Americans don’t want illegal or excessive immigration. When the issue has been in the news, like in 2010 when the Arizona law was in the headlines, polling shows the sentiment that is always there, that citizens want their borders and sovereignty enforced, not ignored.
Now, when citizens see the full horror of the liberal ideal of a borderless America, they are appalled.
Most voters don’t want any of the young illegal immigrants who’ve recently arrived here housed in their state and say any legislation passed by Congress to deal with the problem should focus on sending them home as soon as possible.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the primary focus of any new immigration legislation passed by Congress should be to send the young illegal immigrants back home as quickly as possible. Just 27% say it should focus instead on making it easier for these illegal immigrants to remain in the United States. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Advocates for the illegal immigrants argue that they are flooding into the country to escape violent situations in their home countries, but just 31% of U.S. voters think they are coming here now for their own safety. Most voters (52%) believe they are coming here for economic reasons. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.
Voters are more uncertain, however, when it comes to the $3.7 billion in new spending that President Obama has asked for from Congress to deal with these new illegal immigrants. Twenty-six percent (26%) think Congress should approve the president’s request even if it does not provide for quicker deportation of these illegals, but 40% oppose approval if money for sped-up deportation is not included. One-in-three voters (34%) are not sure.
A retired doctor and his wife phoned Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday to tell their story about the San Bernardino Catholic church urging members of the parish welcome illegal aliens into their homes. Not only did the archbishop invite parishioners to harbor lawbreakers (a felony, right?) but he also to keep quiet about it to the media. Furthermore, the government put the church up to the scheme.
No problema about the cost though, since the church promised to reimburse the generous (if foolish) care providers. However, the Catholic church receives millions of Americans’ tax dollars to pursue its alleged good works of refugee resettlement and other immigration services, shown as “Government Revenue” in the 2010 Catholic Charities graph, so it’s not so surprising that Washington and the church would work in partnership:
Retired Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony was a big supporter of illegal alien amnesty, as when he protested Arizona’s immigration enforcement law in 2010.
Limbaugh was properly shocked by the call, particularly given his newfound interest in the America-killing immigration catastrophe of open borders. He has been slow on the uptake but seems more comfortable with the subject lately.
RUSH: This is Ann and Ed in Southern California. Welcome. It’s great to have you on the phone. Hello.
ANN: Hi, Rush. How are you?
RUSH: Just fine. Thank you very much.
ANN: Great. Well, we have some interesting news. My husband Eddie is on the phone with us. We live in Southern California, and we’re Catholic, active Catholics in our community, and there was a town hall meeting last evening, emergency meeting called by our local parish priest, ordered by our bishop (unintelligible) and the Archdiocese of San Bernardino. They have made the decision that they’re going to absorb the immigrants that are coming through because the federal government called the bishop’s office on Monday and they’re gonna be busing these immigrants to our communities and asking us to open our homes and to house them for up to a month. The church will reimburse us for any out-of-pocket expenses and we were told not to talk to anybody about it, especially the media. I’m not especially happy about it. My husband is a retired doctor, and he will share his concerns with you regarding this matter. Eddie, do you want to go ahead and talk about your thoughts?
EDDIE: Longtime listener, Rush. Thanks –
RUSH: Thank you, Eddie.
EDDIE: I’m very concerned about the health care crisis that we’re facing and these illegal aliens that are coming into the United States. Doctors are being asked not to talk to the media, they’re on gag orders, both doctors and nurses, and we got a big problem because there are a lot of diseases that can come through this border bringing all kinds of stuff –
RUSH: Eddie, I just read that in some cases the lice are so bad you can see them crawling down the faces of some of the kids.
ANN: Yeah, the lice won’t kill you, but Ebola will, and so will gonorrhea and there’s syphilis and AIDS and hepatitis and diphtheria and polio, meningitis, and this new coronavirus coming in from the Middle East, so –
RUSH: Hang on. I gotta take a break. Hold your thought and we’ll continue after the break.
RUSH: We rejoin Ann and her retired doctor husband, Eddie, on the phone jointly, together with us from Southern California. Eddie, could you put Ann back to the phone or is she on with you?
ANN: Yes. Hi. I’m here with you.
RUSH: Okay, Eddie, I’ll come back to you in just a second, but, Ann, I want to clarify. Did you say that it is the Catholic Church that the government called and asked for assistance?
