The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Fred Reed ArchiveBlogview
OK, Now What?
The Party is Over, Cometh the Hangover
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

All right, we have him. My reaction to Trump’s victory is barely of interest to me, and so it may be that the world is not waiting in quiet desperation for an account. I have no information on this matter from Ulan Bator or Sulawesi. Insofar as my reaction was that of half of the country, it may be of note.

My reaction was, “Yes! Yes! Yessss!”

This of course is because like all of Trump’s supporters I am sick of corruption, oligarchs, New York, candidate’s who sell state favors surrounded by serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned bought-and-paid-for media.

And then I wondered how much I should be delighted. I am not a particularly enthusiastic Trump fan. The man seems radically incoherent, almost nutty. What now? Of the things Trump has promised, which, if any, make sense? Which are unthought-out huff and puff? From what will he back away? Will he transmute himself by degrees into Hillary?

For example, his Wall. As a metaphorical expression of opposition to immigration, it serves well. As a practical project? No. What are the specifics? A Wall made of what? How high, how deep under ground, requiring how much of what materials? Do the arithmetic on yards of concrete and feet of rebar and then pour yourself a stiff drink. Flimsy is cuttable, tall requires only a taller ladder.

Electronic monitoring sounds good, but would require either use of the military as a domestic police force to patrol the Wall–hello, Guatemala–or a huge new federal bureaucracy working three shifts, often housed in barracks in uninhabited country. Helicopters, sensors, big contracts for the same.

Things that would actually work to discourage illegals, such as heavy prosecution of people hiring illegals, this by using federal laws already on the books and a Justice Department he will control, do not feature greatly in his talk. Uh…why not?

He wants to put a thirty percent (or whatever: he isn’t consistent) tariff on goods made by American companies in China and brought back for sale in the US. So an iPad goes from $1000 to $1300, whereupon Samsung corners the market. So he puts an equal tariff on Samsung’s tablets. The effect is of a heavy tax on the American consumer.

The underlying problem is that if labor is a dollar an hour in Bangladesh, and $40 an hour in America after including benefits, bringing jobs back to America is going to make things much more expensive for Americans. Breaking unions, which are irrelevant today anyway, or charges of currency manipulation will not make enough of a difference to make a difference.

Trump has said that he will rid the country of illegals, of whom there are between ten and fifteen million, in eighteen months to two years. Anyone want to make bets on this? He seems to have backed off, as he seems to back from many things that got him elected.

He wants to end welfare for illegals. This would have the desired effect on unemployed illegals, but a lot of welfare comes from states, no? Does he have the authority?

He has talked of removing citizenship from children of illegals. If he does this by executive order, he will establish a new Presidential power to revoke citizenship of anyone he pleases. Otherwise the question will assuredly go to a hostile Supreme Court. Can he make a state stop offering schooling to children of his choice?

And of course ending benefits for children of illegals will result in night after night of television of poor little Rosita Gomez, aged eight, being dragged in tears and perhaps handcuffs from second grade by brutal federal marshals when all she wants to to learn English and be a good American, etc. Will California buy into this? Will the country?

He has talked of getting American troops out of Japan and South Korea on grounds that those countries can pay for their own defense if they want it. Good idea. However, it would mean the end of the American Empire in Asia. This would fly like space ships with the public–who really gives a damn about the Empire?–but would face squalling, roaring opposition from NATO, the Neocons, the arms industry, imperialists. and the international welfare clients–countries benefiting from free American stuff.

Bucking these would take great, clanking brass balls and a really good ballistic vest. Does he have them? Already he seems to be backing off removal of troops from South Korea.

He talks of getting out of, or disbanding, NATO. Great idea. NATO’s real purpose is to keep Europe under Washington’s control and to supply sepoys to provide a thin coating of legitimacy to imperial wars in places like Afghanistan–not excessively a North Atlantic country, but never mind. The idea that Europe, with over twice Russia’s 145 million people, and a much greater economy, needs America to defend it against an uninterested Russia–nuff said. But hey, exuberate the rubes, scare’m, tell them you will protect them, send money. Works every time. Can Trump stand up to this?

I hope so. I bet not.

He was going to ban Muslims. This seems to have disappeared from his web site. Again, backing off.

In short, I think he can’t do or won’t do most of the things he said he would do. The question here is not whether he should do them–I think several are splendid ideas–but whether he can or will.

End “sanctuary cities”? How? By cutting off federal funding, he has suggested. Will he use an executive order–that is, do it by fiat? If he can cut off funding to one city for one reason, he can cut off funding to any city for any reason. (Another interesting new power.) Didn’t Congress use to have something to do with funding?

ORDER IT NOW

In his policies on immigration, he faces three grave problems. First, Mexicans at least are not behaving badly enough. While most people would happily keep more from coming in there is no groundswell for kicking them out–furious internet commentators notwithstanding. Second, the President doesn’t have the legal authority to dictate local policies. Can he tell Los Angeles not to treat Latinos in hospitals? To stop issuing driver’s licenses? Third, in places with large Latino populations he will run into passive resistance. A city that doesn’t want to find illegals won’t.

My predictions, subject to ingestion of crow: No ethnic cleansing of illegals. No wall. No tight ban on Muslims. No punishment of sanctuary cities. No termination of welfare by states. No major decrease in military deployments. No war with Russia. Few or no jobs repatriated.

Fred is reachable at jetpossum-readers@yahoo.com. Put “pdq” in the subject line of your email will be heartlessly autodeleted. Lack of response usually due to volume, not bad manners.

(Republished from Fred on Everything by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: 2016 Election, Donald Trump, Immigration 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
179 Comments to "OK, Now What?"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Fred, you seem to be arguing for States’ Rights. How did Little Bush and Obama get away with executive orders by Trump can’t?

    Read More
    • Replies: @in the middle
    He should do away with all past executive orders, with one sweeping executive order. Since no candidate EVER fulfilled his promises, what makes people believe that Trump will?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/freed/ok-now-what/#comment-1644565
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. 1) If taller ladders were all it took; Israel would have a lot more Sudanese.
    The rest is just engineering, not even difficult engineering. Vauban showed how to do it
    4 centuries ago. That wall will cost less than a sitting duck Aircraft carrier, probably less than the next upgrade to the B-2 or the Osprey. And I suspect that after the USA builds its wall, Mexico will build the same thing on its southern border.
    2) You mean the border patrol and local law enforcement might be upgraded? Quel Surprise.
    3) As Obama and Bush have shown, you do not need congress to get shit done. Just invoke national security in a memo. The USA may no longer be the Founder’s Grand Republic experiment; but then it hasn’t been since 1860 and the War of Northern Aggression, or maybe since 1846 and the Polk war with Mexico.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian

    And I suspect that after the USA builds its wall, Mexico will build the same thing on its southern border.
     
    From Europe to Israel to Mexico-South, it's on. Walls are VERY fashionable of late.
    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    You haven't been keeping up with the news. Mr. Reed. Israel built a fence/wall on its southern border that is very effective at keeping out wannabe illegal aliens. The USA actually financed a similar fence/wall on the northern border of Jordan that has been just as successful. Multiplying the costs per mile of building and maintaining the Israeli and Jordanian fences by the total length of the USA's border with Mexico generates a figure in the tens of billions of dollars, hardly a budget-breaker and probably less thatn the total costs illegal aliens impose on the USA. Even better, a modest tax on immigrant remittances to Mexico would probably pay for all of this. If Mexico wants to get in a tussle with the USA over remittances - its largest source of income after oil production - so be it.

    Finally, one has to ask, "If the USA's federal government is willing to pay for a border fence that protects Jordan's northern borders, why is it not willing to do the same for a fence on its own borders to protect its own citizens?"

    As someone has noted, Trump's enemies don't take him seriously but take the literal meaning of his words very seriously; Trump's friends take him very seriously but the literal meaning of his words less so.
  3. “No war with Russia”: a perfectly sufficient reason to reject Hellary.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes, Realist
    • Replies: @Old fogey
    Hearing Trump say that he wanted to negotiate with Putin, not fight, was enough for me. That was the major reason that I voted for him.
  4. “If he can cut off funding to one city for one reason, he can cut off funding to any city for any reason.”

    This is the “Big Stick” globally and nationally, federal funds. The Dems giving drivers licenses to illegals just complicated identification for everyone.

    Birth certs for ALL fed funds: Welfare, Social Security, Disability. It will be a pain, at first, but once the system is purged of parasites, profitable.

    Cut off the money and we won’t have to “hunt them down”, they’ll leave on their own.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Crawfurdmuir
    Congress has repeatedly used the threat of a cut-off of Federal subsidies to the states and cities to force them to change their policies. As an example, when Carter sought to impose a nationwide 55-mph speed limit the means used were the threat of cutting off Federal highway funding to states that didn't do it.

    Trump may not be able to defund sanctuary cities all by himself, but Republicans do control both houses of Congress, and do you think that even an open-borders Republican like Paul Ryan will oppose cutting off Federal funds to sanctuary cities? Such cities aren't run by Republicans or represented by them in Congress. It should be easy to get such a measure through Congress by attaching it to an appropriations bill.
    , @in the middle
    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people's labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system, as we actually do with student loans. Laziness is an aberration and we must put an end to it, by requiring welfarers (A new word i guess) to WORK! what an idea!
    , @Lawrence Fitton
    most illegals have jobs. that's why they are here. not for 'free stuff.'
    big agra will not be prosecuted for hiring illegals. neither will service industries, like hotels.
    birth certs are already needed for ss disability. perhaps for retirement as well.
  5. The one thing he will do is to appoint Supreme Court Justices. And that in itself is a very big and important thing. Now I don’t trust any politician, and like it or not, DJT is now a politician. But I do trust him on appointing one or more “good” Supremes. Why? For one thing his list of published SCOTUS candidates looks pretty impressive. For another, it’s a relatively easy way to satisfy his base. And finally I have confidence that he will do the right thing in the appointment(s) if he continues to utilize the services/advice of Stephen Miller and Senator Sessions.

    Read More
  6. Well Fred, double chain link fences topped with razor wire work pretty well at prisons. Yes you need to have something in the ground for tunneling – perhaps 1/2 inch armor plate driven 15 feet into the ground topped by the 20 foot high chain link fence. Each chain link fence is topped with razor wire. Have 3 such fences each 25 feet apart so that border patrol cars can drive between them.

    A lot of this stuff can be built in factories and trucked to the work site and installed easily.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    You forgot giving border agents orders to shoot to kill. A minefield would also be a nice force multiplier.
    , @TheJester
    Large-scale electronic + physical "walls" to deter illegal border crossing are known technologies. The Saudis built one on its northern border with Iraq in 2014.

    The line consists of a multi-layered fence and ditch barrier wall. The border zone includes five layers of fencing with includes 78 monitoring watch towers, night-vision cameras, and radar cameras, eight command centres, 10 mobile surveillance vehicles, 32 rapid-response centres, and three rapid intervention squads.[4][5] The barrier is sometimes referred to as the Great Wall of Saudi Arabia.[6] The works are done by Airbus Group, formerly EADS.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi%E2%80%93Iraq_border

    The Saudi plan is to eventually "wall" of all of their borders with neighboring countries ... something like 3,900-mile of border.
    , @Alden
    12 foot fences work just fine Every school in the country has them. Just drive on any city street for a mile or so and you will see numerous 12 foot fences that keep intruders out.
    , @Son of Dixie
    Yes, I did some mason work in my 20's. Not complex at all to build a wall. The footings need to be in place anyhow before a wall goes up. A backhoe can easily dig down 20, 30 feet. Concrete is secured by rebar. Concrete is cheap, rebar is too. Reinforcing both sides of the 30 foot footing is not difficult.
    Tunnels will inevitably be dug, however, the average Mexican can't just run over our border when a nice wall is there.

    Fred, you lost, punk. When the WALL goes up, I hope your American citizenship is revoked.
  7. ” By 2012 India was constructing a 4,000-kilometer fence to seal the India-Bangladesh international border. The fence is intended to curb infiltration, movement of militants and enhance management on the India-Bangladesh border. The border fencing by India, to prevent smuggling of humans, cattle, drugs and arms, has been a prickly issue in bilateral relations. The fence was seen as an outrage among the Bangladeshi public, and the government of Bangladesh has made repeated protests to the Indian government over the matter.

    The Indian side of the Indo-Bangladesh border passes through West Bengal (2216.7 Km), Assam (263 Km), Meghalaya (443 Km), Tripura (856 Km) and Mizoram (318 Km). The entire stretch consists of plain, riverine, hilly/jungle and with hardly any natural obstacles. The area is heavily populated, and the cultivation is carried out till the last inch of the border.

    The Indo-Bangladesh border is marked by a high degree of porosity and checking illegal cross border activities has been a challenging proposition. The main problem is of illegal migration from Bangladesh into India. In order to prevent illegal immigration and other anti-national activities from across the border, the Government of India had sanctioned the construction of border roads and fencing in two phases.

    [MORE]

    In the mid- and late 1980s, India’s plan to erect a fence to prevent cross-border migration from Bangladesh and Bangladesh’s desire that Chakma insurgents not receive Indian covert assistance and refuge in India were major irritants in bilateral relations. As agreed eighteen years earlier, in June 1992 India granted a perpetual lease to Bangladesh for the narrow, 1.5-hectare Tin Bigha corridor in the Ganga’s delta that had long separated an enclave of Bangladeshis from their homeland. The two countries signed new agreements to enhance economic cooperation. Bangladesh also received Indian developmental assistance, but that aid was minor compared with the amounts India granted to Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and Maldives.

    The total length of Indo-Bangladesh border to be fenced is 3286.87 Km out of which 2535.80 Km of fencing had been completed by 2008, at which time the work of construction of fencing in approximately 751 Km was under implementation. Out of this, work of construction of fencing in 296 Km in Mizoram sector, where the work started only in 2005, would be completed during the year 2007-08. Fencing had not been undertaken in remaining length on account of non-feasibility, riverine/low lying areas, population within 150 yards of the border, pending land acquisition cases. An additional length of 120 Km in Tripura, which was not originally sanctioned to be part of Phase-II, was also taken up during the year 2007-08. In addition, 3250.60 Km of border roads had also been constructed out of sanctioned length of 3663 Km as on 31st December, 2007.

    Over 277 Km of floodlighting had been completed in West Bengal as a pilot project. Government decided to undertake floodlighting in 2840 Km along the entire length of Indo-Bangladesh border, in the stretches where the fencing had been erected, at an estimate cost of Rs.1327.00 crore. The floodlighting workso commenced during the year 2007-08 and would be completed by the year 2011-12. The Government of India decided to replace the entire 861 Km of fence constructed under Phase-I in West Bengal, Assam and Meghalaya, as most of this fence has been damaged due to adverse climatic conditions, repeated submergence etc. The replacement work has already commenced in the States of Assam and West Bengal. Some 193.70 Km of fencing had been replaced by 2008.

    With a towering razor-wire fence and heavily armed Indian Border Security Forces (BSF) guards who kill around 200 people every year, the fence along the India-Bangladesh border is ominous and sometimes dangerous. The fence, which snakes through paddy fields about 150 yards inside India’s notoriously porous border with Bangladesh, has torn apart the lives of tens of thousands of people, cutting them off from family, friends, jobs and schools.

    Bangladeshi official say the Indian plan to build more fencing will not stop illegal cattle trading. Major Mahmudul Hasan of the Bangladesh Rifles said “Most of the killings are related to illegal cattle trading. If it was legal to trade cattle the killings will stop.” He said the fencing would not reduce the deaths because cattle traders simply cut through it. In majority Hindu India, cows are considered sacred and beef is not eaten but in Muslim Bangladesh, beef is a staple and the price is much higher.

    Work under phase-I of the Indo-Bangla fencing project started in 1989 and fencing was done in 854 km against the approved target of 857 km. The phase-II involved 2429 km of the total 4,096 km long border. By early 2007 the fence spanned about half of the 4,100-km India-Bangladesh border. Since construction of the barrier began in 2003, tens of thousands of people in at least 200 villages were in geographical limbo – living in India, but on the wrong side of the border fence and thus with easier access to Bangladesh. They live inside a corridor the width of an airport runway, between the Bangladeshi border and the new fence. ”

    I guess this thing doesn’t exist right? I mean it is impossible to build something – call it a “wall” for controlling access.

    Oh wait, I get it. A “wall” has to be made of concrete or bricks or something. Because Trump said “Wall.” If he had meant “Fence” he would have said “Fence.” Just no way anything else will work.

    Hmmm I’ve heard of this “Great Wall of China” thing. That was made of stone right? Nah, that’s impossible. Can’t be done. The technology doesn’t exist. Evidently a fiction.

    Of course as a Trump voter it wouldn’t bother me if, you know, we had a “Fence” instead of a “Wall.” But then again some people are real picky about how things look. Even if it works.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Wong
    Amercian does not have the technology to build a "Great Wall of USA," but they always can outsource the project to others who can do it, like Chinese who can show the American they have proven experience of building Great Walls.
  8. Wrong on the citizenship of anchor babies Fred. A child born to non-citizen parents who are legally resident in the United States, is an American citizen. That was decided by SCOTUS in 1898. Wong Kim Ark was the case petitioner’s name. See: 169 US 649

    What has never been judicially decided is the citizenship of a child born in the United State of parents who are not legal residents, i.e., illegal aliens. Nor has Congress passed any law to that effect.

    The State Department calls them citizens but without any statutory or precedential basis for that statement.

    Fred, if you disagree, please cite the U.S. Code section or the citation of the SCOTUS case. But don’t bother – neither exists.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle a
    The children must return with their parents country of Origen until parents get legal status or the child become 21 years of age.
    , @Bob who is said to be an ist phobic American
    No need to make a federal case out of it. The presumption should just be that family reunification should take place in the nation where the parent is a citizen. I have my racist red flag ready to throw at anyone that wants to argue against this.
    , @jp straley
    Jim Sweeney:

    Right you are on Wong Kim Ark. I've been saying this for years. WKA also works perfectly well to disallow birth tourism. Trump can easily put this interpretation into practice....it really is the easy way to get started on his immigration project.

    JPS
  9. My reaction was, “Yes! Yes! Yessss!”

    Mine too but once he’s picked his team – most especially secretary of state and secretary of defense – we shall have a much better idea of whether he means business or is just another windbag.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Millennial Falcon
    It's almost certainly going to be a mixed bag, the key is whether the damage is mitigated.

    Just need to keep the hawks (eg Bolton) away from State.
  10. President Trump can not only appoint sound SCOTUS justices, he can also

    - rescind all of Obama’s Open Border$/illegal alien-coddling executive orders, and then issue fresh executive orders to counteract the ill-effects of Obama’s executive orders

    - direct the Attorney General to deemphasize “Racism” witch hunts against police forces and individuals, and to instead focus intensively on enforcing immigration law: this alone will have a profound positive effect by compelling illegals to go voluntarily back to their own countries, by discouraging & disincentivizing future illegal border crossing, and by putting the fear of prosecution into U.S. employers of illegal alien parasites

    - direct the Attorney General to identify and deport visa over-stayers, of whom last year alone there were half a million, and, further, insist upon establishment of a biometric visa ID system to track visa holders U.S. residence/school registration/employment, and to enforce visa stipulations on length of foreigners’ stays

    - direct the Attorney General to make a big show of prosecuting prominent illegal aliens (such as that Vargas guy whom Obama actually had the gall to invite to and praise at one of his SOTU addresses); this would send the message to prominent illegals to get out of the “activism” for Open Border$ rackets, thus taking the wind out of the sails of such “activism”/movements, and thus also giving no prominent illegal alien martyrs for U.S. citizens keen for Open Border$ to use as propaganda icons

    - as C-in-C, direct the armed forces to shut down bases and operations in foreign countries where those bases and operations do absolutely no good for ordinary Americans

    - insist upon nationwide E-Verify for all employment

    - by executive order cut off funding to “sanctuary cities” to force such U.S. municipalities to cooperate comprehensively with DHS/ICE/&c.

    - refuse visas to nationals of countries which refuse to accept their citizens convicted here of crime

    - end the “Refugee” Resettlement Rackets (all of which are almost 100% scammed by foreigners) by executive order, thus depriving the traitorous VOLAGs that run those rackets of the lion’s share of their federal funding, and forcing those VOLAGs to appeal to Americans for donations to alone fund their racketeering (and a great many Americans, especially those of us harmed individually by cheap foreign labor and those of us who see our communities despoiled by non-assimilating “refugees,” will not donate to such VOLAGs)

    - put brakes on “family reunification” to discourage legal & illegal immigration

    - repudiate UN power to dictate which and how many phony “refugees” the U.S. must admit

    - deny Social Security benefits & other entitlements (e.g., Medicaid) to illegal aliens & their offspring

    - insist upon a constitutional amendment to end anchor baby birthright citizenship (thus putting the birth tourism rackets out of business

    - apply stringent restrictions to issuance of green cards; institute revocation of green cards for foreigners convicted of crime; prohibit family reunification for green card holders (thus driving down demand for green cards)

    - withdraw troops from foreign countries and deploy them “to provide for the common defense” along the southern border (there is nothing “Guatemala” about this, Mr. Reed, as it is an explicit purpose of the Constitution stipulated distinctly in the Preamble)

    - insist upon a constitutional amendment establishing English-only as the official language of the United States, for all Government business and documents; and even before such an amendment, refuse Government-provided interpreters to foreigners on our soil – compel foreigners to provide their own interpreters, relieving U.S. citizens of the burden of paying for interpreters

    I’m sure there are other steps President Trump can and should take to restore our country and its governance and prosperity to us ordinary Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Sweeney
    Please see my Comment above as to birthright citizenship. [Number 8]We ought to codify that it does not grant citizenship however,
    , @melendwyr
    Presidents don't have the power to insist on Constitutional Amendments. He might make a good spokesperson for a popular movement to get the states to vote on it, but his position gives him no direct power at all on the matter.
  11. Fred always jumps to the defense of Mexicans, but even if Mexicans (and other third-world immigrants) were everything he imagines them to be, I still wouldn’t want 100 million of them in my country, and that’s roughly how many we’ve had since the nation-wrecking Hart-Celler legislation. Sorry, I don’t want 100 million foreigners in my country, and BTW no other country would want this either. “Quantity has a Quality all its own.”

