Sunday, May 20, 2007

AFB Book Review

I just finished Pat Buchanan's relevant and somewhat scary State of Emergency. I'm thankful I read it, although I'll never be the same (read: ignorant, at ease).

Buchanan takes great pains to illustrate the duplicity of the Mexican government and provides a historical context against which to assess the current invasion of illegals: truly, they are trying to take back lands that they have lost.

Some favorite parts...

Buchanan quotes JFK at length in one chapter of the book. As one of the "great" Democrat Presidents, JFK is adored by the Democrats, but his words are an indictment of the current policy of amnesty advocated by the Democrats (and many Republicans). It is worth noting that when people say the same things JFK said, they are labelled racists (p. 238).

He also takes an interesting look at illegal and unchecked immigration: how it hurts the poorest Americans, and wisely illustrates this by quoting Booker T. Washington (p. 230). He also notes that Samuel Gompers (founder of the AFL) was a strong opponent of unchecked immigration, and that this too is an example of how the poorest Americans are harmed by unchecked immigration.

Buchanan offers a number of great ideas, among them a "time-out" on immigration altogether (p. 251). This would give us the necessary time to assimilate the roughly 36 million immigrants in the country today.

Great point I never considered: the elites want illegal and unchecked immigration because it is a means of an enormous transfer of wealth to them.

OK, I've said enough. I recommend the book without reservation. Well, one comment: you'll feel a little like Neo in the first "Matrix" movie - once you go down that rabbit hole, there's no going back.

My new mantra is build the fence; throw out the illegals (no amnesty); time-out on immigration; assimilate those who are here legally; and legislate a common sense annual immigrant allowance (it was 157,000 a year in JFK's day, a far cry from the million and a half a year that is happening today).
Posted by at
Labels: ,

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I'll have to look up that book. Thanks for the review.

9:24 PM
Terry Morris said...

I too plan to read the book, and appreciate the review. I have a couple questions in the meantime though...

1. What's the point (or where's the advantage) in building the fence? It seems to me that an uncompromising enforcement of strong deterrant laws would be much more effective. And cheaper too. I mean, it ain't that difficult to identify 'em once they're here. And as they say: "bad news travels alot faster than good news does." -in this case to the south predominately. There are currently a lot of advantages illegals enjoy over their American hosts. In other words the United States has effectively stacked the deck against its own citizens and in favor of these illegals. THAT needs correcting.

2. I wonder if Buchanan ever broke it down to percentages in the book? In other words, what percentage of the population does the current 1.5M per year represent, as opposed to the 157K figure during JFK's administration? It's not that I disagree with Buchanan's conclusions based on those numbers (I realize for example that our population hasn't increased 10X in the last forty odd years, thanks in part to Roe), but that I think that percentages of immigrants to legitimate citizens (then as compared to now) might be a more effective way to illustrate the crisis.

One thing's for sure, this immigration deal might well be the most important issue of our time.

BTW, people are unfairly labeled racists (generally by the left) anytime they hold to certain standards of truth and right. We are often called bigots, prejudgmental; even "intolerant." I say to that prejudgmental, bigotted, intolerant, and uneducated point of view: whoopti-doo!

Assimilate them? People assimilate much better when they are willing participants in the assimilation process, which would include (but not be limited to) entering this country LEGALLY.

Don't get me started! lol

6:44 AM
Michael Tams said...

Good questions. I'll tackle the first, and let Pat handle the second. ;) Suffice it to say, he does, if in a roundabout way.

The point of building a fence is twofold. First, we have an open 2,000 mile long southern border which is an invitation to illegals... and terrorists.

Second, it works way more effectively than doubling the size of some government agency would. Fully 46% of Mexicans in Mexico (and as any American member of the internet network will tell you, that's nearly HALF) want to come to the United States. That's an awful lot of people to chase down and collect, if they get in.

Pat would agree with you that the incentives for coming here have to be ended (under his plan they would be), but the fence is a major step to getting that done.

Assimilation is key: most aren't interested in becoming American. Those people should leave or be thrown out.

-AH

7:33 AM
Terry Morris said...

Wait a minute.

Why do we have to wait until the forty six percent have invaded this country before we hunt them down and send 'em back? This is of course assuming that their (100% of the 46%) expressed desire will necessarily translate to their actually following thru' and coming to live here...illegally.

I don't doubt that the 46% number is an accurate representation of those Mexicans who express a desire to come to the United States. But you'll acknowledge that an expression of a desire does not necessarily translate to actually doing it, for any number of reasons. I mean, I'd like to do a lot of things. But that don't mean I'm gonna do 'em.

I agree, remove the incentives Mexicans enjoy over their American hosts. But I still can't see the necessity of having a fence.

Where'm I going wrong?

5:55 AM
Michael Tams said...

My point exactly, DW.

We should build the fence and not wait for (50 million?) more people to try and enter the United States. If 20 million have so far, it can't be that hard. I think the poll noted that of the 46% who want to come to the US, 20% of those would do so illegally. Use round numbers, say there are 100 million Mexicans (I'd guess that there's more). 46 million - nearly half their country! - want to come here, and of those people, just a little over 9 million say they'd enter illegally - they have no problem with that.

Without a fence, we'd need an enormous number of people staffing the border. Just from a slowing-the-growth-of-government alone standpoint, I'd rather have the fence that Pat describes in his book than another entire "Department of..." layer added to the government.

-AH

7:29 AM
Terry Morris said...

Okay here's my point...

You gotta get tough and refuse them basically all these little perks (incentives) for coming and staying here. If that were done, the number of those who say they are willing to come here illegally would evaporate as news got back to them. You can't just say you're gonna get tough and then not follow thru' though.

What I'm gleaning from Pat's plan (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that he has absolutely no confidence (at this moment) in the ability, or the determination of Americans to get tough with these invaders. Hence he thinks we oughta build a fence spanning the length of our southern border...to give Americans time to get the collective will to demand tougher immigration standards?

What's his projected time-frame for getting the fence up...in reality?

P.S. The Oklahoma State Legislature is working on what's been described by some as "the toughest immigration legislation in the country." If and when this legislation becomes law (after being challenged in the courts, right?) then I guess the rest of you people'll have to...do similar things in your own States?

8:10 AM
Michael Tams said...

DW,

I think in some respects you've got him right... if a majority of our "representatives" don't have the will to get tough, why should we expect that anything other than a minority of the people would? I called my two Senators to speak my piece and urge them to kill the immigration bill, but do you think I'm in the majority or minority of Americans on taking that action?

If the controlling party in both houses of Congress is actively working for the defeat of America, what chance is there that they'll "get tough" and take entitlements away from anybody?

-AH

P.S. Dang! I was hoping you were going to conclude: "... move to Oklahoma?" ;)

9:52 PM
Anonymous said...

I have the book now and the statistics in it are truly appalling. I also checked out another book on the "new" shelf, " World Inc." So far it's appalling in it's socialist agenda for large corporations.
I really have to stop reading more than one book at once. It does weird things to my thought processes.

3:17 PM
Michael Tams said...

Well, I'm eager to hear what you think of both, Mom. And I know EXACTLY what you mean about reading more than one - it becomes difficult to keep them straight in my head.

-AH

4:06 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)