Limbaugh portrays himself as a great patriot, the Mayor of Realville, but he has routinely ignored the one issue that will permanently transform America into just another failed liberal conglomeration. When he has spoken on demographic remaking of the nation, he has been informative, but apparently has not seen it as important, often not mentioning immigration for weeks at a time unless brought up by a caller.
Now I think this would be a great time for me to give you a little bit more detail on what’s happening with this influx of illegal kids crossing the border. Remember, they’re not from Mexico, we’re told. These are “unaccompanied alien children,” and they have a name, UACs, and they are from Central America, which means El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua. Not Mexico. And they are “pouring in.”
They’re pouring into Arizona and they’re pouring into Texas, which has consequences. When they get across the border they are being “transferred to Border Patrol facilities elsewhere along the border — US government officials are scrambling to find places to put them.” Here’s the problem: “[B]ased on current immigration and asylum laws, the vast majority of those children could be legally staying right here in the United States before long.”
Now, remember, the conventional wisdom in Washington is the Republicans had better adopt the policies of the Democrats so that they get some Hispanic support so that they can win some elections again. And if they don’t do that, it’s sayonara — or adios. Yet here we have the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, “Hispanics Help Drive President Obama’s Approval Rating to a Fresh Low.”
How is this possible?
Republicans are buying into the idea that they have to be for amnesty to win Hispanic votes, yet Obama’s erased the border, he’s promised illegals amnesty, and he’s tanking in this poll. We’re being overrun at the moment with unaccompanied children from Central America. Maybe could it be that the Hispanic population of this country wants a secure nation just like everybody else?
This president — who has presided over the opening of the Southern border to tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands now) illegal aliens and children, not just from Mexico, but from other Central American countries — is going to come before you today and present himself as an expert and eminently qualified to detail for us our future policy in Iraq.
Since temporary housing seems to be a problem, can’t Sheriff Arpaio set up a few more tents? When the 2013 sequester drama played out in illegals being released from prison, he offered free jail space to house the foreign pests.
Some people say they are shocked at the border chaos (“urgent humanitarian crisis” according to MSM), but it’s only Obama using his executive power to welcome future Democrats.
Retired INS Senior Special Agent Mike Cutler suggests that the thousands of unaccompanied illegal alien kiddies be reunited with their US-residing families and then ship the whole bunch home — family reunification done correctly!
The estimated tab for American taxpayers to provide welfare for illegal alien children from Latin America keeps rising and is now up to $2.3 billion next year.
Incidentally, opening the border to the world is likely to prove an irresistable magnet to jihadists and other enemies.
Naturally, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer fired off a sternly worded letter of complaint to the White House, but the squirrelly media loves to focus on the adorable kiddies and their parent-caused travails.
PHOENIX (KSAZ) – One day after Arizona Governor Jan Brewer fired off a letter to President Obama, concerned about dozens of undocumented immigrants being dropped off at a Phoenix bus station, another bus load of immigrants arrived.
Early Tuesday morning FOX 10 saw a bus load of people dropped off by a bus with Department of Homeland Security markings.
The Greyhound spokesperson said that Arizona is the only state they’re aware of that is getting bus loads of people.
The Greyhound bus station near 24th St & Buckeye has turned into a refuge for bus loads of immigrants being dropped off by DHS.
FOX 10 was told immigration officials are moving hundreds of undocumented workers caught in Texas who are from Central America to Arizona. DHS says they don’t have the manpower to process them all.
Volunteers dropped off Powerade, diapers, and toys for the kids.
“I’m a mother with small children, I can’t imagine how exhausted, tired, and scared the women are. So I just wanted to be able to help them in any way possible,” said Ella Herrington.
A spokesperson for Greyhound said that up until a couple of days ago they were not given any notice that large groups of people were being dropped off. They say this had never happened before.
“We do not have an agreement of any kind with ICE or the U.S. Border Patrol. We recently established protocol with them which they now will inform us going forward several hours in advance before dropping off large groups of people to ensure we have the resources to accommodate them once they arrive,” said Lanesha Gipson. Continue reading this article
When I was a child, I recall political discussions in my family about whether the Catholic candidate John Kennedy would follow the orders of the Vatican if elected President. My parents were great supporters of President Eisenhower, a Presbyterian, and were suspicious of a possible Pope influence in the White House.
These days, the influence of Catholic elites to subvert the American interest is not mentioned in polite company — although it clearly occurs with clerical demands for an amnesty for millions of foreign lawbreakers, many of whom are Catholic. The powerful Conference of Bishops has spent millions of dollars to lobby for amnesty against Americans.
