testimonials of people who in the high-tech sector were actually having and forced to train their replacements who were imported workers who were coming in and making less than half of what they were being paid . . . when companies are undercutting an American worker just so they can increase their profits without regard to the people who made them profitable in the first place, that's not a money issue. That's a moral issue." -- HUCKABEE

Carly Fiorina is not revealing much yet about her view on current legal immigration policies, but she has echoed Huckabee on visas for high-skilled immigrants.
Even Jeb Bush has begun to suggest to voters that he might be open to having fewer immigrants. Just this month, he said:

Legal immigration needs to be reformed as well. Most of our legal immigrants come through a quota system by country and by family petitioning. . . . We have the broadest definition of family in the world: spouse and minor children, like every country, right? And then adult siblings and adult parents. If we narrowed that to what every other country has, it would be half a million people less." -- BUSH

And over on the Democratic side,Bernie Sanders complained to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce about unfair competition that immigration poses for struggling American workers. He has not offered any specific proposals, but he stated a principle that was basically repeated by Trump over this weekend:

With high unemployment rates for high school-age kids in America - 36 percent for Hispanics - I frankly do not believe we should be bringing in significant numbers of unskilled workers to compete with those kids. I want to see these kids get jobs." -- SANDERS

If all those above statements and more from those candidates have started a bit of a fire in media attention to the jobs/wage competition issue, the following excerpts from Trump's position paper ought to add some high-octane gasoline:

Decades of disastrous trade deals and immigration policies have destroyed our middle class. Today, nearly 40% of black teenagers are unemployed. Nearly 30% of Hispanic teenagers are unemployed. For black Americans without high school diplomas, the bottom has fallen out: more than 70% were employed in 1960, compared to less than 40% in 2000." -- TRUMP

Across the economy, the percentage of adults in the labor force has collapsed to a level not experienced in generations. . . . The influx of foreign workers holds down salaries, keeps unemployment high, and
makes it difficult for poor and working class Americans -- including immigrants themselves and their children -- to earn a middle class wage. Nearly half of all immigrants and their US-born children currently live in or near poverty, including more than 60 percent of Hispanic immigrants. Every year, we voluntarily admit another 2 million new immigrants, guest workers, refugees, and dependents, growing our existing all-time historic record population of 42 million immigrants." -- TRUMP

Perhaps most provocatively, Trump closed with a section titled, "Immigration moderation:"

Before any new green cards are issued to foreign workers abroad, there will be a pause where employers will have to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed immigrant and native workers. This will help reverse women's plummeting workplace participation rate, grow wages, and allow record immigration levels to subside to more moderate historical averages." -- TRUMP

A "pause?"
"Historical averages?"
These phrases tease us with the thought of at least a temporary moratorium and shooting for an annual legal immigration level chopped from 1.2 million to 300,000.
The most important outcome of Trump's plans may be pressure for all candidates -- including Trump -- to be asked what level of legal immigration they support.
ROY BECK is Founder & President of NumbersUSA

Tags:

2016 election

NumbersUSA's blogs are copyrighted and may be republished or reposted only if they are copied in their entirety, including this paragraph, and provide proper credit to NumbersUSA. NumbersUSA bears no responsibility for where our blogs may be republished or reposted. The views expressed in blogs do not necessarily reflect the official position of NumbersUSA.

A timely post about from www.vdare.com about Pope Francis. This follows this post about immigration and population. This follows this post about Harper Lee's new book. 
You can follow me here.

<

Socialism And The Pope: Capitalism Diabolic?