    Speaking of quotes, here are Donald Trump’s actual words, speaking to Republicans at the primary debate:

    “We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, and everything else that is all falling apart!”

    Is it so wrong to want to take care of your own country, when it’s falling apart? If you prefer Mexico, I certainly don’t mind your living in Mexico and doing what you think is best for Mexico.

    But just as your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins, your right to export your undesirables ends where my border begins. Contrary to MSM propaganda, the wrecked and trashed third world does not actually enjoy the right to wreck and trash the United States of America, or even Europe for that matter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    and that’s roughly how many we’ve had since the nation-wrecking Hart-Celler legislation.

    This took away the prioritizing of nationality and made it based on family reunification. We still could have kept immigration under control if it wasn't for Reagan's amnesty, his central American refugees and other idiotic refugee and guest worker programs which eventually morphed into some form of legal residence to third world parasites. People should realize that these policies had more to do with it than the 1965 bill.
    , @gwynedd1
    I am always glad to get a seat on the train. I don't mind when the seats fill up. I do however mind when its packed beyond capacity.

    Not sure why its controversial other than of course it being propaganda.
    , @Jeff77450
    Very well said.
  12. I’ll make this read easy for you all. No need to waste your time on this. The short version: Fred doesn’t like Trump>

    Read More
  13. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Can he tell Los Angeles not to treat Latinos in hospitals? To stop issuing driver’s licenses?

    This is simple: make CA driver’s licenses insufficient ID for boarding a plane. Could be done with the stroke of a pen. (That it can be, however, is a different discussion…)

    Read More
  14. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Someone said to me… “So, a twitter troll became the president.”

    We live in the age of Trollitics.

    Trump is the Trollitician of the Age.

    We need a musical about him, like Hamilton.

    Read More
  15. I agree with Fred. Trumps election planks,promises and talking points were just political bait to hook disgruntled and frustrated voters, who felt ignored and exploited by a Neo- liberal globalist agenda which cost them jobs, a lower standard of living and more competition from immigrants and illegal aliens coming across the Mexican border.
    So Trump offered them protectionism [to bring back jobs], isolationism and non- interventionism [ to eliminate the exorbitant costs of waging wars and offshore military bases to protect allies from nonexistent threats] , increased scrutiny of Muslims [to stop domestic terrorism] and a crack down on illegal Hispanics [who are taking away jobs and increasing domestic crime rates].
    Hey, what’s not to like? So they swallowed the bait, never mind that these proposals are difficult to implement, problematic and counterproductive. Simple solutions might result in more complicated problems.
    Hey,no problem for Trump, he’s president now, that’s the goal and the ticket to making more money and expanding his business empire. He’s got no time to devote to solving the nation’s problems; no that’s for the vice president to take care of.
    He’s got lot’s of Jewish friends and business associates, who will bring in more Jewish advisors to run the nation for him. They are good at it, they have lot’s of experience and no doubt the country will be run like a business to make a profit. A profit for who? Do you really expect to prosper under Trumps care? Watch out you could also be bankrupted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    You found an honest man, Diogenes. And now you're slandering him?

    I would certainly support breaking with Ron Unz's tradition just this once and allowing you to change your handle.
    , @Diogenes
    Good to have contact with you again; I love your handle!
    Even if I were to change my handle my ideology [values] and my writing style I would be recognized as Diogenes the Cynic.
    Trump an "honest"[?] man, he has a history, we know him well, he's a conniving opportunist a confidence man, a promoter and conceited salesman with an overblown Ego.{Slander?] This is who you want as POTUS?
    Is My view on Trump different than other Liberals, progressives or the principal opinion writers in the Unz Review? No, the Trumpsters on this site are the anomaly!
    , @Ace
    ** never mind that these proposals are difficult to implement, problematic and counterproductive. Simple solutions might result in more complicated problems. **

    It's hopeless. We're doomed. Give up now. Trump just wants to make more money. Wahhh!
  16. Fred Reed = putz.

    Yeah, building walls is much more complicated than building high-speed rail, right old fart? Seriously, this is Fred the old fart for you: he rails (haha) against America for not building un-needed high speed rail, then he acts like building a wall might as well be a mission to Mars. Buffoon.

    Things that would actually work to discourage illegals, such as heavy prosecution of people hiring illegals, this by using federal laws already on the books and a Justice Department he will control, do not feature greatly in his talk. Uh…why not?

    Because it might have put off already-shaky chamber of commerce types, nice GOPers, etc? Build That Wall is better for a campaign. You can bet your sweet ass that Trump & co. are talking about it, though. Even if we assume Trump is only interested in immigration reform because he promised it (and only promised it to get elected), you can bet he’s going to hear this from true believers. Because you’re right, cracking down hard on criminal employers is absolutely the first, best way to get this thing done.

    If we can remove the illegal immigrant population, how big would the remaining hispanic population be? 12%?

    Meaning blacks + hispanics + Jews = around 29% of the population? Bad. Very bad. But much more manageable than the alternative.

    He seems to have backed off, as he seems to back from many things that got him elected.

    I know you’re old and slow, Fred, but try and keep up.

    He has talked of removing citizenship from children of illegals. If he does this by executive order, he will establish a new Presidential power to revoke citizenship of anyone he pleases. Otherwise the question will assuredly go to a hostile Supreme Court. Can he make a state stop offering schooling to children of his choice?

    Nonsense. I know you’re old and slow (and more than a bit treacherous), but try to follow the logic: “birthright citizenship was only granted through a (deliberate) misinterpretation of Constitutional law, so removing the illicitly granted citizenship therefrom is simply correcting an injustice.” No blanket power of citizenship removal is expressed or implied.

    The rest of your doddering, cranky post was TL;DR.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    For the first time you have written something that I agree with 100%.

    The same people who said Trump would never show up for the debates, never win the primaries and never get elected are now saying Trump will never build the wall and get rid of the immigrants.

    Fred is anti American scum.
  17. @Auntie Analogue
    President Trump can not only appoint sound SCOTUS justices, he can also

    - rescind all of Obama's Open Border$/illegal alien-coddling executive orders, and then issue fresh executive orders to counteract the ill-effects of Obama's executive orders

    - direct the Attorney General to deemphasize "Racism" witch hunts against police forces and individuals, and to instead focus intensively on enforcing immigration law: this alone will have a profound positive effect by compelling illegals to go voluntarily back to their own countries, by discouraging & disincentivizing future illegal border crossing, and by putting the fear of prosecution into U.S. employers of illegal alien parasites

    - direct the Attorney General to identify and deport visa over-stayers, of whom last year alone there were half a million, and, further, insist upon establishment of a biometric visa ID system to track visa holders U.S. residence/school registration/employment, and to enforce visa stipulations on length of foreigners' stays

    - direct the Attorney General to make a big show of prosecuting prominent illegal aliens (such as that Vargas guy whom Obama actually had the gall to invite to and praise at one of his SOTU addresses); this would send the message to prominent illegals to get out of the "activism" for Open Border$ rackets, thus taking the wind out of the sails of such "activism"/movements, and thus also giving no prominent illegal alien martyrs for U.S. citizens keen for Open Border$ to use as propaganda icons

    - as C-in-C, direct the armed forces to shut down bases and operations in foreign countries where those bases and operations do absolutely no good for ordinary Americans

    - insist upon nationwide E-Verify for all employment

    - by executive order cut off funding to "sanctuary cities" to force such U.S. municipalities to cooperate comprehensively with DHS/ICE/&c.

    - refuse visas to nationals of countries which refuse to accept their citizens convicted here of crime

    - end the "Refugee" Resettlement Rackets (all of which are almost 100% scammed by foreigners) by executive order, thus depriving the traitorous VOLAGs that run those rackets of the lion's share of their federal funding, and forcing those VOLAGs to appeal to Americans for donations to alone fund their racketeering (and a great many Americans, especially those of us harmed individually by cheap foreign labor and those of us who see our communities despoiled by non-assimilating "refugees," will not donate to such VOLAGs)

    - put brakes on "family reunification" to discourage legal & illegal immigration

    - repudiate UN power to dictate which and how many phony "refugees" the U.S. must admit

    - deny Social Security benefits & other entitlements (e.g., Medicaid) to illegal aliens & their offspring

    - insist upon a constitutional amendment to end anchor baby birthright citizenship (thus putting the birth tourism rackets out of business

    - apply stringent restrictions to issuance of green cards; institute revocation of green cards for foreigners convicted of crime; prohibit family reunification for green card holders (thus driving down demand for green cards)

    - withdraw troops from foreign countries and deploy them "to provide for the common defense" along the southern border (there is nothing "Guatemala" about this, Mr. Reed, as it is an explicit purpose of the Constitution stipulated distinctly in the Preamble)

    - insist upon a constitutional amendment establishing English-only as the official language of the United States, for all Government business and documents; and even before such an amendment, refuse Government-provided interpreters to foreigners on our soil - compel foreigners to provide their own interpreters, relieving U.S. citizens of the burden of paying for interpreters

    I'm sure there are other steps President Trump can and should take to restore our country and its governance and prosperity to us ordinary Americans.

    Please see my Comment above as to birthright citizenship. [Number 8]We ought to codify that it does not grant citizenship however,

    Read More
  18. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Can he tell Los Angeles not to treat Latinos in hospitals?

    Why? If I collapsed in the street in Mexico City I’d expect to be treated, no? Am I missing something here?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle a
    As an American you would have insurance while in Mexico. Mexicans in the states? Come on man.
    , @Alden
    If you collapsed in the street in Mexico you would be picked up by an ambulance and treated at a hospital

    But, you would be expected to PAY for the services you received. Unless of course you were a Mexican citizen in their social security low cost medical care for the indigent program

    And they would not release you out of the hospital until you paid the bill in full.

    I used to work in the medical records/billing department of a major hospital located in the Whitest neighborhood of a major city.

    About 85 percent of the babies born at the hospital were the anchor babies of Mexican and Central American non citizens. Medi-Cal paid the hospital
    $1,100 for the babies born to the illegal Hispanics. The hospital charged $14,000 for children born of American citizens with insurance

    Is that fair? Fred Reed thinks so.
    , @OutWest
    In fact my son was on a diving trip to Mexico with a friend when his friend busts his appendix. I had to wire $6500 (20 years ago) to the doctor before he would operate.
  19. Fred you are right that deporting children would look bad on TV. But what about arresting employers who knowingly hire a lot of illegal immigrants ? Going into a country club and putting someone in handcuffs would make great TV and be far more effective.

    Judges forcing them to mow lawns as part of their service in an open prison, even better.

    Read More
    • Replies: @skedaddle
    I've been arguing for arresting employers of illegals for years now . It would be so effective because after a few country club arrests, their buddies would fall all over each other hiring Americans and ditching their illegal ditch diggers.

    Definitely must-see TV and I bet it'd even sell some newspapers.
  20. Domestic police force? No. Armed forces defending the country. No “policing” involved. Ergo, no possum commitatus.

    Helicopters, sensors, big contracts for the same. More expensive than military adventures in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria?

    First version of wall goes up in high-traffic areas. 50-miles additional hike through the desert discourages mucho. Scalable wall lets in only guys eligible for Olympics. Carrying ladders in the hot sun is doable but one more obstacle. That’s the name of the game. Gradual tightening of the net.

    Ten to fifteen million? Try 30-40 mill.

    Heavy tax on the American consumer? Nothing like the “tax” of having your job taken by an illegal.

    The question will assuredly go to a hostile Supreme Court — No, Fred. The hostile SC would have been a problem if Hillary Rodham had been elected.

    The cases for “NA”TO and against Russia are el weako.

    No groundswell for kicking them out? It is to laugh, Fred. That is an argument beloved of leftist nutcases who wash their cars with the American flag. We’re tired of the guy who got a swelling when he saw the invaders coming in.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    Heavy tax on the American consumer? Nothing like the “tax” of having your job taken by an illegal.
     
    Or the tax of giving them free medical care and housing them in our jails and prisons. Or of having your home value decrease when throngs of them move nearby.
  21. @dearieme
    "No war with Russia": a perfectly sufficient reason to reject Hellary.

    Hearing Trump say that he wanted to negotiate with Putin, not fight, was enough for me. That was the major reason that I voted for him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeff Davis
    Me too. Let peace break out. Most folks seem to think that's a good idea. Been a good idea since forever. Just not for those in the highly -- very highly -- profitable death-machine business.

    The vast sums spent of the military are not about defense. Not really. They are about an economic way of life for all those on the receiving end of the money spigot. The "defense" business as a capitalist profit center is a poison chalice, looting the country for the benefit of patriot parasites.
  22. Trump can order the US Army back to the US border, which it left in 1945. The Border Patrol didn’t even exist until 1924. He can do this without any new law or approval by Congress. Just 10,000 troops would make a big difference and cost little. For those confused by propaganda that this cannot be done, here are facts:

    http://www.g2mil.com/border.htm

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    I remember a while back US Marines were deployed on the border, I think Arizona, to augment the Border Patrol. Tragically, a marine shot an killed a young Mexican shepherd by mistake who had wondered over the poorly marked border - thinking he was a smuggler or something.

    There was a huge outcry, and Marines were quickly removed.

    Military is trained to kill enemy soldiers: you shoot first. If you hesitate in battle, you might get killed. Don't know if they'd be suitable to deal with civilians. Any incident will be blown out of proportion, and the pressure to remove the military from the border will be immense. Then the incident(s) will be used by certain groups to pretty much abandon any border control.

    Best is to first build a clearly demarcated fence/wall.
    Then get rid of a couple or three of the useless carrier groups and use the $10 billions thus saved to hire and train more civilian border patrol.

    Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border.
    , @Jeff Davis
    Exactly, my thought. Bring the troops back from Okinawa, South Korea, and Germany and station them along the order, one every 500 feet round the clock. No rough treatment for anyone trying to cross, not at all, just a very polite escort into custody and then a return to the other side. Perhaps even provide the application forms for legal entry, even a nice lunch and cold drink. Practicing courtesy and respect for the humanity of others, and in doing so, respect for your own humanity, are virtues that are rewarding to everyone. In short order, all illegal cross-border flows would stop. Mission accomplished.
  23. Holding employers accountable for hiring illegals doesn’t remove the threat of illicit hardcore drugs numbnutz.

    Read More
  24. @Jim Sweeney
    Wrong on the citizenship of anchor babies Fred. A child born to non-citizen parents who are legally resident in the United States, is an American citizen. That was decided by SCOTUS in 1898. Wong Kim Ark was the case petitioner's name. See: 169 US 649

    What has never been judicially decided is the citizenship of a child born in the United State of parents who are not legal residents, i.e., illegal aliens. Nor has Congress passed any law to that effect.

    The State Department calls them citizens but without any statutory or precedential basis for that statement.

    Fred, if you disagree, please cite the U.S. Code section or the citation of the SCOTUS case. But don't bother - neither exists.

    The children must return with their parents country of Origen until parents get legal status or the child become 21 years of age.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Sweeney
    You have your statutes mixed. Were the child a citizen and the parents illegals which is not easy to do other than by adoption, you would be right. Otherwise, you're mistaken. As I wrote, State has alleged anchor babies to be citizens by birth but no law or case supports that. If you disagree, simply cite the code section or the case which would have to refer to the code.
  25. @Anon

    Can he tell Los Angeles not to treat Latinos in hospitals?
     
    Why? If I collapsed in the street in Mexico City I'd expect to be treated, no? Am I missing something here?

    As an American you would have insurance while in Mexico. Mexicans in the states? Come on man.

    Read More
  26. “Things that would actually work to discourage illegals, such as heavy prosecution of people hiring illegals, this by using federal laws already on the books ”

    This never was and never will be done because it actually works.

    NO JOBS FOR ILLEGALS =NO ILLEGALS

    Read More
  27. @boogerbently
    "If he can cut off funding to one city for one reason, he can cut off funding to any city for any reason."

    This is the "Big Stick" globally and nationally, federal funds. The Dems giving drivers licenses to illegals just complicated identification for everyone.

    Birth certs for ALL fed funds: Welfare, Social Security, Disability. It will be a pain, at first, but once the system is purged of parasites, profitable.

    Cut off the money and we won't have to "hunt them down", they'll leave on their own.

    Congress has repeatedly used the threat of a cut-off of Federal subsidies to the states and cities to force them to change their policies. As an example, when Carter sought to impose a nationwide 55-mph speed limit the means used were the threat of cutting off Federal highway funding to states that didn’t do it.

    Trump may not be able to defund sanctuary cities all by himself, but Republicans do control both houses of Congress, and do you think that even an open-borders Republican like Paul Ryan will oppose cutting off Federal funds to sanctuary cities? Such cities aren’t run by Republicans or represented by them in Congress. It should be easy to get such a measure through Congress by attaching it to an appropriations bill.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ace
    ** do you think that even an open-borders Republican like Paul Ryan will oppose cutting off Federal funds to sanctuary cities? **

    Alas, yes.
  28. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I agree that the fence is more symbolic than effective. The real battle is ending welfare for illegal aliens.

    But….having a fence is better than not having a fence. And if we spent 5 trillion fighting wars in the middle east, why can’t we spend 30 billion or so securing our border?

    By the way, a good economy attracts millions of immigrants. What do you think will happen when there is a great depression and Latin American countries collapse? A wall would be nice.

    Read More
  29. @CK
    1) If taller ladders were all it took; Israel would have a lot more Sudanese.
    The rest is just engineering, not even difficult engineering. Vauban showed how to do it
    4 centuries ago. That wall will cost less than a sitting duck Aircraft carrier, probably less than the next upgrade to the B-2 or the Osprey. And I suspect that after the USA builds its wall, Mexico will build the same thing on its southern border.
    2) You mean the border patrol and local law enforcement might be upgraded? Quel Surprise.
    3) As Obama and Bush have shown, you do not need congress to get shit done. Just invoke national security in a memo. The USA may no longer be the Founder's Grand Republic experiment; but then it hasn't been since 1860 and the War of Northern Aggression, or maybe since 1846 and the Polk war with Mexico.

    And I suspect that after the USA builds its wall, Mexico will build the same thing on its southern border.

    From Europe to Israel to Mexico-South, it’s on. Walls are VERY fashionable of late.

    Read More
  30. The Podestas and the Clintons are out of power for few months – thank god!

    Center for American Progress – be gone.

    In this episode of The Empire Files, Abby Martin explores John Podesta’s political rise, his vast network of corporate connections and his think tank “Center for American Progress.” Learn why the Podestas and the Clintons are a match made in ruling class heaven.

    Read More
  31. The ‘Trump Virtual Reality Comedy Hour’ is over, now comes the pain of reality. Not much will change, as evidenced by Trump wanting to appoint serial crook Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan to the Treasury, having the slimy Newt Gingrich on his transition team and probably giving a Cabinet spot–USAG?–to 9/11 enabler Rudy G.

    The real power in this nation is with the banks and until the FED is shut down and the Treasury starts issuing debt-free currency, nothing of substance will change.

    Read More
  32. “… or a huge new federal bureaucracy working three shifts, often housed in barracks in uninhabited country. Helicopters, sensors, big contracts for the same.”

    Between the 94m work-force-capable bodies sitting on the sidelines and uncounted in the 4.8% “unemployment rate” and roughly 45m people sitting around watching daytime TV and living on SNAP benefits, I’m sure you can muster a few million to live in the middle of nowhere and spend too much time in dayrooms watching TV and waiting for something to happen on their shift. Hell, I wasted too many years of my life doing just that in the military.

    Read More
  33. “He wants to put a thirty percent (or whatever: he isn’t consistent) tariff on goods made by American companies in China and brought back for sale in the US. So an iPad goes from $1000 to $1300, whereupon Samsung corners the market. So he puts an equal tariff on Samsung’s tablets. The effect is of a heavy tax on the American consumer.”

    Considering how many accidental deaths and injuries have been caused by people using various components of the Apple / Samsung ecosystem (texting while driving, watching netflix while driving, walking off cliffs while using selfie-sticks, not to mention facebag bullying), a hefty tax on the importation of these things would be a good idea in any case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @CK
    There are always candidates and victors in the Race for the Darwin Awards.
  34. @MarkinLA
    Well Fred, double chain link fences topped with razor wire work pretty well at prisons. Yes you need to have something in the ground for tunneling - perhaps 1/2 inch armor plate driven 15 feet into the ground topped by the 20 foot high chain link fence. Each chain link fence is topped with razor wire. Have 3 such fences each 25 feet apart so that border patrol cars can drive between them.

    A lot of this stuff can be built in factories and trucked to the work site and installed easily.

    You forgot giving border agents orders to shoot to kill. A minefield would also be a nice force multiplier.

    Read More
  35. @MarkinLA
    Well Fred, double chain link fences topped with razor wire work pretty well at prisons. Yes you need to have something in the ground for tunneling - perhaps 1/2 inch armor plate driven 15 feet into the ground topped by the 20 foot high chain link fence. Each chain link fence is topped with razor wire. Have 3 such fences each 25 feet apart so that border patrol cars can drive between them.

    A lot of this stuff can be built in factories and trucked to the work site and installed easily.

    Large-scale electronic + physical “walls” to deter illegal border crossing are known technologies. The Saudis built one on its northern border with Iraq in 2014.

    The line consists of a multi-layered fence and ditch barrier wall. The border zone includes five layers of fencing with includes 78 monitoring watch towers, night-vision cameras, and radar cameras, eight command centres, 10 mobile surveillance vehicles, 32 rapid-response centres, and three rapid intervention squads.[4][5] The barrier is sometimes referred to as the Great Wall of Saudi Arabia.[6] The works are done by Airbus Group, formerly EADS.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi%E2%80%93Iraq_border

    The Saudi plan is to eventually “wall” of all of their borders with neighboring countries … something like 3,900-mile of border.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Saudi has a big problem with African pilgrims who stay around as illegals. They have created crime ridden slums.