A recent blatant example of the Catholic amnesty shakedown was a piece in Time saying Speaker Boehner “must decide between the social teaching of his faith and the political agenda of a fringe element of his party.”
Right, the Vaticrats regard the majority of citizens who want immigration to be a legal procedure to be “fringe.” In addition, the Tea Party is seen as part of that fringe and stands against the Gospel — that’s the imperious attitude of the know-it-all Catholic church.
The intimidation is strongly worded and sounds like a command from a superior: “If Speaker Boehner continues to balk on this crucial issue, he’ll face the uncomfortable reality of being in a public dispute with his Church.”
Catholic leaders are calling on House Speaker John Boehner to act swiftly on immigration reform
Three years ago Speaker of the House John Boehner received an honorary degree from the Catholic University of America, a prestigious religious institution that was founded and is still largely governed by the bishops of the United States. But the times have clearly changed.
Last week, the same bishops paid a visit to Capitol Hill to put more pressure on Speaker Boehner to pass comprehensive immigration reform this summer. This comes on the heels of a trip earlier this spring by the same bishops to the border town of Nogales, Arizona.
There Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley said that the bishops came on behalf of the Church in the United States “to be a neighbor and to find a neighbor in each of the suffering people who risk their lives and at times lose their lives in the desert.” Following his homily, Cardinal O’Malley and his brother bishops made a poignant gesture by reaching across the border fence to distribute communion to Mexicans on the other side.
Last week’s Mass and Capitol Hill visits were led by Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski. In his homily, Wenski had pointed words for lawmakers: “[o]ur immigration system is a stain on the soul of our nation. As a moral matter, it must be changed. We must pray that our elected officials recognize this and have the courage to reform it.”
Courage is exactly what the Speaker of the House needs right now. Nearly a year ago, the United States Senate passed a sweeping immigration reform bill. Boehner has said he won’t bring the bill to the House floor unless a majority of his Republican colleagues support it. But with nearly all Democrats supporting the bill, it’s clear that it would pass if it were brought to the floor for a vote. It’s widely known that Boehner personally supports immigration reform. In fact, earlier this year, he even went as far as to mock his fellow House Republicans who were afraid to take up the issues.
Make no mistake: Boehner’s opposition to the bill is purely political. He’s afraid that bringing up immigration reform will hurt his party in the fall elections and even hamper his own chances to be re-elected Speaker of the House. But recent polling suggests the former is unlikely.
If Speaker Boehner continues to balk on this crucial issue, he’ll face the uncomfortable reality of being in a public dispute with his Church. Educated by Jesuit and Marianist priests in Cincinnati, this is no small deal to the fifth Catholic elected United States Speaker of the House.
A national coalition of Catholic leaders calling on Speaker Boehner to act put it well: “[the current situation] is immoral and shameful. The eyes of our God — who hungers for justice and commands us to welcome the stranger and bind the wounds of those left by the side of the road — are on us. …As Catholics who share your commitment to the sanctity of life in the womb, we must not be complicit in the suffering of migrants dying in the shadows.
Speaker Boehner now must decide between the social teaching of his faith and the political agenda of a fringe element of his party. He doesn’t face this decision alone, however. If he stands up against the Tea Party and for the Gospel on this critical issue, he’ll find a Church who is willing to walk with him the entire way. That’s a team worth being on: after all, it is faith—not politics—that saves us in the end.
Christopher Hale is a senior fellow at Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. He helped lead national Catholic outreach for President Obama’s re-election campaign. You can follow him on Twitter @chrisjollyhale.
Thursday’s LA Times had a front-page pair of stories about the two Republican candidates for Governor. The primary is June 3, and the state’s southern voice may have thought it should pretend an interest in non-Democrats.
The story about Tim Donnelly was mostly fair, but it couldn’t resist a mini-smear by quoting the SPLC’s sour leftwing gripe against his support for American sovereignty and immigration enforcement.
State Assemblyman Tim Donnelly was showing off his home, an unpretentious four-bedroom high in the mountains near Lake Arrowhead that, given his low-budget run for governor, doubles as a campaign office.
He hurried past his son blasting away at animated enemies on the TV screen, past the three campaign staffers hunched over computers in the dining room and the Yorkiepoo terrier Rusty, begging to be played with in the kitchen.
But when the Republican candidate arrived at a little office at the back of the garage, he paused. Pointing to a desk laced with cobwebs, he said this musty, abandoned room was central to who he is and why he is running for governor.
This, he said, is where he ran his plastic-parts business, until that business collapsed, bringing his family to the brink of financial ruin.
