[Rushtalk] GOP immigration plan devised by Communist Party

Carl Spitzer cwsiv at keepandbeararms.com
Mon Aug 12 12:09:53 MDT 2013


GOP immigration plan devised by Communist Party

Goal: Use amnestied illegals to build 'permanent progressive majority'

Published: 6 days ago 
 by James Simpson
James Simpson is an investigative journalist, businessman and former
economist and budget analyst for the White House Office of Management
and Budget. Best-known for his exposé on the Cloward Piven Strategy of
Manufactured Crisis, Simpson's work provided background for Glenn Beck's
groundbreaking TV series on the subject. He is a frequent guest on radio
talk shows and is featured in Curtis Bowers' award winning documentary
"Agenda: Grinding America Down." Follow Jim onMore ↓Less ↑ 

The U.S. Senate’s “Gang of Eight” immigration-reform plan, as well as a
strikingly similar plan now being backed by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and
a bi-partisan House “Gang,” both offer the “roadmap to citizenship”
originally conceived and carefully developed by members of the Communist
Party USA working within the Democratic Party and the radical left
activist network for the purpose of using amnestied illegals to build a
“permanent progressive majority.”

That is the inescapable conclusion readers will draw after reading the
forthcoming book by acclaimed researcher and blogger Trevor Loudon,
titled “The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in
the U.S. Congress.” Although not yet published, Loudon agreed to allow
WND readers to preview one chapter, titled “Latino Immigrants: Tools to
Ensure a ‘Governing Coalition’ for the Left.”

In the book, Loudon exhaustively documents the Left’s longtime agenda
regarding illegal aliens and how its activists have gone about
implementing it. He provides irrefutable proof that the entire
immigration-reform movement was the brainchild of American communists
and that their goal has long been to establish unchallengeable political

According to Loudon, the Communist Party USA has influenced U.S. policy
toward illegals since at least the 1960s. He traces the history, showing
how communists and communist-founded organizations slowly built the
movement from the ground up. While other groups certainly joined the
effort, the communists were always at the center.

For example, he tells the story of CPUSA member Bert Corona, the
“Communist Father of the ‘Immigrants Rights’ movement.” In 1964, Corona,
Cesar Chavez and future Democratic Socialists of America member Dolores
Huerta forced Congress to end the guest worker “Bracero” program. Later,
Corona sought ways to address “problems confronting Mexicans in the
United States who had no visas or citizenship documents” – in other
words, illegal aliens – including “how to defend persons detained by
immigration authorities and how to help immigrants acquire disability
and unemployment insurance and welfare.”

Along the way, Corona founded and/or led numerous organizations, such as
the Mexican American Political Association, or MAPA, Centro de Action
Social Autonoma, or CASA, and La Hermandad Mexicana Nacional (the
National Mexican Brotherhood), all influential in the “immigrant rights”
movement. The Communist Party still has strong influence in MAPA, which
acts as a king-maker for Democratic Party candidates in the Los Angeles

Antonio Villaraigosa, former Los Angeles mayor and 2012 chairman of the
Democratic National Convention, got his start with CASA. He was also a
former member of the Communist Venceremos Brigades and worked with the
Brigades in Cuba. As mayor of Los Angeles, he was “the most pro-illegal
immigrant mayor the city has ever seen.”

Lorenzo Torrez, a long-time organizer of the Arizona Communist Party,
paved the way for Communist-backed Congressmen Ed Pastor and Raul
Grijalva to win congressional seats in Arizona. He organized opposition
to Southwestern states attempting to prevent illegal immigration and
also helped change voting patterns across the entire region.

Loudon’s book identifies many influential communist and socialist
politicians holding positions of influence in Congress and state and
local governing bodies. For example, Rep. Judy Chu, D.-Calif., writes
Loudon, has “a thirty-year history with the now defunct pro-China
Communist Workers Party (CWP) and its surviving networks.” Chu is an
advocate for “progressive” immigration reform and was a co-sponsor of
the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill introduced by Rep. Luis
Gutierrez in 2010. In 2012, Chu served as co-chair of President Obama’s
reelection campaign.