    But still begging and crime in Saudi is better than going home.
  36. @The Alarmist

    "He wants to put a thirty percent (or whatever: he isn’t consistent) tariff on goods made by American companies in China and brought back for sale in the US. So an iPad goes from $1000 to $1300, whereupon Samsung corners the market. So he puts an equal tariff on Samsung’s tablets. The effect is of a heavy tax on the American consumer."
     
    Considering how many accidental deaths and injuries have been caused by people using various components of the Apple / Samsung ecosystem (texting while driving, watching netflix while driving, walking off cliffs while using selfie-sticks, not to mention facebag bullying), a hefty tax on the importation of these things would be a good idea in any case.

    There are always candidates and victors in the Race for the Darwin Awards.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    That's why, when I lived in NYC and I was driving, any time a yuppie mother or couple would push a stroller (pram) across the street against the red light, I would step on the accelerator!
  37. YEP – let’s erect wall around the entire US border including Canada – because before the evil non-White immigration – there were no White serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned Jewish-owned media existed in the good-old White America. I mean who had ever heard that 40% of Nurses were sexually molested by church officials and 31% of school girls as young as 12, had tasted sexual experience at the hands of their family members or the boys at schools?

    Let’s not forget who is the expert in building WALL like terrorism in the world? Netanyahu has already declared A GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL.

    Every time I hear some idiot boasting his/her White moral superiority – I remember the sad story of a fellow Canadian, professor Julie Macfarlane (University of Windsor, Ontario), who went to office of the Rector of her church to seek spiritual guidance. It was 1975, and she was 16-year-old. The Rector told her that God wanted her to kneel and perform oral sex on him.

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/18/god-wanted-me-to-perform-oral-sex-on-my-priest/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Rehmat I was surprised they didn't interview you for this story http://islamandhomosexuality.com/5-ways-pakistan-gay-friendly/
    , @dcite
    As God the Concept is beyond physical dimension, description, and understanding (at least in any religion worth its name that I've looked at), that sort of activity has never been part of any doctrine, popular belief, or even the fantasies of the sane ones. Usually such fantasies are projected onto what they see as God's evil twin, Satan.
    Sadly, there are those who experienced abuse as children, or are just crazy, as the world is a hellish hothouse for them. You must know this coming from where you do....
    , @Sherman
    Hey Homer

    "A fellow Canadian".

    You're nobody's "fellow Canadian". You left your rathole in Pakistan and escaped to Canada.

    I doubt anybody in Canada refers to you as a "fellow Canadian".

    Maybe legally you're technically a Canadian but nobody in Canada wants you there.

    (Your goat can stay but you should leave Canada).

    Sherm
    , @Ace
    Please, abu-Rehmat, go back to your much more congenial and admirable homeland so you don't have to live in that awful white country.
    , @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque
    40% of nurses sexually molested by Catholic officials?

    Jack Chick, rumors of your demise have been exaggerated, right?

    In 1960, America was about 90% white and trying to restore that historical percentage would be good policy.

    The Preamble to the constitution was written by white christians and it was to THEIR posterity, not latinos or muslims, that this country was created for.

    White Christians of european descent desire to live with other white christians of european descent. Tell me what name you have for that evil desire
  38. Fred’s Presbyterianism is beginning to break out again. Trump’s is not nearly as virulent, so I think he will succeed.

    Read More
  39. @CK
    There are always candidates and victors in the Race for the Darwin Awards.

    That’s why, when I lived in NYC and I was driving, any time a yuppie mother or couple would push a stroller (pram) across the street against the red light, I would step on the accelerator!

    Read More
  40. As far as deportation of illegals is concerned, I think most Americans of the send-em-back opinion will be mollified by sending the criminals back at every opportunity. If Mexico and Guatemala will not take them back then we build special prisons that are “special” enough that the word gets out that breaking our laws has unpleasant consequences.

    Enforcement of labor laws will result in a lot of self-deportations that will also serve to mollify. A tax on remittances to Mexico by non-citizens or people without visas will be a source of income (helping an illegal send money would be tax evasion).

    And get control of the border, of course.

    Read More
  41. @Carlton Meyer
    Trump can order the US Army back to the US border, which it left in 1945. The Border Patrol didn't even exist until 1924. He can do this without any new law or approval by Congress. Just 10,000 troops would make a big difference and cost little. For those confused by propaganda that this cannot be done, here are facts:

    http://www.g2mil.com/border.htm

    I remember a while back US Marines were deployed on the border, I think Arizona, to augment the Border Patrol. Tragically, a marine shot an killed a young Mexican shepherd by mistake who had wondered over the poorly marked border – thinking he was a smuggler or something.

    There was a huge outcry, and Marines were quickly removed.

    Military is trained to kill enemy soldiers: you shoot first. If you hesitate in battle, you might get killed. Don’t know if they’d be suitable to deal with civilians. Any incident will be blown out of proportion, and the pressure to remove the military from the border will be immense. Then the incident(s) will be used by certain groups to pretty much abandon any border control.

    Best is to first build a clearly demarcated fence/wall.
    Then get rid of a couple or three of the useless carrier groups and use the $10 billions thus saved to hire and train more civilian border patrol.

    Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Carlton Meyer
    I mention that in my article. The teen had a rifle and was firing it at things. It was suspected that he was a scout for smugglers. There will be incidents as there are now, and our billionaire owned media uses them to argue for open borders.

    Soldiers would have strict rules of engagement that I list in my article, and only guard remote areas that our Border Patrol does not watch. Soldiers are much better than civilians for this mission, as I explain in my article. All of our border now has at least a three foot fence, and everyone in the region knows exactly what the border fence looks like.

    You need manpower, because even if you have a wall, smugglers will drive up to the wall or fence with cutting torches, sledgehammers, and even explosives and make a hole, as they do now. Small yapping dogs between long rows of fences are a great deterrent who can alert guards a mile away while keeping jumpers at bay.

    Once it becomes too difficult to cross, word will spread southward and the problem will quickly end.
    , @Marcus
    Deploy Armenian militiamen from Nagorno-Karabakh
    , @Ace
    ** Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border **

    Genius solution: mark border clearly.
  42. Those may be the rates of rape and incest where you come from, but in the U.S.? I doubt that. Even if it were so, what place do you have in the West, especially when you hate the West and its people? What would it take for you to go home?

    Read More
  43. The man seems radically incoherent, almost nutty.

    Trump may be smarter than you think.

    Read More
  44. @Rehmat
    YEP - let's erect wall around the entire US border including Canada - because before the evil non-White immigration - there were no White serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned Jewish-owned media existed in the good-old White America. I mean who had ever heard that 40% of Nurses were sexually molested by church officials and 31% of school girls as young as 12, had tasted sexual experience at the hands of their family members or the boys at schools?

    Let's not forget who is the expert in building WALL like terrorism in the world? Netanyahu has already declared A GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL.

    Every time I hear some idiot boasting his/her White moral superiority - I remember the sad story of a fellow Canadian, professor Julie Macfarlane (University of Windsor, Ontario), who went to office of the Rector of her church to seek spiritual guidance. It was 1975, and she was 16-year-old. The Rector told her that God wanted her to kneel and perform oral sex on him.

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/18/god-wanted-me-to-perform-oral-sex-on-my-priest/

    Rehmat I was surprised they didn’t interview you for this story http://islamandhomosexuality.com/5-ways-pakistan-gay-friendly/

    Read More
  45. After suckling on the LSM tit, Fred can no longer recognize reality and goes full negative throwing up weak red-herrings as if they are actual problems.

    Many countries have border effective walls including Israel and Saudi Arabia. There is nothing stopping the US from having one as well no matter how many idiots say it can’t be done.

    Trumps team is already putting his program together so he can hit the ground running. But since troglodytes like Fred refuse to actually do any research, preferring instead to take their queues from the LSM they throw up red herrings and piss and moan that none of Trump’s platform is possible. And the real assholes throw in that Trump “incoherant” or some other BS.

    Trump is worth is a self-made billionaire, Fred. What have you ever done besides bitch and moan?

    Why don’t you try a little alternative media. You might actually learn something:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-10/trump-reveals-policy-goals-building-wall-end-war-coal-repeal-obamacare-dismantle-dod

    Read More
    • Replies: @Willem Hendrik
    According to Forbes your president-elect inherited 40 million in 1975. He can only be credited for placing all his eggs in the right basket (New York City). And indeed the NY real estate market grew 12% per annum since the 70's.

    It is America that made him great ;-)


    What would you do for 40 years to come with a 182 million (adjusted) inheritance and lots of daddy's political connections?
  46. @Clyde Wilson
    Fred, you seem to be arguing for States' Rights. How did Little Bush and Obama get away with executive orders by Trump can't?

    He should do away with all past executive orders, with one sweeping executive order. Since no candidate EVER fulfilled his promises, what makes people believe that Trump will?

    Read More
  47. This is very simple. Build the wall and enforce it vigorously. Beaners tunneling under or flying over the wall should be shot and hung from the wall on the Mexican side. It works for coyotes who quickly get the message. Beaners will probably take a little longer. All illegals should be deported….Tyson Chicken can hire Americans to murder their gmo birdies…..leftie elites can hire Americans to be their nannies and maids. Immediately slap a 35% duty on all imported everything. Walmart can modify its biz model or go bankrupt. The Chinese can sell their crap to each other. Disband NATO and SEATO and bring all troops home from the far flung reaches of the vast crumbling empire. Reinstate the death penalty with no appeal for a whole range of violent felonies. This would be a good start in the first 100 days……

    Read More
  48. I think this is the last Fred Reed article I’ll ever read. First, it is totally anti Trump.
    Second, it is totally negative and claims Trump will be unable to make changes.
    Third, Reed claims Trump is “incoherent and nutty.”

    Trump is not incoherent and nutty. I believe Reed dislikes Trump because of Reed’s Mexican connections.

    I myself don’t have extravagent hopes for a Trump administration. TPTB will fight him in the courts and the courts are completely anti White in terms of affirmative action and black brown and Asisn immigrant job thieves.

    But Trump is the first Presidential candidate in decades who has not been actively anti White.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    I think this is the last Fred Reed article I’ll ever read.
     
    That's pretty funny, Al. Like you would give up any opportunity to bitch.
  49. @boogerbently
    "If he can cut off funding to one city for one reason, he can cut off funding to any city for any reason."

    This is the "Big Stick" globally and nationally, federal funds. The Dems giving drivers licenses to illegals just complicated identification for everyone.

    Birth certs for ALL fed funds: Welfare, Social Security, Disability. It will be a pain, at first, but once the system is purged of parasites, profitable.

    Cut off the money and we won't have to "hunt them down", they'll leave on their own.

    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people’s labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system, as we actually do with student loans. Laziness is an aberration and we must put an end to it, by requiring welfarers (A new word i guess) to WORK! what an idea!

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people’s labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system
     
    But, where's the money come from to enrich corrupt officials, provide political slush funds, make lawyers wealthier than they ever dreamed, etc.? You can't just cut off welfare!! Too many rich people will be less rich -- you commie!!
    , @Delinquent Snail
    Welfare needs to be reset. Every welfare recipient needs to sign up again. This time, they need ssi numbers, birth certificates and all other necessary info with them, along with all members of the household that are being claimed. Drug test all of them and require they stay clean with random drug screening. After this whole process, help find jobs for the members that are capable.
  50. @CK
    1) If taller ladders were all it took; Israel would have a lot more Sudanese.
    The rest is just engineering, not even difficult engineering. Vauban showed how to do it
    4 centuries ago. That wall will cost less than a sitting duck Aircraft carrier, probably less than the next upgrade to the B-2 or the Osprey. And I suspect that after the USA builds its wall, Mexico will build the same thing on its southern border.
    2) You mean the border patrol and local law enforcement might be upgraded? Quel Surprise.
    3) As Obama and Bush have shown, you do not need congress to get shit done. Just invoke national security in a memo. The USA may no longer be the Founder's Grand Republic experiment; but then it hasn't been since 1860 and the War of Northern Aggression, or maybe since 1846 and the Polk war with Mexico.

    You haven’t been keeping up with the news. Mr. Reed. Israel built a fence/wall on its southern border that is very effective at keeping out wannabe illegal aliens. The USA actually financed a similar fence/wall on the northern border of Jordan that has been just as successful. Multiplying the costs per mile of building and maintaining the Israeli and Jordanian fences by the total length of the USA’s border with Mexico generates a figure in the tens of billions of dollars, hardly a budget-breaker and probably less thatn the total costs illegal aliens impose on the USA. Even better, a modest tax on immigrant remittances to Mexico would probably pay for all of this. If Mexico wants to get in a tussle with the USA over remittances – its largest source of income after oil production – so be it.

    Finally, one has to ask, “If the USA’s federal government is willing to pay for a border fence that protects Jordan’s northern borders, why is it not willing to do the same for a fence on its own borders to protect its own citizens?”

    As someone has noted, Trump’s enemies don’t take him seriously but take the literal meaning of his words very seriously; Trump’s friends take him very seriously but the literal meaning of his words less so.

    Read More
  51. @TheJester
    Large-scale electronic + physical "walls" to deter illegal border crossing are known technologies. The Saudis built one on its northern border with Iraq in 2014.

    The line consists of a multi-layered fence and ditch barrier wall. The border zone includes five layers of fencing with includes 78 monitoring watch towers, night-vision cameras, and radar cameras, eight command centres, 10 mobile surveillance vehicles, 32 rapid-response centres, and three rapid intervention squads.[4][5] The barrier is sometimes referred to as the Great Wall of Saudi Arabia.[6] The works are done by Airbus Group, formerly EADS.
     
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi%E2%80%93Iraq_border

    The Saudi plan is to eventually "wall" of all of their borders with neighboring countries ... something like 3,900-mile of border.

    Saudi has a big problem with African pilgrims who stay around as illegals. They have created crime ridden slums.

    But still begging and crime in Saudi is better than going home.

    Read More
  52. @Rehmat
    YEP - let's erect wall around the entire US border including Canada - because before the evil non-White immigration - there were no White serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned Jewish-owned media existed in the good-old White America. I mean who had ever heard that 40% of Nurses were sexually molested by church officials and 31% of school girls as young as 12, had tasted sexual experience at the hands of their family members or the boys at schools?

    Let's not forget who is the expert in building WALL like terrorism in the world? Netanyahu has already declared A GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL.

    Every time I hear some idiot boasting his/her White moral superiority - I remember the sad story of a fellow Canadian, professor Julie Macfarlane (University of Windsor, Ontario), who went to office of the Rector of her church to seek spiritual guidance. It was 1975, and she was 16-year-old. The Rector told her that God wanted her to kneel and perform oral sex on him.

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/18/god-wanted-me-to-perform-oral-sex-on-my-priest/

    As God the Concept is beyond physical dimension, description, and understanding (at least in any religion worth its name that I’ve looked at), that sort of activity has never been part of any doctrine, popular belief, or even the fantasies of the sane ones. Usually such fantasies are projected onto what they see as God’s evil twin, Satan.
    Sadly, there are those who experienced abuse as children, or are just crazy, as the world is a hellish hothouse for them. You must know this coming from where you do….

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    As God the Concept is beyond physical dimension, description, and understanding (at least in any religion worth its name that I’ve looked at)
     
    Don't be ridiculous. All kinds of gods are described in terms of physical dimension and understanding, or perhaps as the lack thereof. People will believe anything, if you phrase it just right.
  53. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Tariffs provide benefits. First, they effectively reduce the outflow of capital to foreign governments by “taking back” some portion of what was taken by external manufacturing. Second, they encourage the restitution of that external manufacturing, back into the US. If Apple profits from Iphones made in China, Apple can profit from Iphones made in the USA. Short-term, there is an inflation, of sorts, paid by the American consumer for what are, essentially, luxury items. Nobody really needs an Iphone — it’s a luxury. Pay for that luxury until American manufacturing efficiency reduces the cost. It’s simple economics.

    On the issue of sanctuary cities and states being immune from punishment, don’t be ridiculous. Those cities/states are directly aiding and abetting unlawful residence, employment, and education. Federal funds can lawfully be withheld for reasons of unlawful state/local activity. So, do that. Withhold all Federal funds. Make sanctuary states and localities pay the freight for their support of illegal activity. Let’s see for how long the locals like those community tax hikes that pay for Mexican comfort.

    Read More
  54. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @dcite
    As God the Concept is beyond physical dimension, description, and understanding (at least in any religion worth its name that I've looked at), that sort of activity has never been part of any doctrine, popular belief, or even the fantasies of the sane ones. Usually such fantasies are projected onto what they see as God's evil twin, Satan.
    Sadly, there are those who experienced abuse as children, or are just crazy, as the world is a hellish hothouse for them. You must know this coming from where you do....

    As God the Concept is beyond physical dimension, description, and understanding (at least in any religion worth its name that I’ve looked at)

    Don’t be ridiculous. All kinds of gods are described in terms of physical dimension and understanding, or perhaps as the lack thereof. People will believe anything, if you phrase it just right.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stonehands
    Yeah, whew that God thing...how can that possibly be true?. Judgement with retribution- or reconciliation after all of ones toil and miscarriages of justice here on earth- nah...I think eating, drinking and whoring, and the mythic memes of our Overlords on Madison Ave.[ and in DC] will suffice for Truth.
  55. @woodNfish
    After suckling on the LSM tit, Fred can no longer recognize reality and goes full negative throwing up weak red-herrings as if they are actual problems.

    Many countries have border effective walls including Israel and Saudi Arabia. There is nothing stopping the US from having one as well no matter how many idiots say it can't be done.

    Trumps team is already putting his program together so he can hit the ground running. But since troglodytes like Fred refuse to actually do any research, preferring instead to take their queues from the LSM they throw up red herrings and piss and moan that none of Trump's platform is possible. And the real assholes throw in that Trump "incoherant" or some other BS.

    Trump is worth is a self-made billionaire, Fred. What have you ever done besides bitch and moan?

    Why don't you try a little alternative media. You might actually learn something:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-10/trump-reveals-policy-goals-building-wall-end-war-coal-repeal-obamacare-dismantle-dod

    According to Forbes your president-elect inherited 40 million in 1975. He can only be credited for placing all his eggs in the right basket (New York City). And indeed the NY real estate market grew 12% per annum since the 70′s.

    It is America that made him great ;-)

    What would you do for 40 years to come with a 182 million (adjusted) inheritance and lots of daddy’s political connections?

    Read More
    • Replies: @woodNfish
    Yes, Trump came from money, but his father made him earn it. Daddy loaned him money for Trump's first big project. Trump was already a multi-millionaire when he got his inheritance, and he built it into a multi-billion empire.

    It is America that made him great
     
    Trump would probably agree with you. He has said he loves this country and running for President was his way of giving back. Trump knows how to rub elbows with the political scum. He invited HRC to his daughters wedding and he told us why she was there - he PAID her to be there. Idiots like Fred and Peggy Noonan like to say Trump doesn't have the experience to be president, Trump has had more dealings with political leaders here and around the world than any of them. He knows how to deal with them and he knows they are corrupt. He has had to play by their rules. Now they are going to dance to his rules and some of them are probably going to jail.
    , @Wally
    Forbes?

    Seriously?
    , @MarkinLA
    His dad died in 1999 so how could he have inherited anything in 1975?

    His first deal was a dilapidated hotel when NYC is bankrupt. He promised to restore it if he got tax relief from the city. He used those guarantees to get loans along with some money from his dad. Yeah, he had connections and people probably understood that if he got into trouble his dad would backstop him but Donald did the work on his own.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump
  56. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @in the middle
    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people's labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system, as we actually do with student loans. Laziness is an aberration and we must put an end to it, by requiring welfarers (A new word i guess) to WORK! what an idea!

    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people’s labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system

    But, where’s the money come from to enrich corrupt officials, provide political slush funds, make lawyers wealthier than they ever dreamed, etc.? You can’t just cut off welfare!! Too many rich people will be less rich — you commie!!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    "But, where’s the money come from to enrich corrupt officials, provide political slush funds, make lawyers wealthier than they ever dreamed, etc.? You can’t just cut off welfare!! Too many rich people will be less rich — you commie!!"

    And guess what, Trump just won.
  57. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Alden
    I think this is the last Fred Reed article I'll ever read. First, it is totally anti Trump.
    Second, it is totally negative and claims Trump will be unable to make changes.
    Third, Reed claims Trump is "incoherent and nutty."

    Trump is not incoherent and nutty. I believe Reed dislikes Trump because of Reed's Mexican connections.

    I myself don't have extravagent hopes for a Trump administration. TPTB will fight him in the courts and the courts are completely anti White in terms of affirmative action and black brown and Asisn immigrant job thieves.

    But Trump is the first Presidential candidate in decades who has not been actively anti White.

    I think this is the last Fred Reed article I’ll ever read.

    That’s pretty funny, Al. Like you would give up any opportunity to bitch.

    Read More
  58. @Avery
    I remember a while back US Marines were deployed on the border, I think Arizona, to augment the Border Patrol. Tragically, a marine shot an killed a young Mexican shepherd by mistake who had wondered over the poorly marked border - thinking he was a smuggler or something.

    There was a huge outcry, and Marines were quickly removed.

    Military is trained to kill enemy soldiers: you shoot first. If you hesitate in battle, you might get killed. Don't know if they'd be suitable to deal with civilians. Any incident will be blown out of proportion, and the pressure to remove the military from the border will be immense. Then the incident(s) will be used by certain groups to pretty much abandon any border control.

    Best is to first build a clearly demarcated fence/wall.
    Then get rid of a couple or three of the useless carrier groups and use the $10 billions thus saved to hire and train more civilian border patrol.

    Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border.

    I mention that in my article. The teen had a rifle and was firing it at things. It was suspected that he was a scout for smugglers. There will be incidents as there are now, and our billionaire owned media uses them to argue for open borders.