Many politicians might take pains to whitewash such a failure. Donnelly, who captured his Assembly seat in an upset in 2010, just before dissolving his business, wears the defeat like a badge, touting it on the campaign trail as a reason voters should elect him.
The approach plays to his conservative tea party supporters and fits right in with an old strain in American politics — an outsider stressing that status, the better to run against the establishment. Continue reading this article
Is the Washington Post developing a lib-crush on Jeb Bush? The paper featured a curious piece about Bush on Monday’s front page (“For Jeb Bush, a family decision”), celebrating his appeal to diversity via the Mexican wife, but the article brings up ancient history that may have been forgotten by the public. One item: daughter Noelle’s several run-ins with the law concerning drugs, including a famous 2002 mug shot (shown).
Incidentally, the mainstream press exhibited fondness for John McCain whom they characterized as a “maverick” but the affection for the Arizona Senator disappeared when he actually ran for President. The liberal media is not a reliable squeeze.
The media likes liberal Republicans, particularly the ones who support a firehose supply of cheap foreign workers. The scribbler class appreciates inexpensive household help.
Still, the article has too many negative details of the Jeb Bush narrative to be considered a full-on puff piece. We read that Jeb and Mexican wife Columba speak Spanish together; is English not comfortable for her? (At least candidate John Kerry’s immigrant wife, billionaire Teresa Heinz, was an adequate speaker of America’s language.) Plus, there’s the druggie daughter “hiding crack cocaine in her shoe.”
Perhaps if Jeb were to expand on his statement that illegal immigration is an “act of love” then that might get more positive press clips. Too bad for Jeb that the voters are sick of open borders fawning from elites.
Jeb Bush can trace some of his most appealing qualities as a potential presidential candidate for a diversifying electorate to his 40-year partnership with his Mexican-born wife, Columba.
The couple speak Spanish to one another, and their lives have been immersed in Hispanic culture and the immigrant experience.
But Columba’s intense distaste for the public arena is one of the issues weighing most heavily on the former Florida governor as he grapples with whether to run for the White House in 2016, according to interviews with friends, former staffers and GOP donors close to the family. These people said Columba may be willing to take on the burdens of a campaign, yet even then the couple would need to find a way to craft a comfortable role for her.
“Columba is not in any way power-ambitious,” said Rafael A. Peñalver Jr., a Miami lawyer who has been friends with the Bush family since the early 1980s. “She is a very private person.” He added: “She’s supportive and will stand by him, even taking roles that are not in her nature.”
Still, another Bush confidante said, “the family issues are Columba, 1, 2 and 3. It’s whether she’s up for it.”
“She’s cognizant of what a campaign would be like, and she would have to come to terms with that. He’s not going to do it over her objections,” said the confidante, who like a number of loyalists, spoke only on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations of the family.
Both Bushes declined to be interviewed, and spokeswoman Kristy Campbell declined to comment on his behalf.
Jeb Bush, 61, has acknowledged that he is thinking about running, indicating he will make a decision later this year. He has repeatedly said he will decide based on whether he believes he can run an optimistic, hopeful campaign — run “joyfully,” as he has put it — as well as whether a campaign would be the right thing for his family.
Presidential campaigns have come to rely heavily on candidates’ family members playing visible roles such as fundraising, speaking and submitting to media interviews. Spouses have increasingly become full-fledged fill-ins for the candidates. Sons and daughters help the candidate forge ties with younger voters and can soften and humanize a candidate’s image.
The pressure for family participation could be more intense on Bush, who is so widely identified as the scion of a political dynasty and who could find himself facing a campaign by Hillary Rodham Clinton that fully incorporates her husband and daughter Chelsea as political allies.
People close to Bush say the impact a modern presidential campaign would have on his wife and children remains the most important piece of a difficult family decision that goes far beyond a simple political analysis of whether voters want another Bush in the White House. In addition to Columba’s reluctance, he must consider their 36-year-old daughter, Noelle. Her struggles with drug addiction burst into the headlines 12 years ago when she was arrested, but she has since dropped almost entirely from public view. Continue reading this article
Jeh Johnson, the new guy who replaced Janet Napolitano as head of the Department of Homeland Security, remarked recently about illegal aliens, “Everyone knows we have millions of undocumented immigrants in this country, and they’re not going away; they’re not going to self-deport.” His comments came during a February 7 speaking event at the Woodrow Wilson Center with former Congresswoman Jane Harman, now CEO of the place.
