The result is not pretty. Paul's book misrepresents the views of immigration-control advocates and then insults their motivations. He insinuates that patriotic Americans who oppose mass immigration are lazy and motivated by race. He says that immigrants "have a work ethic superior to many of our own citizens who have grown dependent on welfare and unemployment benefits. This anger may reflect embarrassment as much as anything." He also claims, "It's hard to hide the fact that resentment toward a Hispanic immigrant is more common than toward a European illegal immigrant."What Tancredo is quoting is â€?Worse than A Crimeâ€”A Blunderâ€?: Ron Paulâ€™s Tragic Turnaround On Immigration By Washington Watcher, April 28, 2011.Â I mention this, because while WND goes back to the very early days of internet journalism, during the Clinton Impeachment, it hasn't bothered to add links.
The immigration website VDARE.com refutes both of these assertions. They note that 77 percent of illegal aliens are Hispanic, while less than 5 percent of illegal and 10 percent of legal immigrants are European â€“ so the idea that we are treating Europeans specially is specious. VDARE also points to a Center for Immigration Studies report that shows immigrants are much more likely to be on welfare than native-born American citizens.
In addition to insulting the motives of the critics of uncontrolled immigration, he argues against policies that we don't support. According to Paul, immigration-control advocates want to "use the U.S. Army, round them up, ship them home." In my decades fighting this battle, I have not once heard anyone advocate using the military for deportations.
Read more: Ron Paul's amnesty with an asterisk