    Soldiers would have strict rules of engagement that I list in my article, and only guard remote areas that our Border Patrol does not watch. Soldiers are much better than civilians for this mission, as I explain in my article. All of our border now has at least a three foot fence, and everyone in the region knows exactly what the border fence looks like.

    You need manpower, because even if you have a wall, smugglers will drive up to the wall or fence with cutting torches, sledgehammers, and even explosives and make a hole, as they do now. Small yapping dogs between long rows of fences are a great deterrent who can alert guards a mile away while keeping jumpers at bay.

    Once it becomes too difficult to cross, word will spread southward and the problem will quickly end.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    "Small, yapping dogs"? I'm thinking un neutered, under fed cane corsos and pitbulls.
    , @Avery
    Thanks for the clarification.
    Should have read your article first before commenting: my mistake.
  59. @MarkinLA
    Well Fred, double chain link fences topped with razor wire work pretty well at prisons. Yes you need to have something in the ground for tunneling - perhaps 1/2 inch armor plate driven 15 feet into the ground topped by the 20 foot high chain link fence. Each chain link fence is topped with razor wire. Have 3 such fences each 25 feet apart so that border patrol cars can drive between them.

    A lot of this stuff can be built in factories and trucked to the work site and installed easily.

    12 foot fences work just fine Every school in the country has them. Just drive on any city street for a mile or so and you will see numerous 12 foot fences that keep intruders out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    Two fences fifty feet apart.
    A shoot to kill policy for anyone between them.
    Can't say they weren't warned.

    Fixed in the first month.
  60. @Kyle a
    The children must return with their parents country of Origen until parents get legal status or the child become 21 years of age.

    You have your statutes mixed. Were the child a citizen and the parents illegals which is not easy to do other than by adoption, you would be right. Otherwise, you’re mistaken. As I wrote, State has alleged anchor babies to be citizens by birth but no law or case supports that. If you disagree, simply cite the code section or the case which would have to refer to the code.

    Read More
  61. @Diogenes
    I agree with Fred. Trumps election planks,promises and talking points were just political bait to hook disgruntled and frustrated voters, who felt ignored and exploited by a Neo- liberal globalist agenda which cost them jobs, a lower standard of living and more competition from immigrants and illegal aliens coming across the Mexican border.
    So Trump offered them protectionism [to bring back jobs], isolationism and non- interventionism [ to eliminate the exorbitant costs of waging wars and offshore military bases to protect allies from nonexistent threats] , increased scrutiny of Muslims [to stop domestic terrorism] and a crack down on illegal Hispanics [who are taking away jobs and increasing domestic crime rates].
    Hey, what's not to like? So they swallowed the bait, never mind that these proposals are difficult to implement, problematic and counterproductive. Simple solutions might result in more complicated problems.
    Hey,no problem for Trump, he's president now, that's the goal and the ticket to making more money and expanding his business empire. He's got no time to devote to solving the nation's problems; no that's for the vice president to take care of.
    He's got lot's of Jewish friends and business associates, who will bring in more Jewish advisors to run the nation for him. They are good at it, they have lot's of experience and no doubt the country will be run like a business to make a profit. A profit for who? Do you really expect to prosper under Trumps care? Watch out you could also be bankrupted.

    You found an honest man, Diogenes. And now you’re slandering him?

    I would certainly support breaking with Ron Unz’s tradition just this once and allowing you to change your handle.

    Read More
  62. @Anon

    Can he tell Los Angeles not to treat Latinos in hospitals?
     
    Why? If I collapsed in the street in Mexico City I'd expect to be treated, no? Am I missing something here?

    If you collapsed in the street in Mexico you would be picked up by an ambulance and treated at a hospital

    But, you would be expected to PAY for the services you received. Unless of course you were a Mexican citizen in their social security low cost medical care for the indigent program

    And they would not release you out of the hospital until you paid the bill in full.

    I used to work in the medical records/billing department of a major hospital located in the Whitest neighborhood of a major city.

    About 85 percent of the babies born at the hospital were the anchor babies of Mexican and Central American non citizens. Medi-Cal paid the hospital
    $1,100 for the babies born to the illegal Hispanics. The hospital charged $14,000 for children born of American citizens with insurance

    Is that fair? Fred Reed thinks so.

    Read More
  63. @Carlton Meyer
    I mention that in my article. The teen had a rifle and was firing it at things. It was suspected that he was a scout for smugglers. There will be incidents as there are now, and our billionaire owned media uses them to argue for open borders.

    Soldiers would have strict rules of engagement that I list in my article, and only guard remote areas that our Border Patrol does not watch. Soldiers are much better than civilians for this mission, as I explain in my article. All of our border now has at least a three foot fence, and everyone in the region knows exactly what the border fence looks like.

    You need manpower, because even if you have a wall, smugglers will drive up to the wall or fence with cutting torches, sledgehammers, and even explosives and make a hole, as they do now. Small yapping dogs between long rows of fences are a great deterrent who can alert guards a mile away while keeping jumpers at bay.

    Once it becomes too difficult to cross, word will spread southward and the problem will quickly end.

    “Small, yapping dogs”? I’m thinking un neutered, under fed cane corsos and pitbulls.

    Read More
  64. @Jim Sweeney
    Wrong on the citizenship of anchor babies Fred. A child born to non-citizen parents who are legally resident in the United States, is an American citizen. That was decided by SCOTUS in 1898. Wong Kim Ark was the case petitioner's name. See: 169 US 649

    What has never been judicially decided is the citizenship of a child born in the United State of parents who are not legal residents, i.e., illegal aliens. Nor has Congress passed any law to that effect.

    The State Department calls them citizens but without any statutory or precedential basis for that statement.

    Fred, if you disagree, please cite the U.S. Code section or the citation of the SCOTUS case. But don't bother - neither exists.

    No need to make a federal case out of it. The presumption should just be that family reunification should take place in the nation where the parent is a citizen. I have my racist red flag ready to throw at anyone that wants to argue against this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Sweeney
    That there has never been a federal case re this point is, of course, part of the problem.

    Your "presumption" is exactly the kind of legislating from the bench rather than Congress of which Constitutionalists complain. Were one able to make his own presumptions, he'd never lose a case or an argument.

    And, as for racist flags, whenever a commentor has neither fact nor law with which to argue, he throws the racist, misogynist or other such flag of invective to impeach his opponent. It doesn't work.
  65. @Willem Hendrik
    According to Forbes your president-elect inherited 40 million in 1975. He can only be credited for placing all his eggs in the right basket (New York City). And indeed the NY real estate market grew 12% per annum since the 70's.

    It is America that made him great ;-)


    What would you do for 40 years to come with a 182 million (adjusted) inheritance and lots of daddy's political connections?

    Yes, Trump came from money, but his father made him earn it. Daddy loaned him money for Trump’s first big project. Trump was already a multi-millionaire when he got his inheritance, and he built it into a multi-billion empire.

    It is America that made him great

    Trump would probably agree with you. He has said he loves this country and running for President was his way of giving back. Trump knows how to rub elbows with the political scum. He invited HRC to his daughters wedding and he told us why she was there – he PAID her to be there. Idiots like Fred and Peggy Noonan like to say Trump doesn’t have the experience to be president, Trump has had more dealings with political leaders here and around the world than any of them. He knows how to deal with them and he knows they are corrupt. He has had to play by their rules. Now they are going to dance to his rules and some of them are probably going to jail.

    Read More
  66. Reed asks: ‘How will Trump do it’?

    Having both the Senate and the House is how.

    Read More
  67. Well Fred, I am sorry to see that you think Americans are nothing more than “consumers”. As for Trump being able to revoke citizenship, it seems to me, that every time a drone strike, apporoved by the president, takes out an “American”, he has, de facto, revoked his citizenship.

    Read More
  68. @Kyle McKenna
    Fred always jumps to the defense of Mexicans, but even if Mexicans (and other third-world immigrants) were everything he imagines them to be, I still wouldn't want 100 million of them in my country, and that's roughly how many we've had since the nation-wrecking Hart-Celler legislation. Sorry, I don't want 100 million foreigners in my country, and BTW no other country would want this either. "Quantity has a Quality all its own."

    Speaking of quotes, here are Donald Trump’s actual words, speaking to Republicans at the primary debate:

    “We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, and everything else that is all falling apart!”

    Is it so wrong to want to take care of your own country, when it's falling apart? If you prefer Mexico, I certainly don't mind your living in Mexico and doing what you think is best for Mexico.

    But just as your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins, your right to export your undesirables ends where my border begins. Contrary to MSM propaganda, the wrecked and trashed third world does not actually enjoy the right to wreck and trash the United States of America, or even Europe for that matter.

    and that’s roughly how many we’ve had since the nation-wrecking Hart-Celler legislation.

    This took away the prioritizing of nationality and made it based on family reunification. We still could have kept immigration under control if it wasn’t for Reagan’s amnesty, his central American refugees and other idiotic refugee and guest worker programs which eventually morphed into some form of legal residence to third world parasites. People should realize that these policies had more to do with it than the 1965 bill.

    Read More
  69. @JZ
    I'll make this read easy for you all. No need to waste your time on this. The short version: Fred doesn't like Trump>

    Trump probably banged hotter Latinas than Fred.

    Read More
  70. @John Jeremiah Smith

    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people’s labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system
     
    But, where's the money come from to enrich corrupt officials, provide political slush funds, make lawyers wealthier than they ever dreamed, etc.? You can't just cut off welfare!! Too many rich people will be less rich -- you commie!!

    “But, where’s the money come from to enrich corrupt officials, provide political slush funds, make lawyers wealthier than they ever dreamed, etc.? You can’t just cut off welfare!! Too many rich people will be less rich — you commie!!”

    And guess what, Trump just won.

    Read More
  71. @Anon
    Someone said to me... "So, a twitter troll became the president."

    We live in the age of Trollitics.

    Trump is the Trollitician of the Age.

    We need a musical about him, like Hamilton.

    Starring a black guy?

    Read More
  72. @Willem Hendrik
    According to Forbes your president-elect inherited 40 million in 1975. He can only be credited for placing all his eggs in the right basket (New York City). And indeed the NY real estate market grew 12% per annum since the 70's.

    It is America that made him great ;-)


    What would you do for 40 years to come with a 182 million (adjusted) inheritance and lots of daddy's political connections?

    Forbes?

    Seriously?

    Read More
  73. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “The underlying problem is that if labor is a dollar an hour in Bangladesh, and $40 an hour in America after including benefits, bringing jobs back to America is going to make things much more expensive for Americans”

    Think of it being a pie, zero sum, of course, being split up. When companies come back to America, most of the profit-pie stays in America versus giving a slice, no matter the size, to a country like Bangladesh. So all considered Americans as a whole are better off.

    - Steven J.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23
    And sometimes the slice isn't so small:

    How about Hon Hai Precision Industry manufacturing for the US market?

    "The largest of these companies is Hon Hai Precision Industry, also known as Foxconn. The company has grown at an astounding rate, first in Taiwan and later in China. Its revenues last year were $62 billion, larger than Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Dell (DELL), or Intel. Foxconn employs over 800,000 people, more than the combined worldwide head count of Apple, Dell, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Intel, and Sony (SNE)"

    Andy Grove ex-CEO of Intel used the 10x rule. Any new computer device generates 10 jobs in Asia for 1 job in the US.
  74. @Bob who is said to be an ist phobic American
    No need to make a federal case out of it. The presumption should just be that family reunification should take place in the nation where the parent is a citizen. I have my racist red flag ready to throw at anyone that wants to argue against this.

    That there has never been a federal case re this point is, of course, part of the problem.

    Your “presumption” is exactly the kind of legislating from the bench rather than Congress of which Constitutionalists complain. Were one able to make his own presumptions, he’d never lose a case or an argument.

    And, as for racist flags, whenever a commentor has neither fact nor law with which to argue, he throws the racist, misogynist or other such flag of invective to impeach his opponent. It doesn’t work.

    Read More
  75. @Diogenes
    I agree with Fred. Trumps election planks,promises and talking points were just political bait to hook disgruntled and frustrated voters, who felt ignored and exploited by a Neo- liberal globalist agenda which cost them jobs, a lower standard of living and more competition from immigrants and illegal aliens coming across the Mexican border.
    So Trump offered them protectionism [to bring back jobs], isolationism and non- interventionism [ to eliminate the exorbitant costs of waging wars and offshore military bases to protect allies from nonexistent threats] , increased scrutiny of Muslims [to stop domestic terrorism] and a crack down on illegal Hispanics [who are taking away jobs and increasing domestic crime rates].
    Hey, what's not to like? So they swallowed the bait, never mind that these proposals are difficult to implement, problematic and counterproductive. Simple solutions might result in more complicated problems.
    Hey,no problem for Trump, he's president now, that's the goal and the ticket to making more money and expanding his business empire. He's got no time to devote to solving the nation's problems; no that's for the vice president to take care of.
    He's got lot's of Jewish friends and business associates, who will bring in more Jewish advisors to run the nation for him. They are good at it, they have lot's of experience and no doubt the country will be run like a business to make a profit. A profit for who? Do you really expect to prosper under Trumps care? Watch out you could also be bankrupted.

    Good to have contact with you again; I love your handle!
    Even if I were to change my handle my ideology [values] and my writing style I would be recognized as Diogenes the Cynic.
    Trump an “honest”[?] man, he has a history, we know him well, he’s a conniving opportunist a confidence man, a promoter and conceited salesman with an overblown Ego.{Slander?] This is who you want as POTUS?
    Is My view on Trump different than other Liberals, progressives or the principal opinion writers in the Unz Review? No, the Trumpsters on this site are the anomaly!

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    Given the meaning of the name, it's no surprise there are two of you.
    , @MarkinLA
    he’s a conniving opportunist a confidence man, a promoter and conceited salesman with an overblown Ego.

    I think you just outed 100% of Washington, Wall Street, and real estate developers.
  76. @Avery
    I remember a while back US Marines were deployed on the border, I think Arizona, to augment the Border Patrol. Tragically, a marine shot an killed a young Mexican shepherd by mistake who had wondered over the poorly marked border - thinking he was a smuggler or something.

    There was a huge outcry, and Marines were quickly removed.

    Military is trained to kill enemy soldiers: you shoot first. If you hesitate in battle, you might get killed. Don't know if they'd be suitable to deal with civilians. Any incident will be blown out of proportion, and the pressure to remove the military from the border will be immense. Then the incident(s) will be used by certain groups to pretty much abandon any border control.

    Best is to first build a clearly demarcated fence/wall.
    Then get rid of a couple or three of the useless carrier groups and use the $10 billions thus saved to hire and train more civilian border patrol.

    Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border.

    Deploy Armenian militiamen from Nagorno-Karabakh

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    Not a bad idea.
    One little problem: those crossing must be nomad Turk combatants. or other Islamist terrorists. Otherwise the NKR guys will not shoot.
  77. Why does everyone in the media fail to understand a simple truth? Trump doesn’t need to build a wall, the wall could be trade negotiations with nations that are net emigraters, stronger enforcement of existing laws, and many other ways to make a figurative wall.

    If he gets voted out because he didn’t build a wall, but through other means illegal immigration is curtailed, and violent criminals removed, then those who voted him out are too dumb to deserve a democracy, or freedom of speech.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    You mean like GWBs "virtual wall" that looked an awful lot like those clothes the emperor wore. It is too easy for those policies to be nullified via the executive and the courts and have the public fooled by bogus reports of all the success the administration is making.
  78. @macilrae

    My reaction was, “Yes! Yes! Yessss!”
     
    Mine too but once he's picked his team - most especially secretary of state and secretary of defense - we shall have a much better idea of whether he means business or is just another windbag.

    It’s almost certainly going to be a mixed bag, the key is whether the damage is mitigated.

    Just need to keep the hawks (eg Bolton) away from State.

    Read More
  79. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It seems Mexico agrees with Donald Trump’s plans to build a wall to keep out illegal immigrants but only on its southern border with Central America.

    Mexicans are calling for the border wall to keep out Guatemalans, Salvadorans and Hondurans fleeing violence in their own countries.

    How far have they got with their wall?
    Maybe Mexico will finish building its one first.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Willem Hendrik
    Indeed. There was this excellent documentary series on Dutch television about the why and how en route from Guatamala to the USA.

    http://www.vpro.nl/programmas/americanos/kijk/afleveringen/1-linke-soep.html
    (Dutch voice over, but lots of Spanish and American English)
  80. @Anon
    "The underlying problem is that if labor is a dollar an hour in Bangladesh, and $40 an hour in America after including benefits, bringing jobs back to America is going to make things much more expensive for Americans"

    Think of it being a pie, zero sum, of course, being split up. When companies come back to America, most of the profit-pie stays in America versus giving a slice, no matter the size, to a country like Bangladesh. So all considered Americans as a whole are better off.

    - Steven J.

    And sometimes the slice isn’t so small:

    How about Hon Hai Precision Industry manufacturing for the US market?

    “The largest of these companies is Hon Hai Precision Industry, also known as Foxconn. The company has grown at an astounding rate, first in Taiwan and later in China. Its revenues last year were $62 billion, larger than Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Dell (DELL), or Intel. Foxconn employs over 800,000 people, more than the combined worldwide head count of Apple, Dell, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Intel, and Sony (SNE)”

    Andy Grove ex-CEO of Intel used the 10x rule. Any new computer device generates 10 jobs in Asia for 1 job in the US.

    Read More
  81. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Fred is a smart guy, so I’m stunned he puts out the discredited critiques about walls. Walls are extremely effective in Israel, and in parts of Europe where they have been set up to block migrant inflows. It’ just a big construction project which isn’t technologically complex. It’s cost will be a pittance compared to it’s value and yes, it isn’t hard to find ways to make Mexico indirectly pay for it.

    -Steven J.

    Read More
  82. @Ace
    Domestic police force? No. Armed forces defending the country. No "policing" involved. Ergo, no possum commitatus.

    Helicopters, sensors, big contracts for the same. More expensive than military adventures in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria?

    First version of wall goes up in high-traffic areas. 50-miles additional hike through the desert discourages mucho. Scalable wall lets in only guys eligible for Olympics. Carrying ladders in the hot sun is doable but one more obstacle. That's the name of the game. Gradual tightening of the net.

    Ten to fifteen million? Try 30-40 mill.

    Heavy tax on the American consumer? Nothing like the "tax" of having your job taken by an illegal.

    The question will assuredly go to a hostile Supreme Court -- No, Fred. The hostile SC would have been a problem if Hillary Rodham had been elected.

    The cases for "NA"TO and against Russia are el weako.

    No groundswell for kicking them out? It is to laugh, Fred. That is an argument beloved of leftist nutcases who wash their cars with the American flag. We're tired of the guy who got a swelling when he saw the invaders coming in.

    Heavy tax on the American consumer? Nothing like the “tax” of having your job taken by an illegal.

    Or the tax of giving them free medical care and housing them in our jails and prisons. Or of having your home value decrease when throngs of them move nearby.

    Read More
  83. Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents…

    Basically, “Build the Wall!!” is what Bill Clinton used to call “Boob-Bait for Bubbas.”

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren’t all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them—for PeeCee reasons—focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it’s the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I’m missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn’t have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I’m wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a “Wall” or “Sanctuary Cities” is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here’s my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I agree. Solving legal immigration problem is very simple. It suffices to impose quotas on countries per year. Trump could do it with one signature. Administration would like it because they would have less work. $ saving! While building the wall and deportation costs money. Limiting legal immigration saves money.
    , @Anon
    I agree. But it's the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can't imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.

    It was pathetic how Romney and his ilk talked about wanting more legal immigration by the way.

    -Steven J.

    , @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque
    It is interesting to see the number of men who have been blessed with afflatus and who know what Trump really meant when the said thus and such.

    I think he intends to build a wall but just because I have no expertise in engineering or funding is, I guess, no excuse to say it is impossible to build an effective wall and/or the cost is prohibitive.

    And the attack on what Trump has accomplished in business - His dad gave him money - is negative N'Yeah, N'Yeah. N'Yeah, N'Yeah, N'Yeah suggesting the capital sin of envy might be involved in that denigration.

    We can't change anything is the lament already?

    This self-willed defeatism is good news for the establishment
    , @MarkinLA
    You got to start somewhere. You can't turn this thing on a dime. Trump did address a temporary moratorium on legal immigration, I believe, when he first came out.

    Given all the attacks from the media on the left, he has to do what is easy - illegal immigration. Once people are seeing how good it is to have less people in the country, the immigration restriction crowd can maybe get some traction.

    The common myth is that immigrants are a net benefit, we can't live without them, they are our lifeblood, blah, blah, blah. When people start to see how wrong that is, it will be easier to cut off the spigot.
    , @Carlton Meyer
    That is a good point, and the first step is to eliminate the absurd Diversity Immigrant Lottery Visa program that brings in 50,000 poor, unskilled lottery winners each year and dumps them in our cities on welfare.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_Immigrant_Visa

    After they arrive each applies for a dozen relatives to join them with family visas, who are also unskilled, non-English speaking Third Worlders. Running this program must cost a billion dollars a year.
    , @Mick Jagger gathers no Mosque
    Boob bait for the bubbas,” as Andrew Biggs reminds us today at The American, was the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s description of how to get Republicans to embrace increased government spending: call it a tax break.

    You aver that Trump's claim to build a wall is boob bait for we Bubbas.

    Well, Trump flashed us repeatedly, didn't he?

    He promised to build a wall and if he doesn't, then he can go to hell and we Bubbas will swear off voting and merely swear at the FN liars who mock us for believing what they promise.

    If the essential transaction for a campaign is for a candidate to be the most successful one who fools the voters with obvious lies, then what'n'hell is the point of voting?

    I suppose one could be more cynical about our political plight but I haven't yet started drinking this morning so I don't know what that would be
  84. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I’m wrong.