>

---

Patrick J. Buchanan
                                                      

On arrival in La Paz, Pope Francis was presented by Bolivian President Evo Morales with a wooden crucifix carved in the form of a hammer and sickle, the symbol of Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Fidel.
Had Pope John Paul II been handed that crucifix, he might have cracked it over Evo’s head. For John Paul II had seen up close what communism did–to his country, his church and his people in 45 years of Bolshevik rule.q
On his arrival in the Nicaragua of Daniel Ortega in 1983, Pope John Paul castigated a priest-collaborator who dared to serve that Sandinista Marxist regime as culture minister.
And, while in Managua, he warned Catholics they were being threatened by “unacceptable ideological commitments.”
Today we have a pope for whom free-market capitalism is the “unacceptable ideological commitment.”
As The New York Times reports, Pope Francis does “not just criticize the excesses of capitalism. He compares them to the ‘dung of the devil.‘ He does not simply argue that ‘greed for money’ is a bad thing. He calls it a ‘subtle dictatorship that condemns and enslaves.'”
In South America, Pope Francis “made a historic apology for the crimes of the Roman Catholic Church during the period of Spanish colonialism–even as he called for a global movement against a ‘new colonialism’ rooted in an inequitable economic order.”
“The Argentine pope seemed to be asking for a social revolution.”
Now the church has a long tradition of criticizing capitalism, dating back to the encyclical Rerum Novarum in 1891.
In American Church: The Remarkable Rise, Meteoric Fall, and Uncertain Future of Catholicism in America, author Russ Shaw deals with the causes and consequences of what some Catholics contend was a fatal embrace of a heretical “Americanism” in the 19th century.
This pope goes beyond that. His words about capitalism echo what Cold War Catholics said of communism, that it is a tree poisoned at the root that can yield only bad fruit, and, as the Gospel teaches, ought to be cut down and cast into the fire.
What is wrong with the pope’s neo-socialist sermonizing?
While capitalism does indeed generate inequalities, freedom, too, produces inequality. For all men and all women are unequal in abilities, energy and opportunities. In a free society, some inevitably succeed, others fail.
For as the Biblical parable teaches, some are given 10 talents, others two, and God judges us on how well we use the talents we were given. The only way to achieve absolute equality is absolute tyranny, the remorseless redistribution of wealth by an all-powerful regime.
The pontiff says the capitalist “idolatry of money” creates “the dictatorship of an impersonal economy lacking a truly human purpose.” But it is egalitarianism that has proven to be the road to dictatorship, dictatorships run by egalitarians in the name of the “proletariat.”
Free enterprise has brought more millions out of poverty, enabled more billions of people to live longer, freer, healthier and happier lives, and produced more widespread prosperity than any other economic system.
What is the superior system the pope believes we should adopt?
What has Argentina produced but an economically failed state, incompetent socialist rulers, and an occasional Peronista in sunglasses and shiny boots? Is Latin America a fine model?
The pope used the phrase “dung of the devil.” Is that not a good description of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital? And is not satanic the precise word to describe the scores of millions of dead that 70 years of Marxist-socialist ideology produced?
The 100 million people of Eastern Europe, the 300 million of the late Soviet Union, the 1.2 billion people in China–are they not better off the further they have moved away from Marxism, and the closer they have moved toward free-market capitalism?
As for the pope’s apology for the sins of Spanish Catholicism in Latin America, why does he not speak up for the culture Catholicism helped to create, the eradication of paganism, and the termination of such practices as human sacrifice among the indigenous peoples?
But, then, we Americans are no strangers to “apology tours.”
The pope is calling for a “social revolution.” But what country, among the 190-plus in the U.N., comes closest to the utopia the pope has in mind? Or does his utopia exist only in the mind?
The pope is saintly man. But he has no special understanding of economic systems or of climate change. He is the Vicar of Christ, of the Savior sent by the Father to teach us what we must believe and how we must live to attain eternal life.
Christ did not come among us to end colonialism, or redistribute wealth, or start a social revolution against the empire of the Caesars.
As he told Pontius Pilate, “My Kingdom is not of this world.”
Pope Francis is the infallible custodian of that truths Christ taught. Is that not sufficient, Your Holiness? Why not leave the socialist sermons to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren?
Patrick J. Buchanan needs no introduction to VDARE.COM readers; his books State of Emergency: The Third World Invasion and Conquest of America, and Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? are available from Amazon.com. Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.