Today’s Communist Party USA cites the current amnesty effort as its top
legislative priority. Its official position is virtually
indistinguishable from that of the Democratic Party:

        As Congress begins to draft legislation, immigrant rights groups
        and the labor movement including the AFL-CIO and its constituent
        organizations, SEIU, Change to Win, and many faith-based groups
        are mobilizing for comprehensive immigration reform with
        legalization, a path to citizenship and workers’ rights …
        This legislative and political battle is also at the top of the
        agenda of the Communist Party USA and Young Communist League.
        Our program includes stopping deportations now as legislation is
        being adopted, and calling for legalization with a clear and
        speedy road map to citizenship for all 11 million. Future
        workers who come should have the same opportunity.

But it was left to Eliseo Medina to let the cat out of the bag. Medina,
writes Loudon, “is both the country’s most influential ‘immigration
reform’ activist and a Marxist. He is an Honorary Chair of Democratic
Socialists of America”:

        Medina learned voting strategies from Fred Ross, a Saul
        Alinsky-trained activist and the brains behind Cesar Chavez.
        Ross was to eventually have an impact on the national stage.
        Fred Ross conceived the voter outreach strategy that not only
        elected Communist Party affiliate Ed Roybal as Los Angeles’
        first Latino Council member in 1949, but also laid the
        groundwork for the Obama campaign’s Latino voter outreach
        campaign in 2008 …
        Medina worked hand in hand with UNITE HERE President John
        Wilhelm, to change AFL-CIO immigration policy at the 1999 Los
        Angeles Convention. Then, claiming U.S. immigration policy is
        “broken and needs to be fixed,” the AFL-CIO on February 16,
        2000, called for a new amnesty for millions of undocumented
        workers and the repeal of the 1986 law that criminalized hiring
        them …
        According to the SEIU website, Medina has played the leading
        role in uniting Change to Win and AFL-CIO behind the immigration
        reform movement …
        In 2009, Medina said, “We reform the immigration laws, it puts
        12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually
        voters. Can you imagine if we have, even the same ratio, two out
        of three? If we have eight million new voters … We will be
        creating a governing coalition for the long term, not just for
        an election cycle …”

Republican support

But why would Republicans get behind such a plan? Some astute political
observers advise that when politicians appear to be promoting agendas
against their own interest, follow the money. As Center for Immigration
Studies Executive Director Mark Krikorian put it, “It’s no surprise that
the Republicans supporting this thing are the ones with ties to the
Chamber of Commerce, not ordinary voters.”

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham and others have also stuffed the
Senate bill with special perks for their backers – in Graham’s case, a
provision granting more visas to workers for South Carolina’s meat
industry. Rubio supposedly sought an amendment to assist Florida’s
cruise-ship industry although he insists this is untrue.

But even if big business benefits, the cheap labor advantages are only
temporary. Once illegal aliens are fully legalized, businesses will be
required to provide just as much in pay and benefits as they pay
American workers. In the meantime, however, it is widely assumed those
workers will take jobs from American citizens, depress wages and
increase unemployment. Moreover, in many key swing states, projected
amnesties will swamp the rolls of the unemployed (see table).

Proposed Senate legislation delays full citizenship for 13 years, but if
a bill passes, follow-on legislation is expected to accelerate that

However, it is not even necessary for illegal aliens to achieve
citizenship to significantly impact the vote in key districts. As a
recent report for Capital Research Center detailed, Democrats are
already employing illegals to boost get-out-the-vote efforts among
Hispanics and won a major victory in a local Arizona election in 2011.
They hope this strategy will win them key swing states, especially
Texas, whose electoral votes will, many calculate, provide guaranteed
Democratic presidents for the foreseeable future.

House Speaker John Boehner, R.-Ohio, has made much of his intention to
ignore the Senate proposal and “do our own bill.” What the House has
come up with, however, is considered by most to be “Rubio Lite.”

Boehner has enlisted former Republican VP candidate Ryan to promote the
House plan. Ryan and the Republicans are working with some far-left
House Democrats, including Rep. Luis Gutierrez, a former member of the
Marxist-Leninist Puerto Rican Socialist Party, and Xavier Becerra, both
members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and both longtime
amnesty activists.