    Sure I will, Ron. It’s called shifting the Overton Window, otherwise known as politics being the art of the possible. Once we stop illegal immigration, and people find out that they kind of like having their own country back, there will be much more support for curtailing legal immigration as well. I don’t think it really takes a genius, angry or otherwise, to figure that out.

    Read More
  85. @Anon

    Can he tell Los Angeles not to treat Latinos in hospitals?
     
    Why? If I collapsed in the street in Mexico City I'd expect to be treated, no? Am I missing something here?

    In fact my son was on a diving trip to Mexico with a friend when his friend busts his appendix. I had to wire $6500 (20 years ago) to the doctor before he would operate.

    Read More
  86. Well, about the only thing Trump has said since being elected is that he “vows” to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. Not build a wall, not start deporting illegal aliens. At least we know where his priorities are.

    Next he’ll probably beg for a list of demands from Benjamin Nutandyahoo. I know this is cynical and I’m jumping the gun a bit, but it looks like the new boss is shaping up to be the same as the old bosses.

    Read More
  87. @Rehmat
    YEP - let's erect wall around the entire US border including Canada - because before the evil non-White immigration - there were no White serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned Jewish-owned media existed in the good-old White America. I mean who had ever heard that 40% of Nurses were sexually molested by church officials and 31% of school girls as young as 12, had tasted sexual experience at the hands of their family members or the boys at schools?

    Let's not forget who is the expert in building WALL like terrorism in the world? Netanyahu has already declared A GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL.

    Every time I hear some idiot boasting his/her White moral superiority - I remember the sad story of a fellow Canadian, professor Julie Macfarlane (University of Windsor, Ontario), who went to office of the Rector of her church to seek spiritual guidance. It was 1975, and she was 16-year-old. The Rector told her that God wanted her to kneel and perform oral sex on him.

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/18/god-wanted-me-to-perform-oral-sex-on-my-priest/

    Hey Homer

    “A fellow Canadian”.

    You’re nobody’s “fellow Canadian”. You left your rathole in Pakistan and escaped to Canada.

    I doubt anybody in Canada refers to you as a “fellow Canadian”.

    Maybe legally you’re technically a Canadian but nobody in Canada wants you there.

    (Your goat can stay but you should leave Canada).

    Sherm

    Read More
  88. @boogerbently
    "If he can cut off funding to one city for one reason, he can cut off funding to any city for any reason."

    This is the "Big Stick" globally and nationally, federal funds. The Dems giving drivers licenses to illegals just complicated identification for everyone.

    Birth certs for ALL fed funds: Welfare, Social Security, Disability. It will be a pain, at first, but once the system is purged of parasites, profitable.

    Cut off the money and we won't have to "hunt them down", they'll leave on their own.

    most illegals have jobs. that’s why they are here. not for ‘free stuff.’
    big agra will not be prosecuted for hiring illegals. neither will service industries, like hotels.
    birth certs are already needed for ss disability. perhaps for retirement as well.

    Read More
  89. “……. heavy prosecution of people hiring illegals, this by using federal laws already on the books and a Justice Department he will control, do not feature greatly in his talk. Uh…why not?”

    Because it’s utterly naive to think it will ever happen. We’ve watched the “elite” who run the legal system, the prosecutors and judges, turn a blind eye for what, like, 150 years now.

    Enforce existing laws? Great idea. Ain’t gonna happen. THAT would cost their buddies in the agriculture, hospitality and construction industries WAY too many shekels.`

    A highly invasive enema of the judges and prosecutors would be a great start to draining the swamp, but let’s be realistic here. These “chosen” people are far too busy setting up race wars, incarcerating pot dealers for life, importing guns and gangs from Mexico and generally destroying our culture, any way they can, to make time in their hectic schedules to work against their own “interests”.

    Murder, mayhem thievery and destruction is all they know. But it’s the only way there is to creating a Jewish Utopia and make their diabolical so-called “religion” finally come true.

    A wall may well be our only hope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    "Enforce existing laws? Great idea. Ain’t gonna happen. THAT would cost their buddies in the agriculture, hospitality and construction industries WAY too many shekels.`" - Exactly. And one can imagine that Trump will feel their (business) pain. After all he had the Polish brigade.
  90. @Anonymous
    It seems Mexico agrees with Donald Trump’s plans to build a wall to keep out illegal immigrants but only on its southern border with Central America.

    Mexicans are calling for the border wall to keep out Guatemalans, Salvadorans and Hondurans fleeing violence in their own countries.


    How far have they got with their wall?
    Maybe Mexico will finish building its one first.

    Indeed. There was this excellent documentary series on Dutch television about the why and how en route from Guatamala to the USA.

    http://www.vpro.nl/programmas/americanos/kijk/afleveringen/1-linke-soep.html

    (Dutch voice over, but lots of Spanish and American English)

    Read More
  91. @Ron Unz
    Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents...

    Basically, "Build the Wall!!" is what Bill Clinton used to call "Boob-Bait for Bubbas."

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren't all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them---for PeeCee reasons---focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it's the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I'm missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn't have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I'm wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a "Wall" or "Sanctuary Cities" is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here's my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    I agree. Solving legal immigration problem is very simple. It suffices to impose quotas on countries per year. Trump could do it with one signature. Administration would like it because they would have less work. $ saving! While building the wall and deportation costs money. Limiting legal immigration saves money.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    Solving legal immigration problem is very simple. It suffices to impose quotas on countries per year.
     
    There are quotas now. The Mexican quota for immigration, for example, is 5000 per year. There is an 18-year waiting list for legal immigration from Mexico.

    The pro tempore solution is to stop all immigration, without exception.
  92. Given the practical limitations of what an American president can do without the support, overt or tacit, of the congress and state and local governments, I believe that if the only thing that Trump does is to avoid a war with Russia and build better commercial relations with the rest of the world he would be the best president in my lifetime.

    Most of the bad stuff is here to stay. Obama Care, open boarders, deficit spending on domestic entitlements and a too large military, all of that will continue apace. There are too many snouts in the trough and they provide too much fodder for election conflict between the “two” parties, which helps keep them relevant in peoples minds. Any actions by Trump that could have the potential to REALLY upset the apple cart (ending the Federal Reserve money printing monopoly, reigning in the NSA/CIA/FBI/ATF Stasi) will be the actions that get him killed.

    Having a half way sensible, business minded foreign policy is about the best we can hope for from a POTUS these days. If Trump can do that I’d be relieved.

    Read More
  93. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Ron Unz
    Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents...

    Basically, "Build the Wall!!" is what Bill Clinton used to call "Boob-Bait for Bubbas."

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren't all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them---for PeeCee reasons---focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it's the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I'm missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn't have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I'm wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a "Wall" or "Sanctuary Cities" is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here's my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    I agree. But it’s the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can’t imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.

    It was pathetic how Romney and his ilk talked about wanting more legal immigration by the way.

    -Steven J.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    I agree. But it’s the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can’t imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.
     
    Actually, I think it's the other way round, something which totally surprised me when I gradually discovered it over the last year or so.

    For various reasons, both sensible and ideological, the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they're quite willing to accept the argument.

    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Basically, I think there's roughly a zero chance that Trump will be able to get a half-Democratic Congress to fund building a 3000 mile wall or deporting the 11M existing illegal immigrants. But I think if he handled things the right way, there's actually a pretty good chance he could get overwhelming *Democratic* support for enacting permanent cuts of maybe 50% in *legal* immigration, which would have a vastly greater practical impact on total immigration.
  94. @Diogenes
    Good to have contact with you again; I love your handle!
    Even if I were to change my handle my ideology [values] and my writing style I would be recognized as Diogenes the Cynic.
    Trump an "honest"[?] man, he has a history, we know him well, he's a conniving opportunist a confidence man, a promoter and conceited salesman with an overblown Ego.{Slander?] This is who you want as POTUS?
    Is My view on Trump different than other Liberals, progressives or the principal opinion writers in the Unz Review? No, the Trumpsters on this site are the anomaly!

    Given the meaning of the name, it’s no surprise there are two of you.

    Read More
  95. @Diogenes
    I agree with Fred. Trumps election planks,promises and talking points were just political bait to hook disgruntled and frustrated voters, who felt ignored and exploited by a Neo- liberal globalist agenda which cost them jobs, a lower standard of living and more competition from immigrants and illegal aliens coming across the Mexican border.
    So Trump offered them protectionism [to bring back jobs], isolationism and non- interventionism [ to eliminate the exorbitant costs of waging wars and offshore military bases to protect allies from nonexistent threats] , increased scrutiny of Muslims [to stop domestic terrorism] and a crack down on illegal Hispanics [who are taking away jobs and increasing domestic crime rates].
    Hey, what's not to like? So they swallowed the bait, never mind that these proposals are difficult to implement, problematic and counterproductive. Simple solutions might result in more complicated problems.
    Hey,no problem for Trump, he's president now, that's the goal and the ticket to making more money and expanding his business empire. He's got no time to devote to solving the nation's problems; no that's for the vice president to take care of.
    He's got lot's of Jewish friends and business associates, who will bring in more Jewish advisors to run the nation for him. They are good at it, they have lot's of experience and no doubt the country will be run like a business to make a profit. A profit for who? Do you really expect to prosper under Trumps care? Watch out you could also be bankrupted.

    ** never mind that these proposals are difficult to implement, problematic and counterproductive. Simple solutions might result in more complicated problems. **

    It’s hopeless. We’re doomed. Give up now. Trump just wants to make more money. Wahhh!

    Read More
  96. @Crawfurdmuir
    Congress has repeatedly used the threat of a cut-off of Federal subsidies to the states and cities to force them to change their policies. As an example, when Carter sought to impose a nationwide 55-mph speed limit the means used were the threat of cutting off Federal highway funding to states that didn't do it.

    Trump may not be able to defund sanctuary cities all by himself, but Republicans do control both houses of Congress, and do you think that even an open-borders Republican like Paul Ryan will oppose cutting off Federal funds to sanctuary cities? Such cities aren't run by Republicans or represented by them in Congress. It should be easy to get such a measure through Congress by attaching it to an appropriations bill.

    ** do you think that even an open-borders Republican like Paul Ryan will oppose cutting off Federal funds to sanctuary cities? **

    Alas, yes.

    Read More
  97. @Carlton Meyer
    I mention that in my article. The teen had a rifle and was firing it at things. It was suspected that he was a scout for smugglers. There will be incidents as there are now, and our billionaire owned media uses them to argue for open borders.

    Soldiers would have strict rules of engagement that I list in my article, and only guard remote areas that our Border Patrol does not watch. Soldiers are much better than civilians for this mission, as I explain in my article. All of our border now has at least a three foot fence, and everyone in the region knows exactly what the border fence looks like.

    You need manpower, because even if you have a wall, smugglers will drive up to the wall or fence with cutting torches, sledgehammers, and even explosives and make a hole, as they do now. Small yapping dogs between long rows of fences are a great deterrent who can alert guards a mile away while keeping jumpers at bay.

    Once it becomes too difficult to cross, word will spread southward and the problem will quickly end.

    Thanks for the clarification.
    Should have read your article first before commenting: my mistake.

    Read More
  98. @Marcus
    Deploy Armenian militiamen from Nagorno-Karabakh

    Not a bad idea.
    One little problem: those crossing must be nomad Turk combatants. or other Islamist terrorists. Otherwise the NKR guys will not shoot.

    Read More
  99. The Clintons and Soros have initiated a Purple Revolution against the anti-war and anti-trade policies of the Trumpster. The Clintons appeared in a NY hotel dressed in Purple clothes to endorse the demos being held around the country instigated by Soros organizations. The details are given by Wayne Madsen on the Strategic Culture Foundation blog.
    The Election may be over, but the Election struggle is not.

    Read More
  100. @Anon
    I agree. But it's the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can't imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.

    It was pathetic how Romney and his ilk talked about wanting more legal immigration by the way.

    -Steven J.

    I agree. But it’s the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can’t imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.

    Actually, I think it’s the other way round, something which totally surprised me when I gradually discovered it over the last year or so.

    For various reasons, both sensible and ideological, the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they’re quite willing to accept the argument.

    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Basically, I think there’s roughly a zero chance that Trump will be able to get a half-Democratic Congress to fund building a 3000 mile wall or deporting the 11M existing illegal immigrants. But I think if he handled things the right way, there’s actually a pretty good chance he could get overwhelming *Democratic* support for enacting permanent cuts of maybe 50% in *legal* immigration, which would have a vastly greater practical impact on total immigration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    ...the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they’re quite willing to accept the argument.
     
    I've never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It's a novel argument quoted here, and I've seen and heard a thousand times people saying "legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad". It's the PC way to oppose the flood, and should be used as the wedge to approach the real issue, which is the flood itself, whether legal or otherwise. Why "should"? Because it's the only wedge we have. I'd be fascinated to see evidence to the contrary.
    , @MarkinLA
    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    I haven't seen any stating that publicly. I see more of the Luis Gutierrez types endlessly calling for more immigration from Hispanic countries and endless amnesties and free-bees. Who are they?
    , @folktruther
    good thinking. Trump may be a strutting disgusting racist, but he appears to be a brilliant political thinker, talent knowing no conventionality in target. He might do better than one might envision.
  101. @Kyle McKenna
    Fred always jumps to the defense of Mexicans, but even if Mexicans (and other third-world immigrants) were everything he imagines them to be, I still wouldn't want 100 million of them in my country, and that's roughly how many we've had since the nation-wrecking Hart-Celler legislation. Sorry, I don't want 100 million foreigners in my country, and BTW no other country would want this either. "Quantity has a Quality all its own."

    Speaking of quotes, here are Donald Trump’s actual words, speaking to Republicans at the primary debate:

    “We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, and everything else that is all falling apart!”

    Is it so wrong to want to take care of your own country, when it's falling apart? If you prefer Mexico, I certainly don't mind your living in Mexico and doing what you think is best for Mexico.

    But just as your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins, your right to export your undesirables ends where my border begins. Contrary to MSM propaganda, the wrecked and trashed third world does not actually enjoy the right to wreck and trash the United States of America, or even Europe for that matter.

    I am always glad to get a seat on the train. I don’t mind when the seats fill up. I do however mind when its packed beyond capacity.

    Not sure why its controversial other than of course it being propaganda.

    Read More
  102. @Rehmat
    YEP - let's erect wall around the entire US border including Canada - because before the evil non-White immigration - there were no White serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned Jewish-owned media existed in the good-old White America. I mean who had ever heard that 40% of Nurses were sexually molested by church officials and 31% of school girls as young as 12, had tasted sexual experience at the hands of their family members or the boys at schools?

    Let's not forget who is the expert in building WALL like terrorism in the world? Netanyahu has already declared A GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL.

    Every time I hear some idiot boasting his/her White moral superiority - I remember the sad story of a fellow Canadian, professor Julie Macfarlane (University of Windsor, Ontario), who went to office of the Rector of her church to seek spiritual guidance. It was 1975, and she was 16-year-old. The Rector told her that God wanted her to kneel and perform oral sex on him.

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/18/god-wanted-me-to-perform-oral-sex-on-my-priest/

    Please, abu-Rehmat, go back to your much more congenial and admirable homeland so you don’t have to live in that awful white country.

    Read More
  103. @Avery
    I remember a while back US Marines were deployed on the border, I think Arizona, to augment the Border Patrol. Tragically, a marine shot an killed a young Mexican shepherd by mistake who had wondered over the poorly marked border - thinking he was a smuggler or something.

    There was a huge outcry, and Marines were quickly removed.

    Military is trained to kill enemy soldiers: you shoot first. If you hesitate in battle, you might get killed. Don't know if they'd be suitable to deal with civilians. Any incident will be blown out of proportion, and the pressure to remove the military from the border will be immense. Then the incident(s) will be used by certain groups to pretty much abandon any border control.

    Best is to first build a clearly demarcated fence/wall.
    Then get rid of a couple or three of the useless carrier groups and use the $10 billions thus saved to hire and train more civilian border patrol.

    Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border.

    ** Honestly, last thing we need is for some women or kids getting shot by our military while crossing a poorly marked border **

    Genius solution: mark border clearly.

    Read More
  104. @Auntie Analogue
    President Trump can not only appoint sound SCOTUS justices, he can also

    - rescind all of Obama's Open Border$/illegal alien-coddling executive orders, and then issue fresh executive orders to counteract the ill-effects of Obama's executive orders

    - direct the Attorney General to deemphasize "Racism" witch hunts against police forces and individuals, and to instead focus intensively on enforcing immigration law: this alone will have a profound positive effect by compelling illegals to go voluntarily back to their own countries, by discouraging & disincentivizing future illegal border crossing, and by putting the fear of prosecution into U.S. employers of illegal alien parasites

    - direct the Attorney General to identify and deport visa over-stayers, of whom last year alone there were half a million, and, further, insist upon establishment of a biometric visa ID system to track visa holders U.S. residence/school registration/employment, and to enforce visa stipulations on length of foreigners' stays

    - direct the Attorney General to make a big show of prosecuting prominent illegal aliens (such as that Vargas guy whom Obama actually had the gall to invite to and praise at one of his SOTU addresses); this would send the message to prominent illegals to get out of the "activism" for Open Border$ rackets, thus taking the wind out of the sails of such "activism"/movements, and thus also giving no prominent illegal alien martyrs for U.S. citizens keen for Open Border$ to use as propaganda icons

    - as C-in-C, direct the armed forces to shut down bases and operations in foreign countries where those bases and operations do absolutely no good for ordinary Americans

    - insist upon nationwide E-Verify for all employment

    - by executive order cut off funding to "sanctuary cities" to force such U.S. municipalities to cooperate comprehensively with DHS/ICE/&c.

    - refuse visas to nationals of countries which refuse to accept their citizens convicted here of crime

    - end the "Refugee" Resettlement Rackets (all of which are almost 100% scammed by foreigners) by executive order, thus depriving the traitorous VOLAGs that run those rackets of the lion's share of their federal funding, and forcing those VOLAGs to appeal to Americans for donations to alone fund their racketeering (and a great many Americans, especially those of us harmed individually by cheap foreign labor and those of us who see our communities despoiled by non-assimilating "refugees," will not donate to such VOLAGs)

    - put brakes on "family reunification" to discourage legal & illegal immigration

    - repudiate UN power to dictate which and how many phony "refugees" the U.S. must admit

    - deny Social Security benefits & other entitlements (e.g., Medicaid) to illegal aliens & their offspring

    - insist upon a constitutional amendment to end anchor baby birthright citizenship (thus putting the birth tourism rackets out of business

    - apply stringent restrictions to issuance of green cards; institute revocation of green cards for foreigners convicted of crime; prohibit family reunification for green card holders (thus driving down demand for green cards)

    - withdraw troops from foreign countries and deploy them "to provide for the common defense" along the southern border (there is nothing "Guatemala" about this, Mr. Reed, as it is an explicit purpose of the Constitution stipulated distinctly in the Preamble)

    - insist upon a constitutional amendment establishing English-only as the official language of the United States, for all Government business and documents; and even before such an amendment, refuse Government-provided interpreters to foreigners on our soil - compel foreigners to provide their own interpreters, relieving U.S. citizens of the burden of paying for interpreters

    I'm sure there are other steps President Trump can and should take to restore our country and its governance and prosperity to us ordinary Americans.

    Presidents don’t have the power to insist on Constitutional Amendments. He might make a good spokesperson for a popular movement to get the states to vote on it, but his position gives him no direct power at all on the matter.

    Read More
  105. I don’t know what will happen to America, but it will probably not be nice. I see no way that the different racial, ethnic and political sides can live together peacefully, under the same set of laws, and with massive population population growth, it’ll only get worse. Mock me as a “genius” if you wish, but sending legals and illegals packing is less radical than flooding the nation with them against the will of a vast number of non-immigrant Americans in the first place.

    What should we call the people who created, push and profit from the situation? Traitors? What should be done about them? Maybe we would all be better of without them?

    Read More
  106. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Historical events end but they leave paradigms of how to think about the present and future.

    It’s like what the scatman says in THE SHINING.

    WWII ended in 1945, but WWII Mentality didn’t end. It tended to see ‘New Hitlers’ all over the world. Also, it led to the notion of Whiteness = Nazism = Cancer of History.
    It has cast a long shadow in media, academia, Hollywood, narrative, and etc.
    It was in the 2016 with ‘Deplorables’ as ‘new nazis’. Any whitey who is not on his knees apologizing for being white is a ‘Nazi’. Any whitey who is into white identity or interest is a ‘Nazi’.

    Cold War ended in 1989, but Cold War Mentality didn’t end. It looks for Grand Struggles between Good Guy and Evil Empire. It shaped the War on Terror and a desire by many for a ‘new cold war’ with Russia. Or China or Iran as the grand poobah of evil around the world.

    [MORE]

    Same with Civil Rights Movement. It ended, more or less, by mid-6os with key gains in government and legislature. But Civil Rights Movement Mentality is still alive, so every racial paradigm invokes Emmit Till and TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD when, in fact, the biggest and worst racial thugs in the US have been blacks for a long time now. BLM goes to show that blacks are blind to current reality cuz they still cling to Civil Rights Movement Mentality. Progs and blacks bitch about the bad ole 50s, but they are still stuck in that era cuz blacks really were unequal by law back then, therefore had a clearly compelling moral case.

    Event ends, but Event Mentality can be turned into a narrative-paradigm by which to see and judge present and future.
    It’s like Jesus died in a single event 2000 yrs ago, but His death came to define so much of Christian West history that came to see everything in terms of Struggle between Godliness and Evil, often presented in the form of pagans, heathens, Jews, and later Muslims… and even among Christians with each sect/denomination demonizing others.

