Tancredo Says: STOP ALL LEGAL Immigration (His Fellow Candidates Vehemently Disagree)
Jun 5th, 2007 | 5 responses
During tonight’s Republican debate, Congressman Tom Tancredo (R) Colorado, said definitively: We “… must STOP all LEGAL immigration…”
Tancredo said that only “family members and refugees” should be allowed into the USA for as long a time as it takes, to close off all legal immigration, until ‘we don’t have to press for English…’ [being the exclusive language]
Wolf Blitzer immediately asked other candidates whether they agreed with Tancredo. Those who responded were vehement in their disagreement.
Mayor Giuliani looked as though he thought that Tancredo was NOT speaking English himself, but rather some form of gibberish. But Senator McCain, reacted in facial expression and tone of voice as though Tancredo might have lost his mind and floated up in a pink fairy dress way beyond the pale.
In response to Blitzer asking if he agreed with what Tancredo had just said, McCain replied in slow measured words: “It’s. Beyond. My. Thinking…”
There’s a saying amongst handlers of various public figures, or those who want to be public figures: If you can’t distinguish yourself from others from your own successful experience in the matter, if you fail at eloquence, if you have no track record to point to… try to say something far to the right or left, over the top or under the bottom of what others are saying. If Joe Blow says ten, you say 100. If John Doe says blue, you say red. If Jane Smith bids 500, you bid the whole house.
It’s not a strategy to endear oneself to seasoned politicos who look to work with reliable side arms, not cannons that rotate at will.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
5 Responses to “Tancredo Says: STOP ALL LEGAL Immigration (His Fellow Candidates Vehemently Disagree)”
I’m sure this is going to be difficult to understand, but:
a) Tancredo has been calling for a moratorium for some time,
b) as stated above, he’s not calling for a permanent end to legal immigration,
c) there’s no law or rule saying the U.S. has to admit over 1 million people per year
d) there have been long stretches in our history with little immigration
e) assimilation is a very major problem in the U.S. today (if you don’t believe me, move to L.A.), and a pause would allow that to occur; the current situation with massive immigration definitely makes the situation far worse.
LonewackoDotCom
Yes, thank you. I am aware, esp of the many quotas re your (d. Also, your (e. has merit too. Assimilation is an issue from all sides.
dr.e
I’m not sure if I agree with Tancredo, but it is amazing that the idea should seem so dangerously radical.
Many nations, such as China, Japan, South Korea, etc, essentially have zero immigration. And their economies are still growing.
JR
http://shieldofachilles.blogspot.com
Hi Jognrohan… I couldnt offer stats on all countries
you listed, otherwise I’d have to make a comment into another article, lol… but thanks sincerely for bringing other coutries into the issue. They all have much legal and also, not legal immigration. But I just put a link to this one and quoted from it here for you…
I appreciate your thoughts which led to me looking into and learning more about how other countries deal with these matters.
I think that one of the critical concerns of cutting off Legal Immigration is that there are literally tens of thousands in process RIGHT NOW by INS/ State Dept, as we speak. who have BEEN in the system of huge red tape, HUGE tangling of red tape, for years. My two cents worth? It’s not a Tancredo ‘radical’ idea, it’s punative to
the law-abiding who have applied for status, and to suggest cutting off Legal immigration is cavalier toward those families and individuals’ lives. Legal solutions paired with humane solutions
are not incompatible.
This is re Japan:
” The overall trend toward the settlement of newcomer immigrants is also indicated by the rise in the annual number of permanent resident authorizations, from less than 10,000 in 1996 to nearly 20,000 in 1999 and to 48,000 in 2004. The “permanent resident” status, for which there is no limit to the length of stay in the country, differs from the long-term resident status noted above. Meanwhile, approximately 15,000 people, mainly Koreans and Chinese, have been naturalized every year. ”
the link is here:
http://www.migrationinformation.org/Profiles/display.cfm?ID=487
[...] for Salazar in 2010? If the last one, a follow-up question: Does America need a senator who opposes legal immigration, [...]