In an interview following Senate passage of the Gang of Eight bill, Fox
News’ Sean Hannity pounded Ryan on the issue of border security:

        HANNITY: So, my sources have been telling me, Congressman, that
        you guys are considering a five-year temporary legal status, and
        then [if] the border security measure is not met in five years,
        that that would be revoked.
        RYAN: That’s right. That’s right.
        HANNITY: I don’t believe that would ever happen.
        RYAN: Well, look, they can’t get – what a person would want to
        have, is they would come out of the shadows, they get put on
        probation, they pay taxes, pay fines, learning English, learning
        civics. If they break the terms of their probation, they can be
        deported. And if the border is not secure by that time, if the
        verification system is not up and running, they can’t get – not
        only does that status go away, they can’t legal permanent
        residence …

So, illegal aliens would be granted legal status immediately, but five
years down the road, if the fence still isn’t built and e-verify still
isn’t being used, then their legal status would be revoked. Given that
the Department of Homeland Security is already allegedly ignoring border
security –with immigration and customs agents suing their own agency for
failing to enforce the law – many voters place little confidence in
political promises of future enforcement.

Boehner has announced a closed-door meeting with the entire Republican
caucus, scheduled for tomorrow, Wednesday, July 10, to decide the
immigration issue, a meeting Politico calls “the most important day for
immigration reform.”

Although this meeting was originally requested by Rep. Steve King,
R.-Iowa, to air grave concerns shared by many Republicans over this
“reform,” it is unclear if this meeting was the House speaker’s answer
to King or his own idea. In either case, many fear Boehner will use the
meeting as a vehicle to impose the plan as though it were a done deal.

In the meantime, Senate and House opponents have been painstakingly
highlighting what they consider to be glaring flaws in these proposals:

      * Every single border security provision in the Senate bill,
        including the hire of 20,000 Border Patrol agents, denying
        amnesty to criminals, building fences and installing
        surveillance devices, can be waived by the Homeland Security
      * Both the House and Senate proposals emphasize the path to
        citizenship – the centerpiece of communist efforts – while
        making border security both vague and secondary. 
      * Both bills provide a $5,000 incentive for companies to hire the
        newly legalized illegal aliens instead of Americans, since the
        aliens would not be subject to the Obamacare coverage mandate. 

Although politicians and the media have settled on the claim that there
are 11 million illegal aliens, the actual number may well be closer to
20 million to 30 million. There were 10 million in 1996, a mere 10 years
after Reagan’s amnesty, and it is doubtful only one million more have
been added in the ensuing 17 years. Since 1990, Border agents have
apprehended on average more than 1 million illegal aliens per year,
almost all from Mexico.

When the Reagan amnesty became law, the intention was to naturalize only
1.2 million people, but the actual figure turned out to be 2.7 million.
Statistics on illegal immigration have longed tended to be
underestimated, sometimes vastly so.

Thus, current proposals provide a path to citizenship for as many as 20
to 30 million illegal aliens here now, plus relatives who will be
brought in through chain migration and at least 75 percent of those who
will come in the future – virtually endless amnesty – while efforts to
secure the border are almost certain to be insufficient.

Representatives Steve King, R-Iowa; Louie Gohmert, R-Texas; Dana
Rohrabacher, R-Calif.; Trey Goudy, R-S.C.; Bob Goodlatte, R-Va.; and
others – 70 House members in all – as well as senators Ted Cruz,
R-Texas; Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.; Mike Lee, R-Utah and others have sought
to highlight the dangers of this legislation, with Rep. King recently

        If the House passed border security and interior security and
        sent that over to the Senate, Harry Reid is not going to take
        that up. Chuck Schumer has said that citizenship has to be part
        of the deal. It’s not going to go to the president’s desk, so
        why would the House take up anything if there’s no prospect that
        we’re going to improve the immigration situation, just the
        prospect that they’re going to jam amnesty on us?

With polls showing more than two-thirds of Americans don’t believe
“immigration laws would be enforced in the future if illegal aliens were
given amnesty,” it is clear that passage of the current
Republican-backed bill may indeed fulfill the agenda of its communist
originators – the creation of a permanent Democrat voting majority,
guaranteeing permanent control of the United States government by
leftist progressives.

© Copyright 1997-2013. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130812/cb236071/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 13221 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130812/cb236071/attachment-0001.jpe 

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list