    I think the Trump Movement did somewhat subvert the WWII mentality and the Cold War mentality. Through him, white people did assert themselves and their interests despite the WWII-mentality vilification of them as Nazis who are following New Hitler. They no longer cared about the Crying Nazi Wolf.
    Also, Trump’s call for more cautious foreign policy and peace with Russia weakened the Cold War Mentality. And if US and Russia can learn to get along, Cold War mentality may be buried for good. Those with Cold War Mentality claim that US had no choice but to fight ‘new enemies’. But Trumpian view is that it has been America that has been looking for and making new enemies since end of Cold War in the interests of globo-elites.
    And if Trump can weaken NATO and make EU protect itself, it will really be something new.
    NATO and US presence in Asia are still legacy of WWII mentality and Cold War mentality. Even though those events are now history and things have changed so much, those mentalities have kept our mind frozen in fixed paradigms.

    ————————-

    As for victimology, maybe the homo-tranny-gender-fluid movement was a blessing in disguise. It make me sick in the stomach, but it subverted Victimology from within.

    Victimology gained moral gravitas because of the real horrors of WWII. Who can deny Nazi evil? And in the US, who can deny that blacks had been slaves and been denied legal equality for long time?

    So, when victimology dealt with victims of Nazis, victims of Communism(that killed millions) — anti-communist victimology has legs in Eastern Europe — , victims of racial discrimination, and etc, it had a compelling moral case.

    But when the main victimological symbol became the homo flag, things just got silly. We were supposed to believe homos who aren’t allowed to get ‘married’ are there on par with Holocaust victims, Gulag victims, victims of war and imperialism, blacks denied the right to vote, and etc.
    And when trannies got into the act, victimhood turned into “Some guy who can’t use the lady’s room is a VICTIM!!!!” Victimology, by espousing homos and trannies, monty-pythoned itself without knowing it.
    Also, as the definition of ‘rape’ became fluid, just about any spoiled brat could declare herself a ‘rape victim’. So, Emma ‘fuc* me in the butt’ Sulkowicz became a victim. Lena Dunham claimed she was raped or maybe she was not, but whatever. And there was the UVA case. Maybe Jackie did sort of get raped cuz she has a wild fantasy.

    With 90% of Victimology now taken up with college student with green, pink, or purple hair shrieking about how they are triggered unless their ever fluid ‘genders’ are recognized, it has turned into a Trigglypuff-like joke.

    Read More
    • Agree: Miro23
    • Replies: @Miro23

    "But when the main victimological symbol became the homo flag, things just got silly. We were supposed to believe homos who aren’t allowed to get ‘married’ are there on par with Holocaust victims, Gulag victims..."
     
    In oher words, the end of the line for the Liberal game of victimhood, the same as the people of the late Middle Ages laughing at fat priests selling indulgences.
  107. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @utu
    I agree. Solving legal immigration problem is very simple. It suffices to impose quotas on countries per year. Trump could do it with one signature. Administration would like it because they would have less work. $ saving! While building the wall and deportation costs money. Limiting legal immigration saves money.

    Solving legal immigration problem is very simple. It suffices to impose quotas on countries per year.

    There are quotas now. The Mexican quota for immigration, for example, is 5000 per year. There is an 18-year waiting list for legal immigration from Mexico.

    The pro tempore solution is to stop all immigration, without exception.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna

    There are quotas now. The Mexican quota for immigration, for example, is 5000 per year. There is an 18-year waiting list for legal immigration from Mexico.
     
    I've spent a while searching and I can't find anything remotely confirming your assertions above. The closest thing is the 7% rule, and it's not very close.

    https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/how-united-states-immigration-system-works
  108. What should we call the people who created, push and profit from the situation? Traitors?

    Go with tradition: “The Fifth Column”

    Read More
  109. “to stop all immigration, without exception.” – This will not going to happen. The quota of 5000/y (providing you are correct) is probably just for visa lottery program. Many more get visas in family unification program (on which there is no limitation) and visas for special workers.

    I would like to se quotas for each country that would be congruent with the current origin/ethnic/cultural make up of American society. So for example 14% of immigrants would be black and 60-70% would be European…2% Jewish…

    Read More
  110. @DaveE
    "....... heavy prosecution of people hiring illegals, this by using federal laws already on the books and a Justice Department he will control, do not feature greatly in his talk. Uh…why not?"

    Because it's utterly naive to think it will ever happen. We've watched the "elite" who run the legal system, the prosecutors and judges, turn a blind eye for what, like, 150 years now.

    Enforce existing laws? Great idea. Ain't gonna happen. THAT would cost their buddies in the agriculture, hospitality and construction industries WAY too many shekels.`

    A highly invasive enema of the judges and prosecutors would be a great start to draining the swamp, but let's be realistic here. These "chosen" people are far too busy setting up race wars, incarcerating pot dealers for life, importing guns and gangs from Mexico and generally destroying our culture, any way they can, to make time in their hectic schedules to work against their own "interests".

    Murder, mayhem thievery and destruction is all they know. But it's the only way there is to creating a Jewish Utopia and make their diabolical so-called "religion" finally come true.

    A wall may well be our only hope.

    “Enforce existing laws? Great idea. Ain’t gonna happen. THAT would cost their buddies in the agriculture, hospitality and construction industries WAY too many shekels.`” – Exactly. And one can imagine that Trump will feel their (business) pain. After all he had the Polish brigade.

    Read More
  111. @Alden
    12 foot fences work just fine Every school in the country has them. Just drive on any city street for a mile or so and you will see numerous 12 foot fences that keep intruders out.

    Two fences fifty feet apart.
    A shoot to kill policy for anyone between them.
    Can’t say they weren’t warned.

    Fixed in the first month.

    Read More
  112. @Rehmat
    YEP - let's erect wall around the entire US border including Canada - because before the evil non-White immigration - there were no White serial rapists and goofy-looking pedophiles, and the goddamned Jewish-owned media existed in the good-old White America. I mean who had ever heard that 40% of Nurses were sexually molested by church officials and 31% of school girls as young as 12, had tasted sexual experience at the hands of their family members or the boys at schools?

    Let's not forget who is the expert in building WALL like terrorism in the world? Netanyahu has already declared A GREAT FRIEND OF ISRAEL.

    Every time I hear some idiot boasting his/her White moral superiority - I remember the sad story of a fellow Canadian, professor Julie Macfarlane (University of Windsor, Ontario), who went to office of the Rector of her church to seek spiritual guidance. It was 1975, and she was 16-year-old. The Rector told her that God wanted her to kneel and perform oral sex on him.

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/18/god-wanted-me-to-perform-oral-sex-on-my-priest/

    40% of nurses sexually molested by Catholic officials?

    Jack Chick, rumors of your demise have been exaggerated, right?

    In 1960, America was about 90% white and trying to restore that historical percentage would be good policy.

    The Preamble to the constitution was written by white christians and it was to THEIR posterity, not latinos or muslims, that this country was created for.

    White Christians of european descent desire to live with other white christians of european descent. Tell me what name you have for that evil desire

    Read More
  113. @Ron Unz

    I agree. But it’s the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can’t imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.
     
    Actually, I think it's the other way round, something which totally surprised me when I gradually discovered it over the last year or so.

    For various reasons, both sensible and ideological, the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they're quite willing to accept the argument.

    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Basically, I think there's roughly a zero chance that Trump will be able to get a half-Democratic Congress to fund building a 3000 mile wall or deporting the 11M existing illegal immigrants. But I think if he handled things the right way, there's actually a pretty good chance he could get overwhelming *Democratic* support for enacting permanent cuts of maybe 50% in *legal* immigration, which would have a vastly greater practical impact on total immigration.

    …the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they’re quite willing to accept the argument.

    I’ve never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It’s a novel argument quoted here, and I’ve seen and heard a thousand times people saying “legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad”. It’s the PC way to oppose the flood, and should be used as the wedge to approach the real issue, which is the flood itself, whether legal or otherwise. Why “should”? Because it’s the only wedge we have. I’d be fascinated to see evidence to the contrary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I did not know that Koch Brothers were into immigration. But when you think about it, it makes a perfect sense. It is what business always wanted: cheap labor, scab labor. That's what immigration is all about and always was with slavery being its extreme manifestation. The leftist who advocate immigration have no clue that they are just useful idiots. Actually I would not be surprised to find out that the left's shift from unions and labor issue to identity politics was promulgated and paid for by people like Koch Brothers and their buddies like Soros. Koch's and Soros are playing on the same team.
    , @Ron Unz

    I’ve never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It’s a novel argument quoted here, and I’ve seen and heard a thousand times people saying “legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad”.
     
    I really can't disagree. I've been pretty heavily involved in immigration issues, including sometimes at a fairly high level, for most of the last *twenty-five* years, and until very recently I'd also never considered this analysis, which does seem so utterly counter-intuitive and exactly contrary to what all the politicians constantly say. But I do think it may be correct.

    The spark was earlier this year when I had a series of personal meetings with the editorial boards of most of California's leading mainstream/liberal newspapers. One issue I repeatedly raised was that *legal* immigration was much too high and should be drastically reduced. Naturally, I expected massive push-back---but got absolutely none. One LA Times Ed Board member vaguely quoted some Koch Brothers study on the economic benefits of immigration, while a top Ed Page Editor said he was really shocked that a Republican such as myself would be advocating a policy which liberals, Democrats, and unions would so strongly favor. Most of the other editorial writers just vaguely nodded their heads. But I'm absolutely sure if I had attacked *illegal* immigration, the response would have been icy hostility.

    It took me a while to digest such a surprising reaction, and it led me to spend hours on the phone with some of the top national anti-immigration figures, discovering that they were just as surprised and intrigued by the idea as I had been. When I outlined my ideas to the liberal editor of a top mainstream national opinion magazine, he also found it absolutely fascinating, and wanted me to write something up, though I was too busy with other things at the time.

    It may sound bizarre, but I think there's the strong potential for a natural political alliance between pro-immigrant Democrats and anti-immigration Republicans, with the pro-immigration Republicans like Paul Ryan and the Koch Brothers being the odd-men out. It's all outlined in my long article, up on the Home page.
  114. @John Jeremiah Smith

    Solving legal immigration problem is very simple. It suffices to impose quotas on countries per year.
     
    There are quotas now. The Mexican quota for immigration, for example, is 5000 per year. There is an 18-year waiting list for legal immigration from Mexico.

    The pro tempore solution is to stop all immigration, without exception.

    There are quotas now. The Mexican quota for immigration, for example, is 5000 per year. There is an 18-year waiting list for legal immigration from Mexico.

    I’ve spent a while searching and I can’t find anything remotely confirming your assertions above. The closest thing is the 7% rule, and it’s not very close.

    https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/how-united-states-immigration-system-works

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith
    I saw the "5000" figure on another forum, and also cannot confirm that specific number. It was probably calculated from "per country limit" values for some specific year. However, there is, officially, a quota -- a limit routinely violated. This year, it is 25,620. As for waiting lists:

    Immigrant Waiting List By Country

    Immigrant visa issuances during fiscal year 2016 will be limited by the terms of INA 201 to nomore than 226,000 in the family-sponsored preferences and approximately 140,000 in the employment-based preferences. (Visas for "Immediate Relatives" - i.e., spouses, unmarriedchildren under the age of 21 years, and parents of U.S. citizens - are not subject to numerical limitation, however.)

    It should by no means be assumed that once an applicant is registered, the case is then continually included in the waiting list totals unless and until a visa is issued. The consular procedures mandate a regular culling of visa cases to remove from the count those unlikely to see further action, so that totals are not unreasonably inflated.

    The fifteen countries with the highest number of waiting list registrants in FY 2016 are listed below; together these represent 81% of the total. This list includes all countries with at least 50,000 persons on the waiting list. There is a seven percent per-country limit, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. This limit serves to avoid the potential monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries.

    That limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. For FY 2016 the per-country limit will be approximately 25,620.

    Country Applicants
    Mexico 1,344,429
    Philippines 417,511
    India 344,208
    Vietnam 282,375
    China-mainland born 260,265
    Dominican Republic 207,406
    Bangladesh 183,159
    Pakistan 131,465
    Haiti 119,696
    Cuba 115,208
    El Salvador 82,045
    Jamaica 58,368
    Iran 53,306
    Korea, South 52,887
    Peru 51,772
    All Others 851,921
    Worldwide Total 4,556,021
  115. @Ron Unz
    Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents...

    Basically, "Build the Wall!!" is what Bill Clinton used to call "Boob-Bait for Bubbas."

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren't all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them---for PeeCee reasons---focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it's the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I'm missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn't have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I'm wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a "Wall" or "Sanctuary Cities" is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here's my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    It is interesting to see the number of men who have been blessed with afflatus and who know what Trump really meant when the said thus and such.

    I think he intends to build a wall but just because I have no expertise in engineering or funding is, I guess, no excuse to say it is impossible to build an effective wall and/or the cost is prohibitive.

    And the attack on what Trump has accomplished in business – His dad gave him money – is negative N’Yeah, N’Yeah. N’Yeah, N’Yeah, N’Yeah suggesting the capital sin of envy might be involved in that denigration.

    We can’t change anything is the lament already?

    This self-willed defeatism is good news for the establishment

    Read More
  116. @Anon
    Historical events end but they leave paradigms of how to think about the present and future.

    It's like what the scatman says in THE SHINING.

    https://youtu.be/2rKbtlodzCU?t=2m36s

    WWII ended in 1945, but WWII Mentality didn't end. It tended to see 'New Hitlers' all over the world. Also, it led to the notion of Whiteness = Nazism = Cancer of History.
    It has cast a long shadow in media, academia, Hollywood, narrative, and etc.
    It was in the 2016 with 'Deplorables' as 'new nazis'. Any whitey who is not on his knees apologizing for being white is a 'Nazi'. Any whitey who is into white identity or interest is a 'Nazi'.

    Cold War ended in 1989, but Cold War Mentality didn't end. It looks for Grand Struggles between Good Guy and Evil Empire. It shaped the War on Terror and a desire by many for a 'new cold war' with Russia. Or China or Iran as the grand poobah of evil around the world.

    Same with Civil Rights Movement. It ended, more or less, by mid-6os with key gains in government and legislature. But Civil Rights Movement Mentality is still alive, so every racial paradigm invokes Emmit Till and TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD when, in fact, the biggest and worst racial thugs in the US have been blacks for a long time now. BLM goes to show that blacks are blind to current reality cuz they still cling to Civil Rights Movement Mentality. Progs and blacks bitch about the bad ole 50s, but they are still stuck in that era cuz blacks really were unequal by law back then, therefore had a clearly compelling moral case.

    Event ends, but Event Mentality can be turned into a narrative-paradigm by which to see and judge present and future.
    It's like Jesus died in a single event 2000 yrs ago, but His death came to define so much of Christian West history that came to see everything in terms of Struggle between Godliness and Evil, often presented in the form of pagans, heathens, Jews, and later Muslims... and even among Christians with each sect/denomination demonizing others.

    I think the Trump Movement did somewhat subvert the WWII mentality and the Cold War mentality. Through him, white people did assert themselves and their interests despite the WWII-mentality vilification of them as Nazis who are following New Hitler. They no longer cared about the Crying Nazi Wolf.
    Also, Trump's call for more cautious foreign policy and peace with Russia weakened the Cold War Mentality. And if US and Russia can learn to get along, Cold War mentality may be buried for good. Those with Cold War Mentality claim that US had no choice but to fight 'new enemies'. But Trumpian view is that it has been America that has been looking for and making new enemies since end of Cold War in the interests of globo-elites.
    And if Trump can weaken NATO and make EU protect itself, it will really be something new.
    NATO and US presence in Asia are still legacy of WWII mentality and Cold War mentality. Even though those events are now history and things have changed so much, those mentalities have kept our mind frozen in fixed paradigms.

    -------------------------

    As for victimology, maybe the homo-tranny-gender-fluid movement was a blessing in disguise. It make me sick in the stomach, but it subverted Victimology from within.

    Victimology gained moral gravitas because of the real horrors of WWII. Who can deny Nazi evil? And in the US, who can deny that blacks had been slaves and been denied legal equality for long time?

    So, when victimology dealt with victims of Nazis, victims of Communism(that killed millions) -- anti-communist victimology has legs in Eastern Europe -- , victims of racial discrimination, and etc, it had a compelling moral case.

    But when the main victimological symbol became the homo flag, things just got silly. We were supposed to believe homos who aren't allowed to get 'married' are there on par with Holocaust victims, Gulag victims, victims of war and imperialism, blacks denied the right to vote, and etc.
    And when trannies got into the act, victimhood turned into "Some guy who can't use the lady's room is a VICTIM!!!!" Victimology, by espousing homos and trannies, monty-pythoned itself without knowing it.
    Also, as the definition of 'rape' became fluid, just about any spoiled brat could declare herself a 'rape victim'. So, Emma 'fuc* me in the butt' Sulkowicz became a victim. Lena Dunham claimed she was raped or maybe she was not, but whatever. And there was the UVA case. Maybe Jackie did sort of get raped cuz she has a wild fantasy.

    With 90% of Victimology now taken up with college student with green, pink, or purple hair shrieking about how they are triggered unless their ever fluid 'genders' are recognized, it has turned into a Trigglypuff-like joke.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Uj32C20JCA

    “But when the main victimological symbol became the homo flag, things just got silly. We were supposed to believe homos who aren’t allowed to get ‘married’ are there on par with Holocaust victims, Gulag victims…”

    In oher words, the end of the line for the Liberal game of victimhood, the same as the people of the late Middle Ages laughing at fat priests selling indulgences.

    Read More
  117. @Kyle McKenna

    ...the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they’re quite willing to accept the argument.
     
    I've never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It's a novel argument quoted here, and I've seen and heard a thousand times people saying "legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad". It's the PC way to oppose the flood, and should be used as the wedge to approach the real issue, which is the flood itself, whether legal or otherwise. Why "should"? Because it's the only wedge we have. I'd be fascinated to see evidence to the contrary.

    I did not know that Koch Brothers were into immigration. But when you think about it, it makes a perfect sense. It is what business always wanted: cheap labor, scab labor. That’s what immigration is all about and always was with slavery being its extreme manifestation. The leftist who advocate immigration have no clue that they are just useful idiots. Actually I would not be surprised to find out that the left’s shift from unions and labor issue to identity politics was promulgated and paid for by people like Koch Brothers and their buddies like Soros. Koch’s and Soros are playing on the same team.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    The Koch Brothers are big L libertarians where one of their main tenants is open borders. I think they have a big hand in Reason magazine which is total open borders lunacy.
  118. @Kyle McKenna

    ...the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they’re quite willing to accept the argument.
     
    I've never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It's a novel argument quoted here, and I've seen and heard a thousand times people saying "legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad". It's the PC way to oppose the flood, and should be used as the wedge to approach the real issue, which is the flood itself, whether legal or otherwise. Why "should"? Because it's the only wedge we have. I'd be fascinated to see evidence to the contrary.

    I’ve never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It’s a novel argument quoted here, and I’ve seen and heard a thousand times people saying “legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad”.

    I really can’t disagree. I’ve been pretty heavily involved in immigration issues, including sometimes at a fairly high level, for most of the last *twenty-five* years, and until very recently I’d also never considered this analysis, which does seem so utterly counter-intuitive and exactly contrary to what all the politicians constantly say. But I do think it may be correct.

    The spark was earlier this year when I had a series of personal meetings with the editorial boards of most of California’s leading mainstream/liberal newspapers. One issue I repeatedly raised was that *legal* immigration was much too high and should be drastically reduced. Naturally, I expected massive push-back—but got absolutely none. One LA Times Ed Board member vaguely quoted some Koch Brothers study on the economic benefits of immigration, while a top Ed Page Editor said he was really shocked that a Republican such as myself would be advocating a policy which liberals, Democrats, and unions would so strongly favor. Most of the other editorial writers just vaguely nodded their heads. But I’m absolutely sure if I had attacked *illegal* immigration, the response would have been icy hostility.

    It took me a while to digest such a surprising reaction, and it led me to spend hours on the phone with some of the top national anti-immigration figures, discovering that they were just as surprised and intrigued by the idea as I had been. When I outlined my ideas to the liberal editor of a top mainstream national opinion magazine, he also found it absolutely fascinating, and wanted me to write something up, though I was too busy with other things at the time.

    It may sound bizarre, but I think there’s the strong potential for a natural political alliance between pro-immigrant Democrats and anti-immigration Republicans, with the pro-immigration Republicans like Paul Ryan and the Koch Brothers being the odd-men out. It’s all outlined in my long article, up on the Home page.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kyle McKenna
    For what it may be worth, I was hoping for some independent, objective confirmation in support of the theory; not least because (as you observe) it's a tad counter-intuitive. Naturally I have tremendous respect for your expertise and no reason to doubt your testimony, but so far these are self-reported anecdotes. I can easily recount my own anecdotes indicating precisely the opposite (and I too have been published on the topic, though 1) I dislike pulling rank and 2) you outrank me anyway ;) ) To summarize, though, many people find it politic to oppose illegal immigration because there's at least a law being broken; and legal immigration is popularly seen as equivalent to motherhood and apple pie.

    One of several reasons that the point is worth arguing is tactical. When you attack illegal immigration you have many natural allies. Another is its value as a cudgel, as I mentioned in my previous post. In addition, though, there's the fact that if you don't control illegal immigration the rest is just window-dressing. Decorate your front door as you like; whom you allow in won't much matter when the back door is wide open.

    You state, however, that "for anyone seriously opposed to current high levels of immigration, illegal immigration is largely a red herring and focusing on it is completely misguided." One thing we can agree upon is that this is a total disconnect.

    The owners of the MSM are in favor of high levels of immigration for tribal, economic, and political reasons, and until they are persuaded or replaced (neither of which I consider likely) the masses will continue to be influenced in their favor. The 'white racialists' are easy to caricaturize, but they do accurately observe that the end game is an enforced reduction of white people to the status of just another minority in the nation their forefathers built. The overarching 'ruling class' strategy is called "Divide and Conquer" I believe.

    Meanwhile it's not my experience that "liberals and Democrats" strongly favor cutting back legal immigration. Thanks for directing me to your thoughtful essay, which I must apologize for having missed. Having read it, though, I still don't see how "pro-immigrant Democrats" (not to mention pro-immigrant Republicans) will be brought on board a program to enact "Large, Permanent Cuts to Legal Immigration." And I don't see how increasing the minimum wage will affect or influence the large number of immigrants (and potential immigrants) who operate outside the legal economy. Either I'm dense or your argument needs refining. Frankly I worry about you going out so far on a limb.

