Big Business Balks at Bush Propaganda Plan

President Bush has created the Orwellian-named "Americans for Border and Economic Security" to push for his massive guest worker amnesty scheme. Now, Bloomberg reports, Big Business is balking at the plan:
..."There is a reluctance to sign up for something that might turn out not to be the type of immigration reform bill we want to see," said John Gay [1], who runs a coalition in support of guest-worker programs that includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, First Data Corp. and Marriott International Inc.

Republican lobbyists including Ed Gillespie, the party's former national chairman, and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, are seeking to raise money for a public relations- campaign of as much as $3 million to support Bush's plan. The lobbyists are asking companies such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Microsoft Corp. to contribute between $50,000 and $250,000 to pay for the effort.

Bush's plan aims to allow employers to hire immigrant "guest workers," which companies want. Supporters say their concern is that Republican lawmakers pushing for tighter borders on national-security grounds will pressure Bush eventually to accept a measure making it harder rather than easier to hire workers from overseas.

"We are still uncertain what the policy is that the group will advocate for," Lee Culpepper [2], a lobbyist for Bentonville, Arkansas-based Wal-Mart, said of the Gillespie-Armey effort. "Will it be only whatever the White House wants, or will it be independent policy goals formed by the members of the group?"
In other words, will it be almost completely against the wishes of the vast majority of Americans, or will it be completely against the wishes of the vast majority of Americans? That is, to them, the question.

What will Bush's propaganda consist of?
The campaign being planned by Gillespie and Armey is aimed at emphasizing the economic benefits of immigrant workers, said Terry Holt, a former Bush campaign spokesman who is working with them on the effort.

..."We want to communicate the great message of what immigration means to the American economy," Holt said. "In this political climate, it's also necessary to talk about how our borders must be secured."

..."Immigrants aren't being talked about in a very endearing way [by " Talk-show hosts and newspaper columnists"]," Armey said. "But we're talking about real good people who are doing what we all are trying to do, which is feed our babies."
Translation: "Aww... Why do you hate-filled people hate our cheap laborers? They're wonderful people, despite what you evil xenophobes say about them!"
Gillespie's group, which also includes former Democratic Representative Cal Dooley of California, is courting companies such as Greenwood Village, Colorado-based First Data and Springdale, Arkansas-based Tyson Food Inc. as well as groups representing landscaping businesses, restaurants, hotels, nurses and hospitals.
Obviously, the great majority of Americans are opposed to these various plans. It's also extremely dangerous for our country when corporations are listened to and the people are not: "Would a Bill of Impeachment Wake-Up President Bush?"

[1] In 2003 John Gay was identified as "Vice President, Governmental Affairs, of the American Hotel & Lodging Association". In 2004, he was identified as "vice president at the International Franchise Association". In both cases he was also identified as "co-chair of the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition". The latter group is at Their membership consists of a large number of big business advocacy organizations, together with... the American Immigration Lawyers Association. In the "small world, eh" dep't, there's also a link between the AILA and Rep. Chris Cannon.

[2] Lee Culpepper is also Chairman of the National Immigration Forum and works for the National Restaurant Association. Last mentioned here.


We all love babies and I feel sure that we would not like to seem any of them starve to death. BUT, we stand by and watch this very thing happening EVERY DAY in places around the world and do not get too upset. It does no good to get upset and even if we did, is a complete breakdown in our border security worth it? I, for one, do not think so. It is IMPOSSIBLE to stop EVERY CHILD in the world from starving so why should we pick out one group to help while ignoring the others? And, since we cannot possible help them all, we should not strive to help any. Our own security and economic well being are being compromised every day by illegal immigrants. It is time to stop them ALL by whatever means are necessary.

Foreign criminals are 'real good people' who are just here to feed their babies? I guess nothing happened on 9-11. Amazingly it is admitted that they're also here to breed and not just to work. Immigrants are not babies, when they commit aggressive acts such as going on net public subsidy, this is morally significant. It is emotive to talk about their babies perhaps not getting fed, in the place of a rational argument. It must be that there is no rational argument for tolerance of mass antimerit immigration, and especially not the strictly criminal kind, otherwise why resort to emotive appeals? Why does it apply to foreign criminals here, and not to all the babies in the world whose parents would like to drop the responsibility of feeding them on to us? If the poverty of foreigners is an enforceable claim, how is it that no reasonable argument can be given for this piece of effrontery?