http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.a ... E_ID=50321

Emptying out Mexico
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: May 23, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

It was just a year ago that President Bush explained to the American people why we didn't really have an illegal alien problem.

He told us that these migrants were willing to do jobs that Americans weren't willing to do.

I'm still puzzling over the full ramifications of that statement. It was staggeringly insulting, at once, to both Americans and Mexicans. American workers consider themselves too good to get their hands dirty and work hard. And the Mexicans can be exploited like indentured servants without a care in the world.

Now, of course, President Bush, desperate to prop up his plummeting poll ratings, is singing a different tune. Now it's a "comprehensive immigration reform plan" America needs. Suddenly he has discovered the need – nearly five years after Sept. 11 – to "secure the border."

But, of course, what Bush means by "comprehensive immigration reform" is amnesty for the lawbreakers – not just millions of illegal aliens already here, but also the employers who aided and abetted them and also for the politicians like Bush himself, the biggest lawbreaker of them all.

That's right. You heard me. Bush is the ringleader of the coyotes. He has stage-managed the invasion of our country, refusing to enforce the laws of the land, refusing to carry out his sworn duty as president, refusing to recognize the problems facing the country, refusing to protect his country from rising crime and the threat of more terrorism.

That's why Bush is so intent on promoting amnesty – he needs it for his own reputation, his own legacy. Unfortunately, he doesn't need it to keep his own keister out of jail or from deportation to anywhere except Crawford, Texas.

We are beginning to get a picture of just how big this crisis of illegal immigration has become.

According to statistics that sound very conservative, roughly 10 percent of Mexico's population of just over 100 million is now living in the U.S., representing one of the largest population relocations in modern history. But it gets even worse. About 15 percent of Mexico's labor force is working in the U.S. And one in every seven Mexican workers migrates to the U.S. at some time.

Could this possibly be good for America? Could this possibly be good for Mexico? Could this possibly be good for all those families involved? Is this really a humanitarian idea? Why does it seem to me to be the worst form of human exploitation?

Listen to these shocking developments south of the border: According to a report in the San Francisco Chronicle, "entire rural communities are nearly bereft of working-age men." The town of Tendeparacua, for instance, had 6,000 residents in 1985. Today there are 600 left. In five Mexican states, the report says, the money migrants send home from the U.S. exceeds the locally generated income.

How could this be good for the U.S.? How could this be good for Mexico? How could this be interpreted as a humanitarian idea? Why does it strike me as the worst form of human exploitation?

Last year, the report continues, Mexico received a record $20 billion from migrant workers in the U.S. That is equal to Mexico's 2005 income from oil exports and much larger than what the country earns from tourism.

How could this be good for the U.S.? How could this be good for Mexico? How could the tolerance and encouragement of more population transfers possibly be interpreted as a humanitarian notion? Why do I see it as the worst form of human exploitation?

Here's another shocker. The money Mexican illegal aliens send home almost equals the U.S. foreign aid budget for the entire world. While I wouldn't mind seeing both those sums reduced by 100 percent, perhaps now you understand why the Mexican government is so threatened by any change in the status quo.

We're emptying out Mexico. How can this be a good thing?