    You further propose yet another amnesty for illegals, when history (and logic) has shown this to be a powerful incentive for the next cohort of illegals. You propose payments for those willing to be repatriated, saying that "such payments would require a written commitment not to return, enforced by serious criminal penalties." I call that utopian, at the least.

    My own perspective is that I want the highest-possible quality immigrants for my country, and relatively few of them; keeping in mind that they represent a brain drain for their former homes. I think it's possible and reasonable to oppose high levels of immigration, both legal and illegal, not least because the 'legal' limits are so subject to political manipulation. I also want as small an increase in population as possible (anywhere and everywhere) and I certainly recognize that this places me in a minority position.

  119. @Willem Hendrik
    According to Forbes your president-elect inherited 40 million in 1975. He can only be credited for placing all his eggs in the right basket (New York City). And indeed the NY real estate market grew 12% per annum since the 70's.

    It is America that made him great ;-)


    What would you do for 40 years to come with a 182 million (adjusted) inheritance and lots of daddy's political connections?

    His dad died in 1999 so how could he have inherited anything in 1975?

    His first deal was a dilapidated hotel when NYC is bankrupt. He promised to restore it if he got tax relief from the city. He used those guarantees to get loans along with some money from his dad. Yeah, he had connections and people probably understood that if he got into trouble his dad would backstop him but Donald did the work on his own.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump

    Read More
  120. @Svigor
    Fred Reed = putz.

    Yeah, building walls is much more complicated than building high-speed rail, right old fart? Seriously, this is Fred the old fart for you: he rails (haha) against America for not building un-needed high speed rail, then he acts like building a wall might as well be a mission to Mars. Buffoon.

    Things that would actually work to discourage illegals, such as heavy prosecution of people hiring illegals, this by using federal laws already on the books and a Justice Department he will control, do not feature greatly in his talk. Uh…why not?
     
    Because it might have put off already-shaky chamber of commerce types, nice GOPers, etc? Build That Wall is better for a campaign. You can bet your sweet ass that Trump & co. are talking about it, though. Even if we assume Trump is only interested in immigration reform because he promised it (and only promised it to get elected), you can bet he's going to hear this from true believers. Because you're right, cracking down hard on criminal employers is absolutely the first, best way to get this thing done.

    If we can remove the illegal immigrant population, how big would the remaining hispanic population be? 12%?

    Meaning blacks + hispanics + Jews = around 29% of the population? Bad. Very bad. But much more manageable than the alternative.

    He seems to have backed off, as he seems to back from many things that got him elected.
     
    I know you're old and slow, Fred, but try and keep up.

    He has talked of removing citizenship from children of illegals. If he does this by executive order, he will establish a new Presidential power to revoke citizenship of anyone he pleases. Otherwise the question will assuredly go to a hostile Supreme Court. Can he make a state stop offering schooling to children of his choice?
     
    Nonsense. I know you're old and slow (and more than a bit treacherous), but try to follow the logic: "birthright citizenship was only granted through a (deliberate) misinterpretation of Constitutional law, so removing the illicitly granted citizenship therefrom is simply correcting an injustice." No blanket power of citizenship removal is expressed or implied.

    The rest of your doddering, cranky post was TL;DR.

    For the first time you have written something that I agree with 100%.

    The same people who said Trump would never show up for the debates, never win the primaries and never get elected are now saying Trump will never build the wall and get rid of the immigrants.

    Fred is anti American scum.

    Read More
  121. @Diogenes
    Good to have contact with you again; I love your handle!
    Even if I were to change my handle my ideology [values] and my writing style I would be recognized as Diogenes the Cynic.
    Trump an "honest"[?] man, he has a history, we know him well, he's a conniving opportunist a confidence man, a promoter and conceited salesman with an overblown Ego.{Slander?] This is who you want as POTUS?
    Is My view on Trump different than other Liberals, progressives or the principal opinion writers in the Unz Review? No, the Trumpsters on this site are the anomaly!

    he’s a conniving opportunist a confidence man, a promoter and conceited salesman with an overblown Ego.

    I think you just outed 100% of Washington, Wall Street, and real estate developers.

    Read More
  122. @SG71
    Why does everyone in the media fail to understand a simple truth? Trump doesn't need to build a wall, the wall could be trade negotiations with nations that are net emigraters, stronger enforcement of existing laws, and many other ways to make a figurative wall.

    If he gets voted out because he didn't build a wall, but through other means illegal immigration is curtailed, and violent criminals removed, then those who voted him out are too dumb to deserve a democracy, or freedom of speech.

    You mean like GWBs “virtual wall” that looked an awful lot like those clothes the emperor wore. It is too easy for those policies to be nullified via the executive and the courts and have the public fooled by bogus reports of all the success the administration is making.

    Read More
  123. @Jim Sweeney
    Wrong on the citizenship of anchor babies Fred. A child born to non-citizen parents who are legally resident in the United States, is an American citizen. That was decided by SCOTUS in 1898. Wong Kim Ark was the case petitioner's name. See: 169 US 649

    What has never been judicially decided is the citizenship of a child born in the United State of parents who are not legal residents, i.e., illegal aliens. Nor has Congress passed any law to that effect.

    The State Department calls them citizens but without any statutory or precedential basis for that statement.

    Fred, if you disagree, please cite the U.S. Code section or the citation of the SCOTUS case. But don't bother - neither exists.

    Jim Sweeney:

    Right you are on Wong Kim Ark. I’ve been saying this for years. WKA also works perfectly well to disallow birth tourism. Trump can easily put this interpretation into practice….it really is the easy way to get started on his immigration project.

    JPS

    Read More
  124. @Ron Unz
    Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents...

    Basically, "Build the Wall!!" is what Bill Clinton used to call "Boob-Bait for Bubbas."

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren't all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them---for PeeCee reasons---focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it's the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I'm missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn't have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I'm wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a "Wall" or "Sanctuary Cities" is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here's my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    You got to start somewhere. You can’t turn this thing on a dime. Trump did address a temporary moratorium on legal immigration, I believe, when he first came out.

    Given all the attacks from the media on the left, he has to do what is easy – illegal immigration. Once people are seeing how good it is to have less people in the country, the immigration restriction crowd can maybe get some traction.

    The common myth is that immigrants are a net benefit, we can’t live without them, they are our lifeblood, blah, blah, blah. When people start to see how wrong that is, it will be easier to cut off the spigot.

    Read More
  125. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So, if the Neocons are out as braintrust in Trump GOP, who are in?

    My understanding is that Silicon Valley is overwhelmingly globalist and Democratic, BUT some of the key theorists and tacticians behind Trump were West Coast neo-nationalists. Should they be called Sili-Cons?

    These Sili-Cons are like Neo-Cons who were minority among Jews(mostly Democratic).

    http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2016-election-day/silicon-valley-donated-60-times-more-clinton-trump-n679156

    To be anti-Democratic in Silicon Valley is heresy.

    But it seems these West Coast folks did make a difference. The votes came from Deplorables but the strategy came from Digitals.

    Read More
  126. @Sunbeam
    " By 2012 India was constructing a 4,000-kilometer fence to seal the India-Bangladesh international border. The fence is intended to curb infiltration, movement of militants and enhance management on the India-Bangladesh border. The border fencing by India, to prevent smuggling of humans, cattle, drugs and arms, has been a prickly issue in bilateral relations. The fence was seen as an outrage among the Bangladeshi public, and the government of Bangladesh has made repeated protests to the Indian government over the matter.

    The Indian side of the Indo-Bangladesh border passes through West Bengal (2216.7 Km), Assam (263 Km), Meghalaya (443 Km), Tripura (856 Km) and Mizoram (318 Km). The entire stretch consists of plain, riverine, hilly/jungle and with hardly any natural obstacles. The area is heavily populated, and the cultivation is carried out till the last inch of the border.

    The Indo-Bangladesh border is marked by a high degree of porosity and checking illegal cross border activities has been a challenging proposition. The main problem is of illegal migration from Bangladesh into India. In order to prevent illegal immigration and other anti-national activities from across the border, the Government of India had sanctioned the construction of border roads and fencing in two phases.

    In the mid- and late 1980s, India's plan to erect a fence to prevent cross-border migration from Bangladesh and Bangladesh's desire that Chakma insurgents not receive Indian covert assistance and refuge in India were major irritants in bilateral relations. As agreed eighteen years earlier, in June 1992 India granted a perpetual lease to Bangladesh for the narrow, 1.5-hectare Tin Bigha corridor in the Ganga's delta that had long separated an enclave of Bangladeshis from their homeland. The two countries signed new agreements to enhance economic cooperation. Bangladesh also received Indian developmental assistance, but that aid was minor compared with the amounts India granted to Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, and Maldives.

    The total length of Indo-Bangladesh border to be fenced is 3286.87 Km out of which 2535.80 Km of fencing had been completed by 2008, at which time the work of construction of fencing in approximately 751 Km was under implementation. Out of this, work of construction of fencing in 296 Km in Mizoram sector, where the work started only in 2005, would be completed during the year 2007-08. Fencing had not been undertaken in remaining length on account of non-feasibility, riverine/low lying areas, population within 150 yards of the border, pending land acquisition cases. An additional length of 120 Km in Tripura, which was not originally sanctioned to be part of Phase-II, was also taken up during the year 2007-08. In addition, 3250.60 Km of border roads had also been constructed out of sanctioned length of 3663 Km as on 31st December, 2007.

    Over 277 Km of floodlighting had been completed in West Bengal as a pilot project. Government decided to undertake floodlighting in 2840 Km along the entire length of Indo-Bangladesh border, in the stretches where the fencing had been erected, at an estimate cost of Rs.1327.00 crore. The floodlighting workso commenced during the year 2007-08 and would be completed by the year 2011-12. The Government of India decided to replace the entire 861 Km of fence constructed under Phase-I in West Bengal, Assam and Meghalaya, as most of this fence has been damaged due to adverse climatic conditions, repeated submergence etc. The replacement work has already commenced in the States of Assam and West Bengal. Some 193.70 Km of fencing had been replaced by 2008.

    With a towering razor-wire fence and heavily armed Indian Border Security Forces (BSF) guards who kill around 200 people every year, the fence along the India-Bangladesh border is ominous and sometimes dangerous. The fence, which snakes through paddy fields about 150 yards inside India’s notoriously porous border with Bangladesh, has torn apart the lives of tens of thousands of people, cutting them off from family, friends, jobs and schools.

    Bangladeshi official say the Indian plan to build more fencing will not stop illegal cattle trading. Major Mahmudul Hasan of the Bangladesh Rifles said "Most of the killings are related to illegal cattle trading. If it was legal to trade cattle the killings will stop." He said the fencing would not reduce the deaths because cattle traders simply cut through it. In majority Hindu India, cows are considered sacred and beef is not eaten but in Muslim Bangladesh, beef is a staple and the price is much higher.

    Work under phase-I of the Indo-Bangla fencing project started in 1989 and fencing was done in 854 km against the approved target of 857 km. The phase-II involved 2429 km of the total 4,096 km long border. By early 2007 the fence spanned about half of the 4,100-km India-Bangladesh border. Since construction of the barrier began in 2003, tens of thousands of people in at least 200 villages were in geographical limbo - living in India, but on the wrong side of the border fence and thus with easier access to Bangladesh. They live inside a corridor the width of an airport runway, between the Bangladeshi border and the new fence. "

    I guess this thing doesn't exist right? I mean it is impossible to build something - call it a "wall" for controlling access.

    Oh wait, I get it. A "wall" has to be made of concrete or bricks or something. Because Trump said "Wall." If he had meant "Fence" he would have said "Fence." Just no way anything else will work.

    Hmmm I've heard of this "Great Wall of China" thing. That was made of stone right? Nah, that's impossible. Can't be done. The technology doesn't exist. Evidently a fiction.

    Of course as a Trump voter it wouldn't bother me if, you know, we had a "Fence" instead of a "Wall." But then again some people are real picky about how things look. Even if it works.

    Amercian does not have the technology to build a “Great Wall of USA,” but they always can outsource the project to others who can do it, like Chinese who can show the American they have proven experience of building Great Walls.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Amercian does not have the technology to build a “Great Wall of USA,” but they always can outsource the project to others who can do it, like Chinese who can show the American they have proven experience of building Great Walls.}

    Anything else the Chinese have 'proven experience' with?
    What technological innovation was involved in building the Chinese wall?
    Nothing: lots of people and time.

    The Egyptian pyramids: now that took some doing.
    Have you Chinese figured out how thems Egyptians moved those massive shaped boulders so high and stacked them so neatly?

    As to American knowhow and technology: when did you guys put a man in space ? How many years after Americans (yes, I know USSR was first).
    This is year 2016. Technologically deficient Americans landed men on the Moon almost 50 years ago. Still waiting for China to duplicate the feat.

    And what technological innovations have Chinese come up with recently?
    Would that be escalators that keep sucking in people and crushing them to death?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcpjOIH7bG4
  127. @John Jeremiah Smith

    As God the Concept is beyond physical dimension, description, and understanding (at least in any religion worth its name that I’ve looked at)
     
    Don't be ridiculous. All kinds of gods are described in terms of physical dimension and understanding, or perhaps as the lack thereof. People will believe anything, if you phrase it just right.

    Yeah, whew that God thing…how can that possibly be true?. Judgement with retribution- or reconciliation after all of ones toil and miscarriages of justice here on earth- nah…I think eating, drinking and whoring, and the mythic memes of our Overlords on Madison Ave.[ and in DC] will suffice for Truth.

    Read More
  128. @Ron Unz

    I agree. But it’s the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can’t imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.
     
    Actually, I think it's the other way round, something which totally surprised me when I gradually discovered it over the last year or so.

    For various reasons, both sensible and ideological, the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they're quite willing to accept the argument.

    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Basically, I think there's roughly a zero chance that Trump will be able to get a half-Democratic Congress to fund building a 3000 mile wall or deporting the 11M existing illegal immigrants. But I think if he handled things the right way, there's actually a pretty good chance he could get overwhelming *Democratic* support for enacting permanent cuts of maybe 50% in *legal* immigration, which would have a vastly greater practical impact on total immigration.

    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    I haven’t seen any stating that publicly. I see more of the Luis Gutierrez types endlessly calling for more immigration from Hispanic countries and endless amnesties and free-bees. Who are they?

    Read More
  129. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    What now? Simple. Walk back your promise to repeal Obamacare 2 days after the election!! [maybe he should have waited at least 5 days].

    And look at Jarad Kushner now walking around the Whitehouse grounds like the big Peacock.

    Swamp people are now being hired by the hundreds.

    Donald “J” Trump. “J” stands for jew.

    I have a sneaky suspicion that in 4 years we will be begging for Hitlary.

    Read More
  130. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The Glob is less like a Melting Pot than a Digestive Tract that churns out PC acid to erase all borders, identities, and culture. It is the Belly of the Beast.

    Read More
  131. @utu
    I did not know that Koch Brothers were into immigration. But when you think about it, it makes a perfect sense. It is what business always wanted: cheap labor, scab labor. That's what immigration is all about and always was with slavery being its extreme manifestation. The leftist who advocate immigration have no clue that they are just useful idiots. Actually I would not be surprised to find out that the left's shift from unions and labor issue to identity politics was promulgated and paid for by people like Koch Brothers and their buddies like Soros. Koch's and Soros are playing on the same team.

    The Koch Brothers are big L libertarians where one of their main tenants is open borders. I think they have a big hand in Reason magazine which is total open borders lunacy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    I did not know about that Koch's were libertarians. I always though the libertarianism is ideology for young men with acne of which most of them grow out unless they become Silicon Valley millionaires and start preaching in TED's talk voice.
  132. @Ron Unz
    Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents...

    Basically, "Build the Wall!!" is what Bill Clinton used to call "Boob-Bait for Bubbas."

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren't all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them---for PeeCee reasons---focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it's the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I'm missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn't have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I'm wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a "Wall" or "Sanctuary Cities" is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here's my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    That is a good point, and the first step is to eliminate the absurd Diversity Immigrant Lottery Visa program that brings in 50,000 poor, unskilled lottery winners each year and dumps them in our cities on welfare.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversity_Immigrant_Visa

    After they arrive each applies for a dozen relatives to join them with family visas, who are also unskilled, non-English speaking Third Worlders. Running this program must cost a billion dollars a year.

    Read More
  133. The quality of citizenship can be measured with the length of time one needs to wait to be naturalized. In the US it is 4 years. In Switzerland it is 10 years.

    Perhaps the waiting period should be increased?

    Read More
  134. @AKAHorace
    Fred you are right that deporting children would look bad on TV. But what about arresting employers who knowingly hire a lot of illegal immigrants ? Going into a country club and putting someone in handcuffs would make great TV and be far more effective.

    Judges forcing them to mow lawns as part of their service in an open prison, even better.

    I’ve been arguing for arresting employers of illegals for years now . It would be so effective because after a few country club arrests, their buddies would fall all over each other hiring Americans and ditching their illegal ditch diggers.

    Definitely must-see TV and I bet it’d even sell some newspapers.

    Read More
  135. *Will he transmute himself by degrees into Hillary?*

    All 44 potus since 1875 were war mongers.

    Ian Fleming’s fundamental law of probability sez,
    *Once an accident, twice a coincidence, thrice……enemy action. * !
    In other words, its a feature, not a bug !

    Why, cuz all potus work for the Big Boss. ! [1]

    How did Obama the prez for ‘change’ works out ?
    He morphed into *Bush by the sly*.

    Obama used ‘Kinetic action’ instead of ‘shock n awe’.
    All his interventions were supposedly started by murkkan ‘allies’, while actually ‘led from behind’ by Washington. !

    Would Trump bucks the trend of war mongering potus since 1875 ?
    Ian Fleming says,
    Dont bet on it !

    [1]

    http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2016/08/war-incorporated.html

    Read More
  136. @in the middle
    End welfare, for every one, PERIOD. Lets get them working, and stop living off other people's labors. Place welfare money in education and training, and oblige all welfare recipients to learn a trade and pay back to the system, as we actually do with student loans. Laziness is an aberration and we must put an end to it, by requiring welfarers (A new word i guess) to WORK! what an idea!

    Welfare needs to be reset. Every welfare recipient needs to sign up again. This time, they need ssi numbers, birth certificates and all other necessary info with them, along with all members of the household that are being claimed. Drug test all of them and require they stay clean with random drug screening. After this whole process, help find jobs for the members that are capable.

    Read More
  137. @Ron Unz

    I agree. But it’s the media called Trump a fascist, Hitler 2.0, for even talking about stopping *illegal* immigration. His outspokenness about that was enough to widen the Overton window; in terms of realpolitik I can’t imagine how talking about massive cuts to legal immigration would go over with our globalist media masters.
     
    Actually, I think it's the other way round, something which totally surprised me when I gradually discovered it over the last year or so.

    For various reasons, both sensible and ideological, the liberal media elite is horrified by attacks on illegal immigrants, but (under the right circumstances) usually reacts quite rationally and objectively to calls for sharp cuts in *legal* immigration. Basically, they quote some Koch Brothers pseudo-study claiming that our economy desperately needs heavy immigration, and once you explain otherwise, they're quite willing to accept the argument.

    The fact that liberal/Democratic elites are potentially very willing to support drastic cuts in *legal* immigration was the shocking insight that became the central ingredient in my proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Basically, I think there's roughly a zero chance that Trump will be able to get a half-Democratic Congress to fund building a 3000 mile wall or deporting the 11M existing illegal immigrants. But I think if he handled things the right way, there's actually a pretty good chance he could get overwhelming *Democratic* support for enacting permanent cuts of maybe 50% in *legal* immigration, which would have a vastly greater practical impact on total immigration.

    good thinking. Trump may be a strutting disgusting racist, but he appears to be a brilliant political thinker, talent knowing no conventionality in target. He might do better than one might envision.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    racism, racism, racism, blah, blah, blah. Isn't it time for you to go back to your safe space?
    , @Authenticjazzman
    " Trump may be a strutting disgusting racist", he is not, however you yourself are a disgusting closet racist and an obvious idiot.

    Authenticjazzman, "Mensa" society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.
  138. @MarkinLA
    The Koch Brothers are big L libertarians where one of their main tenants is open borders. I think they have a big hand in Reason magazine which is total open borders lunacy.

    I did not know about that Koch’s were libertarians. I always though the libertarianism is ideology for young men with acne of which most of them grow out unless they become Silicon Valley millionaires and start preaching in TED’s talk voice.

    Read More
  139. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Kyle McKenna

    There are quotas now. The Mexican quota for immigration, for example, is 5000 per year. There is an 18-year waiting list for legal immigration from Mexico.
     
    I've spent a while searching and I can't find anything remotely confirming your assertions above. The closest thing is the 7% rule, and it's not very close.

    https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/how-united-states-immigration-system-works

    I saw the “5000″ figure on another forum, and also cannot confirm that specific number. It was probably calculated from “per country limit” values for some specific year. However, there is, officially, a quota — a limit routinely violated. This year, it is 25,620. As for waiting lists:

    Immigrant Waiting List By Country

    Immigrant visa issuances during fiscal year 2016 will be limited by the terms of INA 201 to nomore than 226,000 in the family-sponsored preferences and approximately 140,000 in the employment-based preferences. (Visas for “Immediate Relatives” – i.e., spouses, unmarriedchildren under the age of 21 years, and parents of U.S. citizens – are not subject to numerical limitation, however.)

    It should by no means be assumed that once an applicant is registered, the case is then continually included in the waiting list totals unless and until a visa is issued. The consular procedures mandate a regular culling of visa cases to remove from the count those unlikely to see further action, so that totals are not unreasonably inflated.

