CALLER: I'm one of those Republicans who helped change the political arrangement by sitting on the sidelines, and if you want to get 10 percent of the Republicans, right now, to vote for Hillary Clinton -- and I would be one of them, and I've been a Republican for 40 years -- you do the following things. You eliminate your support for NAFTA, that was Bill Clinton. Eliminate your support for amnesty and wide-open borders -- Bill Clinton, I've heard him say it many times, and I believe I've heard Hillary say it also -- and you start getting self-deportation of the 20 million illegal aliens here that are taking the jobs, the wages, and the working conditions, and destroying them for working Americans, which I always thought Democrats supported.It's unclear exactly who he's refering to by "the people who have been here for years". Surely he's not refering to citizens. That's similar to language used by those who refer to illegal aliens, but that seems to be slightly contradicted by the next sentence. So, he could have an unclear grasp of the issue, or he could just be speaking in a slighly incoherent manner, or the transcript could be wrong. Or, he could actually be proposing something similar to attrition to reduce the numbers of illegal aliens here.
TERRY MCAULIFFE: I couldn't agree more. We've got to shut these borders down. These people shouldn't be coming in this country. We need to enforce our border protections. We have to do something for the people who have been here for years and have paid taxes -- you know, we're for the people who have been in this country and paying taxes and raising their family. But for the people who have not been here, who have been here illegally and have taken advantage of the situation, we need to have a plan to get them back to the countries they came from, and more important, which is the first thing John talks about, we have gotta shut these borders down. I couldn't agree more.
... I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican, we all agree you've gotta shut the borders down. People who are coming into this nation taking our jobs.
Senator Clinton supports comprehensive reform that fixes our broken immigration system, strengthens our border security and sanctions employers who break the law. She has supported legislation that provides an earned path to citizenship while respecting the enormous contributions that immigrants make and continue to make to our country.Needless to say, the McAuliffe statements caused the panty-bunching machine that Matt Stoller of MyDD wears with him to go into overdrive:
We've got to have a plan to 'get them back to the countries they came from'? 'These people'. 'Taking our jobs'. This is straight up Jim Sensenbrenner racism, and an endorsement of the vicious attacks on immigrants we've seen for years (including a jump in KKK membership we're seeing).Yes, indeed. To many Democrats and to most of their leaders, wanting to enforce our laws is "racism" and "vicious attacks". And, wanting to deport people who are here illegally is definitely an endorsement of the KKK. (That's not a deliberate misreading, that's what Stoller said). Question: since Stoller supports "reform", and since one of the selling points of "reform" is more stringent enforcement, and since that enforcement would include deporting future illegal aliens, isn't Stoller himself endorsing the KKK by his own definition?
McAuliffe is a multi-millionaire, having profited handsomely to the tune of $14M from the Global Crossing fiasco, to the detriment of American shareholders. He's also a global elitist, hanging out with the Clinton's on a regular basis, as well as other world leaders. So in his case, immigrants aren't taking his job. In fact, it's a lot more likely that real immigration reform, which would address NAFTA and poverty, would cost him and his friends money.Stoller is, quite simply, an idiot. Those he complains about are the ones pushing for "reform". And, as Clinton's statement which he provides in an update makes clear, she's pushing for it as well. At least he didn't disappear that part of his post (as he's disappeared a couple of my comments in the past). Although, he probably doesn't realize the internal inconsistencies in what little argument - beside name-calling - he can muster.
Immigration2007a · Tue, 02/06/2007 - 18:39 · Importance: 1