From: Charles Black (e-mail him)
While you were quietly getting ready for Christmas, the Department of Homeland Security pulled a fast one.
These people arrive on Maltese soil, which is European Union territory, and they immediately try to get admitted to the EU.
When the word is out about the Visa Waiver, more boat people will come and try to get legal status in Malta so they can ultimately get into the U.S. without a visa.
Once here, they will, of course, stay forever.
The decision to allow Malta to participate in the VWP should be looked into before all of its 400,000 residents are in our backyards.
Black is a Democrat who writes VDARE.COM that he is "100 percent on your side" of the immigration issue.
From: Jim Rossi (e-mail him)
Re: Randall Burns Blog: Obama's First 100 Days, Immigration And The GOP
Here's the crux of the shared insanity of the Republican and Democratic parties: that we can have a loose immigration policy and free trade without experiencing within the US the huge gaps between the rich and poor that mark the Third World economy.
To be real and credible, any serious attempt at addressing economic inequality in America will have to be coupled with restriction of immigration.
From 1947-1971, median family income increased an average 3.9 percent annually after inflation.
That was a period of low immigration (and families head by one full time income earner only).
The past three decades plus, most of it a period of unprecedented high immigration, have seen no increase in the median family income after inflation despite a dramatic increase in families with two full time incomes. See the charts of family income trends here.
Only morons or liars can't see the connection.
Rossi's previous letters about Hillary Clinton' 2012 prospects, the GOP's numerous political problems besides immigration and the prospects of an abbreviated David Dinkins-like political career are here, here and here.
From: Linda Thom (e-mail her)
Re: Joe Guzzardi's Column: Happy New Year! Why There Will Be No 2009 Amnesty
Like Guzzardi, I can't figure out why the Democrats and specifically Senate Majority leader Harry Reid made such a fuss about the Roland Burris' selection to represent Illinois in the U.S. Senate. [Despite Majority, Senate Leader Has a Rough Start, by Paul Kane, Washington Post, January 8, 2009]
It's a sound, legitimate appointment. Is Governor Rod Blagojevich's involvement in it embarrassing? Yep, but as Burris, the former state Attorney General and just about everyone on Capitol Hill pointed out, it's legal.
Blagojevich is still the governor, not convicted of anything, with all the authorized powers that come with his position. And when he overcomes his narcissism, Blago's smart. He proved it by appointing an African-American, a decision that was both intelligent and hilarious in its defiance.[Illinois House Impeaches Governor, by Susan Saulny, New York Times, January 9, 2009]
Reid's behavior makes me wonder if the idiot Democrats will also waste their time on amnesty.
President-elect Obama may bring them to their senses. He's cautious and has plenty on his hands. Now, if he can corner the loco jackasses (or should I say donkeys) in the 100-acre corral.
House leader Nancy Pelosi is my real worry.
Just a couple of months ago, Pelosi went after the Republicans and blamed them for the economic collapse even though she needed their votes to pass the bailout. When Pelosi angered them, they refused to back her.
I learned from working for years in labor negotiations that if you want the union members to ratify contracts, you shouldn't call them jerks. You need their votes today and you have to work with them tomorrow.
Americans haven't a clue how bad Democrats are on immigration and non-immigrant work visas. African-Americans, especially, need some help getting it.
Linda Thom is a retiree and refugee from California. She formerly worked as an officer for a major bank and as a budget analyst for the County Administrator of Santa Barbara. A regular contributor to VDARE.COM, Thom's archive of columns, blogs and letters is here.
From: Ralph Shafer (e-mail him)
After reading Guzzardi's column, which I agree with, I can't help but wonder if he too is smitten by Barry, "The Magic Man"?
Remember, Barry won our American Idol / Dancing with the Stars-style election mainly because he raised huge amounts of money, rumored to be nearly $750 million. Some of it no doubt came in illegally, some of it illegally raised from foreign sources [ The Amazing Money Machine, by Joshua Green, The Atlantic, June 2008]
Perhaps most importantly, Obama had 24/7 press cheerleading that supported him while covering up his glaring weaknesses. The fawning media never brought up the obvious fact that Obama has no experience in anything.
Furthermore, as weak a candidate as John McCain was, the media's relentless attacks and mocking of Gov. Sarah Palin, through both "straight news" (am I serious?) and entertainment programming like Saturday Night Live helped greatly Obama's campaign.
In the end, all that mattered to the media was the so-called historic element of Obama's race.
Election 2008 is extraordinary only historic because we've never put such an inexperienced mouthpiece like Obama in the White House.
This is the first time America has ever elected such an extreme liberal who campaigned so treasonously on immigration who had such an unimpressive resume with so many bizarre and possibly criminal associations in Chicago.
Schafer adds that he writes from "Dearbornistan, Hezbollah territory."
Joe Guzzardi replies: My reference to Obama as "smart" was to his political skills that he demonstrated by coming out of nowhere in 2004 to get elected to the U.S. Senate, then in 2008 by winning the Democratic Party nomination over the prohibitive favorite, Hillary Clinton. Obama capped it all off by trouncing McCain. In the context I used it, "smart" also meant that Obama is "too smart" to fall for any disingenuous arguments from the ethnic identity lobbyists that amnesty is somehow good for the country.