That observation is simply not true. When tough enforcement measures were applied following passage of Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law, illegals packed up and left en masse for more permissive locales. Despite their obnoxious lawbreaking, lawbreaking foreigners are rational creatures who come to make lots of American dollars and act according to that goal.
If the nation as a whole enforced borders and the workplace, most of the foreign job thieves would go back to where they came from. Self-deport, in other words.
That’s right. They go to other, less law-abiding states to steal American jobs. All states should emulate Arizona to limit jobs to citizens and legal immigrants, as well as keep their dollars in America and avoid billions being shipped offshore as remittances.
Politico reports that the powerful Chair of the House Judiciary Committee Bob Goodlatte believes he has the “solution” for the problem of 11 million illegal aliens living openly in the shadows.
Note to clueless Republicans: illegal aliens don’t cross the burning Arizona desert so they can become citizens to vote in US elections. They come for American jobs that normally pay substantially more than employment in Mexico and points south.
But back to the millions of illegals who cause so much head-scratching in Washington, what should be done with them is the big question vexing the big important brains.
How about. . . nothing. Leave them exactly as they are because they are getting along fine as is. (Of course, if they are caught drunk driving or shoplifting or engaging in document fraud, they should be deported after serving appropriate sentences.)
Life “in the shadows” must be quite agreeable since many illegals manage for years, as illustrated by Pew research from the paper Unauthorized Immigrants: Length of Residency, Patterns of Parenthood, December 2011. It found that “nearly two-thirds of the 10.2 million unauthorized adult immigrants in the United States have lived in this country for at least 10 years.”
The illegals would prefer to have the threat of deportation removed so they can continue to work at their stolen jobs, and legalization with its associated work permit would do that immediately, or as soon as the rubber stamps can be produced. Then they would have been rewarded for lawbreaking by getting everything they came unlawfully to get. For that reason:
Legalization IS Amnesty.
Congressman Goodlatte has been dreaming up enforcement strategies that can be made into legislation, but he may have forgotten that actually carrying out laws is the job of the executive branch. And the current President is arguably the biggest friend open borders ever had and will not enforce sovereignty after an amnesty any more than he has thus far. A Rasmussen poll from last October found only 5 percent of voters believed that an amnesty would include genuine border enforcement.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) says he sees “no reason” why current undocumented immigrants shouldn’t gain legal status as long as Congress enacts tougher border-security and enforcement measures.
In a Telemundo interview set to air Sunday, Goodlatte addressed the set of immigration principles that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said earlier Thursday is expected to be released in the “coming weeks.”
While not delving into specifics of the document, Goodlatte said the principles are meant to show the broader House Republican Conference how all the pieces of immigration reform would fit together and ultimately “galvanize” support among lawmakers.
Though reform has essentially been written off for dead this Congress, Republican leaders in the House have said they want to get an overhaul done and many lawmakers in the chamber are eager to pass a rewrite of current immigration laws.
Goodlatte outlined three pillars of an overhaul – ensuring border enforcement, fixing the legal immigration system and determining a legal status for immigrants already in the country illegally. He stressed that interior enforcement was a major point of focus for Republicans, noting that as much of 40 percent of undocumented immigrants did not cross a border illegally, but overstayed a visa.
“If we can have a way to get [enforcement] up and operating, I see no reason why we can’t also have an agreement that shows how people who are not lawfully here can be able to be lawfully here – able to live here, work here, travel to and from their home country, be able to own a business, pay their taxes,” Goodlatte, a veteran lawmaker who was an immigration lawyer before coming to Congress, said on the Telemundo show “Enfoque,” according to a transcript of the interview. Continue reading this article
Recent Rasmussen poll results reflect the lack of faith with which the public regards the Washington swamp of corruption. The White House and Congress should be embarrassed, but they are incapable of feeling shame and don’t even pretend to carry out the wishes of the American citizens any more.
Most voters continue to put more border control first in any immigration reform plan, but fewer than ever trust the federal government to actually control the border if a new plan is passed. Voters also lean toward a go-slow piece-by-piece approach to immigration reform over a comprehensive bill.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 25% of Likely U.S. Voters think it is even somewhat likely that the federal government will actually secure the border and prevent illegal immigration if that’s part of new immigration legislation. Sixty-five percent (65%) consider it unlikely. This includes only five percent (5%) who say the government is Very Likely to secure the border if it’s part of legislation that would give legal status to those already here illegally and 24% who feel it’s Not At All Likely. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Confidence in the likelihood of the federal government actually securing the border fell to a previous low of 28% in late June from a high of 45% in January. This skepticism continues to be perhaps the biggest problem immigration reformers face.
