Thread: Tom Tancredo: Amnesty is good for the economy?

Tom Tancredo battles Dems' strategy for getting GOP on illegals' train --WND

Amnesty is good for the economy?

Posted: May 07, 2011
1:00 am Eastern
© 2011

A week or so ago, President Obama held a highly publicized White House "dialogue" about immigration. Its real purpose was to find a new strategy for amnesty legislation, which is to say, it was about his 2012 election campaign.

The "new strategy" is in truth a repackaging of the old strategy, but you would not know that from the news commentaries following the event. The participants in the White House meeting were the usual suspects – businesses that employ illegal aliens, sanctuary-city mayors from San Antonio and Atlanta, open-borders activists from the National Council of La Raza, a sprinkling of academics, Hollywood stars and a token number of Republicans.

The latest word is that Obama will make a major speech next week to launch the new amnesty campaign. Evidently, he plans to spend the political capital earned by the Navy SEALs' killing of Osama bin Laden to wage this battle. Unless the leader of Navy SEAL Team Six is miraculously a child of illegal-alien parents, I doubt he can make any connection between the two topics.

Concerned about the impact of illegal aliens on the United States? Don't miss Tom Tancredo's book, "In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security" -- now just $9.95!

What is their new strategy for amnesty legislation? Obama and the amnesty lobby have decided to sell amnesty as good for the economy. That will be about as easy as selling voodoo dolls at the Vatican, but what do they have to lose? The old arguments have all failed, and the House is now controlled by conservative Republicans. The so-called humanitarian arguments used to promote the "Dream Act" failed, and no one really believes that the border is secure.

So, amnesty proponents need a new theme, a new bumper sticker slogan, one that appeals to Republicans, and that will be the economy. We will be asked to believe that illegal aliens do not take jobs away from Americans; they create jobs. Got that?

But let's be clear about what is really going on. No one actually believes that amnesty will be good for the economy, but that is not important. To sell amnesty legislation to Congress, the amnesty lobby only needs an argument some Republicans can pretend to believe when they explain their vote to their local Rotary and Elks clubs.

The real argument being used to stampede Republican support for new amnesty legislation is crassly political: If Republicans don't hop on board the amnesty train, they will lose the Hispanic vote for a generation or longer. This argument does not hold water, but when put forward by Republican pundits and party leaders, it can mislead and confuse many people.

Thus, this "new strategy" for amnesty legislation will orchestrate a two-level campaign: The "good for the economy" arguments will be employed on the public level while the "good for the Party" arguments will be whispered in Republican cloak rooms.

Of course, there are some serious pitfalls in this strategy on both the public level and the subterranean. If amnesty is such a good thing for the Republican Party, why should Democrats favor it? The answer we will hear is that Democrats should support amnesty because it is good public policy, and Republicans must support it to prove they are not racists.

So, for this strategy to succeed, the race card must be used insistently against opponents. They must be painted into a corner so that a vote for amnesty becomes the only way to rescue the Republican Party from "disaster at the polls." That argument by slander will not work with most Republicans, but it has neutralized some Republican leaders who think the issue is not important enough to risk an "electoral backlash."

The other pitfall in this new strategy is that the argument for amnesty as a good thing for our ailing economy does not pass the smell test when we are struggling with 9 percent official unemployment. Yet, we cannot be too complacent in responding to this new campaign. A White House team that can say with a straight face that Osama bin Laden was brought to justice without the help of information gained through waterboarding can say anything. Maybe there is a connection here after all: Chutzpah with a capital "C."

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=295789

When the traitors Obama and the amnesty lobby go for it...
We will shove amnesty up their or down their "depending on your preference". so fast. This is coming soon eh?
Hope everyones ready.

Originally Posted by airdale

When the traitors Obama and the amnesty lobby go for it...
We will shove amnesty up their or down their "depending on your preference". so fast. This is coming soon eh?
Hope everyones ready.

I'm Itchin for a good fight

U-3 & U-6 Unemployment during the Great Depression



http://www.economicpopulist.org/content ... depression

U-3 & U-6 Unemployment during the Current Depression



http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_da ... ent-charts

Current U - 3 (Official) Unemployment is at 8.9% Yeah Right

Current U - 6 Unemployment is at 23.4%

Go ahead and Make Americas day

I am going to sit back at watch America come unhinged on this one

a good pony keg should be enough for the laughs

U3 and U6 Unemployment during the Great Depression
Submitted by New Deal democrat
Tue, 05/12/2009 - 05:20

A frequent meme propounded in the economic blogosphere is that U6 unemployment, running near 17% now, is a truer measure (and there are good reasons to believe it is), so that means we have unemployment already approaching Great Depression levels of 25%. Left out of the comparison is the fact that U3 and U6 measurements didn't exist during the 1930s. So, is the 25% unemployment peak for the Great Depression a fair comparison to U6 unemployment today?

N. Andrews compared historical versions of unemployment statistics with the modern U3 and U6 versions, published as "Historical Unemployment in Relationship to Today" , has an answer. He writes:

For the period of 1900 - 1947 we have two unemployment statistics available, Unemployed Non-Farm employees and Unemployed Civilian Workforce. These two data sets pose a challenge as they were developed during a period of ever-changing data collection methodologies. The data in the sets has been adjusted by the sources listed in Bicentennial Edition: Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 in an attempt to sync the data sets with the methodology that was put in place as of 1940 and was the basis for methodologies since. We can compare the two available data sets ... and we see that the Unemployed Non-Farm employees and Unemployed Civilian Workforce measures of unemployment appear to be a close analogue of modern U3 (Unemployed Civilian Workforce) and U6 (Non-Farm employees).

Based on that research, he was able to generate a mathematical formula to calculate U3 and U6 unemployment for the entire period since 1900. He found that at the peak of the Great Depression, U3 was 25.2%. U6 was 37.6%.

Here's the resulting graph:



If Nelson is correct, the notion in the blogosphere that current U6 unemployment levels are close to those of the Great Depression appears to be false, and indeed, far off the mark. Using Nelson's methodology, our currrent U3 and U6 unemployment are both very close to the figures in 1930, which is bad enough. But they are less than half of the unemployment that existed at the peak of the Great Depression.

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content ... depression

again ... this was in 2009: looking for a more updated comparison

No job? No pay check? No food stamps? No welfare? Hyper inflation??
I wonder who is gonna be really pissed off???
We will need a half barrel or two and sitting back not an option IMO!!

Originally Posted by AirborneSapper7

No one actually believes that amnesty will be good for the economy, but that is not important. To sell amnesty legislation to Congress, the amnesty lobby only needs an argument some Republicans can pretend to believe when they explain their vote to their local Rotary and Elks clubs.

The real argument being used to stampede Republican support for new amnesty legislation is crassly political: If Republicans don't hop on board the amnesty train, they will lose the Hispanic vote for a generation or longer.

Republicans need to stop listening to race-baiting Reconquistas and pay attention to polls of likely voters. Majorities of those folks, including Hispanics, blacks, and Asians actually favor enforecement of our immigration laws.
************************************************** *************************************
Americans first in this magnificent country

American jobs for American workers

Fair trade, not free trade

Listen to this republicans! If you promise or give amnesty to millions of illegals, you will lose the American votes which out number the illegal aliens votes! So you better not go for this load of bull or you will for sure start losing elections.