Republicans want proof that the border has been secured to prevent further illegal immigration before allowing legalization of those now here illegally to go forward. The president believes the legalization process and the implementation of more border security should take place at the same time.
But only 18% of voters believe those who are now in this country illegally should be granted legal status right away. Sixty-two percent (62%) disagree and think legalization should come only after the border is secured. Nineteen percent (19%) are not sure. These attitudes are unchanged from past surveys. Continue reading this article
Anyway, wouldn’t it be better for Mexicans to dislike America, particularly if the feeling dissuaded them from relocating here? A report of positive attitudes on the part of Mexicans is not reassuring.
When U.S. President Barack Obama travels to Mexico this week, he will encounter a Mexican public that has far more positive attitudes about the United States than at any time in the last several years.
America’s image south of the border fell sharply in 2010, when Arizona passed a “show me your papers” law aimed at identifying, prosecuting and deporting immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. But Mexican views have rebounded since then, and U.S. favorability ratings are now at their highest point since 2009. The prospects for U.S. immigration reform may be, at least in part, the source of renewed Mexican approval of their neighbor to the north.
A new Pew Research Center poll found that 66 percent of Mexicans have a favorable opinion of the U.S., up 10 percentage points from a year ago and up 22 points from May 2010, immediately following the enactment of Arizona’s immigration law. The last time America’s image was as strong among Mexicans was in 2009, when 69 percent said they had a favorable opinion. [. . .]
Doesn’t anyone in the polling universe care about what Americans think of Mexico and its demanding inhabitants? Particularly since Mexico is largest sending country of immigrants by far. A search of the handy internet turned up a survey from the National Journal last November, expressed rather cleverly.
The word cloud below answers the survey question, “Now, thinking about Mexico, what are three words that come to mind?”
As the newly elected Mexican president travels to Washington next week, a new survey released by consulting firm Vianovo on Monday underscores the startling challenges Mexico faces with its international image, especially in the U.S.
The survey highlights what has been widely assumed: that Americans have a generally unfavorable view of Mexico. But while illegal immigration and border crossings may be at the forefront of concerns in the Southwest, drugs and corruption are the ringing concerns of most Americans.
“Drugs” was the word most often used to describe Mexico by those surveyed, as is stunningly illustrated by the survey’s word cloud. Additionally, 72 percent cited drug cartels and traffickers as the main reason behind their negative perception of their neighbors to the south.
Of those surveyed, an astounding 72 percent of Americans think Mexico is unsafe for travel and only 17 percent consider the country to be modern. Continue reading this article
The Catholic church has upped its bankroll to wreck American law and sovereignty. It has added $800,000 to its previous amnesty spending of $3 million, since opening the borders to millions more hispanic Catholics is highly desirable for the bishops.
Not that it’s new for Vaticrats to work to subvert a nation that has been very generous to them. The Catholic hierarchy believe their organization supersedes mere laws and nation-states, particularly when the church sees a way to fill its empty pews. Immigration-fueled demographic change has supplied the Catholic church with more credulous worshippers, helpful to replace the many Americans who have left the church out of disgust with its pervert priest problem. (Around 10 percent of Americans are former Catholics, according to Pew research.)
In a 2005 article titled Church organizing anti-Minuteman campaign, (Brownsville Herald, Sept 3), priest Michael Seifert stated, “Any family in economic need has a right to immigrate, that’s our posture.” In Catholic teaching, such Marxist views are called Liberation Theology, which sounds so much nicer than “redistribution.”
Anti-sovereignty Catholics shouldn’t complain so much about Americans, since they get billions of taxpayer dollars, supposedly for Catholic Charities to perform refugee resettlement and “immigrant” services. The chart below comes from the 2010 edition of Catholic Charities at a Glance. FYI, 62% (the Government Revenue) of the total = $2,895,092,130.
The organization of U.S. Catholic bishops said it would make $800,000 in grants available for projects aimed at mobilizing regular Catholics to push for the bishops’ immigration platform That includes family reunification, a path to citizenship and addressing the root causes of immigration, among other things.
The bishops’ anti-poverty program in the past year has invested more than $3.5 million in grass-roots immigration reform.
For a decade, the bishops have had a clear policy on immigration, called “Strangers No Longer.” In addition to being part of general church teaching, support for newcomers matches the demographics of a U.S. church built by immigrants. Even today, half of Americans born abroad are Catholic. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.