    The fifteen countries with the highest number of waiting list registrants in FY 2016 are listed below; together these represent 81% of the total. This list includes all countries with at least 50,000 persons on the waiting list. There is a seven percent per-country limit, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. This limit serves to avoid the potential monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries.

    That limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. For FY 2016 the per-country limit will be approximately 25,620.

    [MORE]

    Country Applicants
    Mexico 1,344,429
    Philippines 417,511
    India 344,208
    Vietnam 282,375
    China-mainland born 260,265
    Dominican Republic 207,406
    Bangladesh 183,159
    Pakistan 131,465
    Haiti 119,696
    Cuba 115,208
    El Salvador 82,045
    Jamaica 58,368
    Iran 53,306
    Korea, South 52,887
    Peru 51,772
    All Others 851,921
    Worldwide Total 4,556,021

    Read More
  140. @Joe Wong
    Amercian does not have the technology to build a "Great Wall of USA," but they always can outsource the project to others who can do it, like Chinese who can show the American they have proven experience of building Great Walls.

    {Amercian does not have the technology to build a “Great Wall of USA,” but they always can outsource the project to others who can do it, like Chinese who can show the American they have proven experience of building Great Walls.}

    Anything else the Chinese have ‘proven experience’ with?
    What technological innovation was involved in building the Chinese wall?
    Nothing: lots of people and time.

    The Egyptian pyramids: now that took some doing.
    Have you Chinese figured out how thems Egyptians moved those massive shaped boulders so high and stacked them so neatly?

    As to American knowhow and technology: when did you guys put a man in space ? How many years after Americans (yes, I know USSR was first).
    This is year 2016. Technologically deficient Americans landed men on the Moon almost 50 years ago. Still waiting for China to duplicate the feat.

    And what technological innovations have Chinese come up with recently?
    Would that be escalators that keep sucking in people and crushing them to death?

    Read More
    • Replies: @denk
    Take it easy, Joe is obviously tongue in cheek.

    As for the spades of escalators mishaps,
    have it crossed your mind that it could be
    another foreign chicanery to give China a black eye ?

    NO prize for guessing who's that foreign country I've in mind !
  141. @folktruther
    good thinking. Trump may be a strutting disgusting racist, but he appears to be a brilliant political thinker, talent knowing no conventionality in target. He might do better than one might envision.

    racism, racism, racism, blah, blah, blah. Isn’t it time for you to go back to your safe space?

    Read More
  142. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I hear in Progs in Europe remarked that the US election was 27th anniversary of fall of Berlin Wall. They bitch that the Fall of the Wall was all about ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’.

    BULL!!!

    Fall of Berlin Wall was about nationalism. Germans reunited. East Germany used to be part of multi-national Soviet Empire. It finally left the empire and rejoined its national brethren.

    It is so disingenuous of the Prog to spin fall of Berlin Wall as triumph of ‘multi-culturalism’ and ‘open-ness’. It was about people of same ethnos and culture reuniting. It was about the rejection of different nations and ethnic groups being forced into one ‘universal’ empire based on ideology.

    Also, didn’t the US praise the breakup of the Soviet Union? The result was new nations based on ethnic identity and set borderlines.

    So, why did the US cheer the rise of EU and Globalism that undermines nationalism and borders?

    I guess rise of nationalism and borders is good when it destroys rival empires, but it is bad when it undermines American globalist imperial ambitions.

    It is like the globo-US is pushing nationalism in Ukraine to antagonize Russia while, at the same time, pushing homomania to turn Ukraine into part of US globo-empire.

    Read More
  143. @Ron Unz

    I’ve never seen that happen, and I read widely. Please prove me wrong? It’s a novel argument quoted here, and I’ve seen and heard a thousand times people saying “legal immigration good, illegal immigration bad”.
     
    I really can't disagree. I've been pretty heavily involved in immigration issues, including sometimes at a fairly high level, for most of the last *twenty-five* years, and until very recently I'd also never considered this analysis, which does seem so utterly counter-intuitive and exactly contrary to what all the politicians constantly say. But I do think it may be correct.

    The spark was earlier this year when I had a series of personal meetings with the editorial boards of most of California's leading mainstream/liberal newspapers. One issue I repeatedly raised was that *legal* immigration was much too high and should be drastically reduced. Naturally, I expected massive push-back---but got absolutely none. One LA Times Ed Board member vaguely quoted some Koch Brothers study on the economic benefits of immigration, while a top Ed Page Editor said he was really shocked that a Republican such as myself would be advocating a policy which liberals, Democrats, and unions would so strongly favor. Most of the other editorial writers just vaguely nodded their heads. But I'm absolutely sure if I had attacked *illegal* immigration, the response would have been icy hostility.

    It took me a while to digest such a surprising reaction, and it led me to spend hours on the phone with some of the top national anti-immigration figures, discovering that they were just as surprised and intrigued by the idea as I had been. When I outlined my ideas to the liberal editor of a top mainstream national opinion magazine, he also found it absolutely fascinating, and wanted me to write something up, though I was too busy with other things at the time.

    It may sound bizarre, but I think there's the strong potential for a natural political alliance between pro-immigrant Democrats and anti-immigration Republicans, with the pro-immigration Republicans like Paul Ryan and the Koch Brothers being the odd-men out. It's all outlined in my long article, up on the Home page.

    For what it may be worth, I was hoping for some independent, objective confirmation in support of the theory; not least because (as you observe) it’s a tad counter-intuitive. Naturally I have tremendous respect for your expertise and no reason to doubt your testimony, but so far these are self-reported anecdotes. I can easily recount my own anecdotes indicating precisely the opposite (and I too have been published on the topic, though 1) I dislike pulling rank and 2) you outrank me anyway ;) ) To summarize, though, many people find it politic to oppose illegal immigration because there’s at least a law being broken; and legal immigration is popularly seen as equivalent to motherhood and apple pie.

    One of several reasons that the point is worth arguing is tactical. When you attack illegal immigration you have many natural allies. Another is its value as a cudgel, as I mentioned in my previous post. In addition, though, there’s the fact that if you don’t control illegal immigration the rest is just window-dressing. Decorate your front door as you like; whom you allow in won’t much matter when the back door is wide open.

    You state, however, that “for anyone seriously opposed to current high levels of immigration, illegal immigration is largely a red herring and focusing on it is completely misguided.” One thing we can agree upon is that this is a total disconnect.

    The owners of the MSM are in favor of high levels of immigration for tribal, economic, and political reasons, and until they are persuaded or replaced (neither of which I consider likely) the masses will continue to be influenced in their favor. The ‘white racialists’ are easy to caricaturize, but they do accurately observe that the end game is an enforced reduction of white people to the status of just another minority in the nation their forefathers built. The overarching ‘ruling class’ strategy is called “Divide and Conquer” I believe.

    Meanwhile it’s not my experience that “liberals and Democrats” strongly favor cutting back legal immigration. Thanks for directing me to your thoughtful essay, which I must apologize for having missed. Having read it, though, I still don’t see how “pro-immigrant Democrats” (not to mention pro-immigrant Republicans) will be brought on board a program to enact “Large, Permanent Cuts to Legal Immigration.” And I don’t see how increasing the minimum wage will affect or influence the large number of immigrants (and potential immigrants) who operate outside the legal economy. Either I’m dense or your argument needs refining. Frankly I worry about you going out so far on a limb.

    You further propose yet another amnesty for illegals, when history (and logic) has shown this to be a powerful incentive for the next cohort of illegals. You propose payments for those willing to be repatriated, saying that “such payments would require a written commitment not to return, enforced by serious criminal penalties.” I call that utopian, at the least.

    My own perspective is that I want the highest-possible quality immigrants for my country, and relatively few of them; keeping in mind that they represent a brain drain for their former homes. I think it’s possible and reasonable to oppose high levels of immigration, both legal and illegal, not least because the ‘legal’ limits are so subject to political manipulation. I also want as small an increase in population as possible (anywhere and everywhere) and I certainly recognize that this places me in a minority position.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    For what it may be worth, I was hoping for some independent, objective confirmation in support of the theory; not least because (as you observe) it’s a tad counter-intuitive.
     
    Sure, that's a very reasonable approach to take. And I shouldn't have made it sound like I had enormous evidence for my surprising analysis rather than just some very intriguing early indications. I'll admit that one reason I'm drawn to it is that it's so totally unexpected and counter-intuitive. Whether it's correct or not, I can't really say.

    However, here's one interesting development I noticed. As I said, I spent hours on the phone discussing it with some of the top anti-immigration leaders, who seemed just as intrigued as I was. These are some of the people who have a great deal of contact and influence with the main anti-immigration figures in the Trump campaign. And then I noticed that Trump seemed to stop talking much about illegal immigration during the later part of the presidential campaign, including the debates, a fact that was widely noted. He could have started to avoid the topic for all sorts of different reasons, but one of them might be to lay the groundwork for the political strategy I'm suggesting.

    Anyway, there's a good chance we'll find out over the next year or so.
    , @utu
    "I also want as small an increase in population as possible "

    Follow this thought and its consequences and you will find allies on the left.

    Frame the immigration issue as environmental, ecological issue.

    Frame the immigration issue as anti-bankster, anti-capitalist issue that population growth is necessary only to the bankers to make their model of growth necessitated by usurious banking feasible.

    Frame the immigration issue as anti-progress issue. The future is robotization and automation. Number of jobs will decline which is good cause people will have more leisure. The universal income will be introduced. Population growth delays on the road to progress.
  144. What can President Trump implement on his own, by executive order?

    What on his agenda will require Congressional approval? Are there enough immigration-friendly Republicans that they could combine with Democrats to withhold that approval?

    What could be tied up or permanently blocked in court by pro-immigration activists?

    Basically, these are the questions that everyone on this thread is trying to answer. Fred doesn’t have the knowledge or expertise to do more than speculate, and I don’t see those from any of the other commenters here, except maybe Ron himself. I’m hoping that someone who does have that knowledge, like perhaps John Derbyshire, will favor us with a column on the subject.

    Read More
  145. @Kyle McKenna
    For what it may be worth, I was hoping for some independent, objective confirmation in support of the theory; not least because (as you observe) it's a tad counter-intuitive. Naturally I have tremendous respect for your expertise and no reason to doubt your testimony, but so far these are self-reported anecdotes. I can easily recount my own anecdotes indicating precisely the opposite (and I too have been published on the topic, though 1) I dislike pulling rank and 2) you outrank me anyway ;) ) To summarize, though, many people find it politic to oppose illegal immigration because there's at least a law being broken; and legal immigration is popularly seen as equivalent to motherhood and apple pie.

    One of several reasons that the point is worth arguing is tactical. When you attack illegal immigration you have many natural allies. Another is its value as a cudgel, as I mentioned in my previous post. In addition, though, there's the fact that if you don't control illegal immigration the rest is just window-dressing. Decorate your front door as you like; whom you allow in won't much matter when the back door is wide open.

    You state, however, that "for anyone seriously opposed to current high levels of immigration, illegal immigration is largely a red herring and focusing on it is completely misguided." One thing we can agree upon is that this is a total disconnect.

    The owners of the MSM are in favor of high levels of immigration for tribal, economic, and political reasons, and until they are persuaded or replaced (neither of which I consider likely) the masses will continue to be influenced in their favor. The 'white racialists' are easy to caricaturize, but they do accurately observe that the end game is an enforced reduction of white people to the status of just another minority in the nation their forefathers built. The overarching 'ruling class' strategy is called "Divide and Conquer" I believe.

    Meanwhile it's not my experience that "liberals and Democrats" strongly favor cutting back legal immigration. Thanks for directing me to your thoughtful essay, which I must apologize for having missed. Having read it, though, I still don't see how "pro-immigrant Democrats" (not to mention pro-immigrant Republicans) will be brought on board a program to enact "Large, Permanent Cuts to Legal Immigration." And I don't see how increasing the minimum wage will affect or influence the large number of immigrants (and potential immigrants) who operate outside the legal economy. Either I'm dense or your argument needs refining. Frankly I worry about you going out so far on a limb.

    You further propose yet another amnesty for illegals, when history (and logic) has shown this to be a powerful incentive for the next cohort of illegals. You propose payments for those willing to be repatriated, saying that "such payments would require a written commitment not to return, enforced by serious criminal penalties." I call that utopian, at the least.

    My own perspective is that I want the highest-possible quality immigrants for my country, and relatively few of them; keeping in mind that they represent a brain drain for their former homes. I think it's possible and reasonable to oppose high levels of immigration, both legal and illegal, not least because the 'legal' limits are so subject to political manipulation. I also want as small an increase in population as possible (anywhere and everywhere) and I certainly recognize that this places me in a minority position.

    For what it may be worth, I was hoping for some independent, objective confirmation in support of the theory; not least because (as you observe) it’s a tad counter-intuitive.

    Sure, that’s a very reasonable approach to take. And I shouldn’t have made it sound like I had enormous evidence for my surprising analysis rather than just some very intriguing early indications. I’ll admit that one reason I’m drawn to it is that it’s so totally unexpected and counter-intuitive. Whether it’s correct or not, I can’t really say.

    However, here’s one interesting development I noticed. As I said, I spent hours on the phone discussing it with some of the top anti-immigration leaders, who seemed just as intrigued as I was. These are some of the people who have a great deal of contact and influence with the main anti-immigration figures in the Trump campaign. And then I noticed that Trump seemed to stop talking much about illegal immigration during the later part of the presidential campaign, including the debates, a fact that was widely noted. He could have started to avoid the topic for all sorts of different reasons, but one of them might be to lay the groundwork for the political strategy I’m suggesting.

    Anyway, there’s a good chance we’ll find out over the next year or so.

    Read More
  146. @folktruther
    good thinking. Trump may be a strutting disgusting racist, but he appears to be a brilliant political thinker, talent knowing no conventionality in target. He might do better than one might envision.

    ” Trump may be a strutting disgusting racist”, he is not, however you yourself are a disgusting closet racist and an obvious idiot.

    Authenticjazzman, “Mensa” society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

    Read More
  147. @Ron Unz
    Well, I very rarely get involved in comment-threads, but I might as well put in my two cents...

    Basically, "Build the Wall!!" is what Bill Clinton used to call "Boob-Bait for Bubbas."

    America certainly has problems with immigration, but *legal* immigrants aren't all much different from *illegal* immigrants in those respects. Nearly all the major anti-immigration organizations are totally aware of this, but most of them---for PeeCee reasons---focus almost entirely on illegal immigration.

    However, since legal immigration is many times larger than illegal immigration, it's the overwhelming problem that needs to be addressed. And unless I'm missing something, even building a 700-foot wall with automatic-firing machine-guns all along the Mexican border wouldn't have much impact upon *legal* immigration. Perhaps some of the angry geniuses on this thread can explain why I'm wrong.

    Indeed, lots of the noisiest anti-illegal immigration politicians often tend to protect themselves ideologically by praising *legal* immigration in the same speeches, and even sometimes calling for *increases* in legal immigration. Since legal immigration is already so much larger, combining a total cutoff of illegal immigration with something like a 30% increase in legal immigration would probably mean more total immigrants, not less.

    And getting large reductions in *legal* immigration through Congress would be enormously difficult politically.

    Endlessly talking about a "Wall" or "Sanctuary Cities" is just silly and completely ignores the main issue. For anyone interested, here's my own perspective and proposed political strategy:

    http://www.unz.com/runz/a-grand-bargain-on-immigration-reform-2/

    Boob bait for the bubbas,” as Andrew Biggs reminds us today at The American, was the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s description of how to get Republicans to embrace increased government spending: call it a tax break.

    You aver that Trump’s claim to build a wall is boob bait for we Bubbas.

    Well, Trump flashed us repeatedly, didn’t he?

    He promised to build a wall and if he doesn’t, then he can go to hell and we Bubbas will swear off voting and merely swear at the FN liars who mock us for believing what they promise.

    If the essential transaction for a campaign is for a candidate to be the most successful one who fools the voters with obvious lies, then what’n’hell is the point of voting?

    I suppose one could be more cynical about our political plight but I haven’t yet started drinking this morning so I don’t know what that would be

    Read More
  148. @Kyle McKenna
    For what it may be worth, I was hoping for some independent, objective confirmation in support of the theory; not least because (as you observe) it's a tad counter-intuitive. Naturally I have tremendous respect for your expertise and no reason to doubt your testimony, but so far these are self-reported anecdotes. I can easily recount my own anecdotes indicating precisely the opposite (and I too have been published on the topic, though 1) I dislike pulling rank and 2) you outrank me anyway ;) ) To summarize, though, many people find it politic to oppose illegal immigration because there's at least a law being broken; and legal immigration is popularly seen as equivalent to motherhood and apple pie.

    One of several reasons that the point is worth arguing is tactical. When you attack illegal immigration you have many natural allies. Another is its value as a cudgel, as I mentioned in my previous post. In addition, though, there's the fact that if you don't control illegal immigration the rest is just window-dressing. Decorate your front door as you like; whom you allow in won't much matter when the back door is wide open.

    You state, however, that "for anyone seriously opposed to current high levels of immigration, illegal immigration is largely a red herring and focusing on it is completely misguided." One thing we can agree upon is that this is a total disconnect.

    The owners of the MSM are in favor of high levels of immigration for tribal, economic, and political reasons, and until they are persuaded or replaced (neither of which I consider likely) the masses will continue to be influenced in their favor. The 'white racialists' are easy to caricaturize, but they do accurately observe that the end game is an enforced reduction of white people to the status of just another minority in the nation their forefathers built. The overarching 'ruling class' strategy is called "Divide and Conquer" I believe.

    Meanwhile it's not my experience that "liberals and Democrats" strongly favor cutting back legal immigration. Thanks for directing me to your thoughtful essay, which I must apologize for having missed. Having read it, though, I still don't see how "pro-immigrant Democrats" (not to mention pro-immigrant Republicans) will be brought on board a program to enact "Large, Permanent Cuts to Legal Immigration." And I don't see how increasing the minimum wage will affect or influence the large number of immigrants (and potential immigrants) who operate outside the legal economy. Either I'm dense or your argument needs refining. Frankly I worry about you going out so far on a limb.

    You further propose yet another amnesty for illegals, when history (and logic) has shown this to be a powerful incentive for the next cohort of illegals. You propose payments for those willing to be repatriated, saying that "such payments would require a written commitment not to return, enforced by serious criminal penalties." I call that utopian, at the least.

    My own perspective is that I want the highest-possible quality immigrants for my country, and relatively few of them; keeping in mind that they represent a brain drain for their former homes. I think it's possible and reasonable to oppose high levels of immigration, both legal and illegal, not least because the 'legal' limits are so subject to political manipulation. I also want as small an increase in population as possible (anywhere and everywhere) and I certainly recognize that this places me in a minority position.

    “I also want as small an increase in population as possible ”

    Follow this thought and its consequences and you will find allies on the left.

    Frame the immigration issue as environmental, ecological issue.

    Frame the immigration issue as anti-bankster, anti-capitalist issue that population growth is necessary only to the bankers to make their model of growth necessitated by usurious banking feasible.

    Frame the immigration issue as anti-progress issue. The future is robotization and automation. Number of jobs will decline which is good cause people will have more leisure. The universal income will be introduced. Population growth delays on the road to progress.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Frame the immigration issue as environmental, ecological issue.

    You mean until the Sierra Club was bought off.

    https://www.noozhawk.com/article/021712_joe_guzzardi_sierra_club
  149. @Anon
    I hear in Progs in Europe remarked that the US election was 27th anniversary of fall of Berlin Wall. They bitch that the Fall of the Wall was all about 'tolerance' and 'diversity'.

    BULL!!!

    Fall of Berlin Wall was about nationalism. Germans reunited. East Germany used to be part of multi-national Soviet Empire. It finally left the empire and rejoined its national brethren.

    It is so disingenuous of the Prog to spin fall of Berlin Wall as triumph of 'multi-culturalism' and 'open-ness'. It was about people of same ethnos and culture reuniting. It was about the rejection of different nations and ethnic groups being forced into one 'universal' empire based on ideology.

    Also, didn't the US praise the breakup of the Soviet Union? The result was new nations based on ethnic identity and set borderlines.

    So, why did the US cheer the rise of EU and Globalism that undermines nationalism and borders?

    I guess rise of nationalism and borders is good when it destroys rival empires, but it is bad when it undermines American globalist imperial ambitions.

    It is like the globo-US is pushing nationalism in Ukraine to antagonize Russia while, at the same time, pushing homomania to turn Ukraine into part of US globo-empire.

    I agree, Andrea.

    Read More
  150. Fred Reed, in case you have not notice – it’s the Organized Jewry which is suffering from TRUMP HANGOVER, and not the Muslim or Mexican whom Trump hates the most…..

    On November 8, Jane Eisener, editor of The Jewish Daily Forward wrote that as a White and Jewish woman, she doesn’t know what future holds for Jews under president Donald Trump. “All I know is that my daughter is crying, and I don’t know what to say,” Eisener wrote.

    On November 11, Jerusalem-based The Times of Israel claimed Donald Trump’s victory proves that most Americans are antisemitics.

    Jeffrey Goldberg, editor The Atlantic and former prison guard at Ktzi’ot, Israel’s largest detention camp for Palestinian political prisoners, compared Trump’s November 8 victory with November 8, 1938, “when the Nazi paramilitary and German civilians looted and vandalized thousands of Jewish business and synagogues burned. Jews were murdered, and estimated 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and taken to concentration camps,” lied the ZioNazi torturer.

    On November 11, Ben Sales whined at the Jewish Telegraph Agency that Donald Trump’s victory has made many Jews feel outsiders.

    David Remnick at The Jew Yorker said on November 9 that Trump’s victory is a sickening event in the history of the United States and liberal democracy.

    Hollywood acress/singer Barbra Streisand, former girlfriend of Canadian prime minister Elliott Trudeau, the late father of current prime minister Justin Trudeau said she plan to emigrate to Canada after Trump victory.

    On November 9, Jonah Engel Bromwich even posted a immigration guidelines at the Jew York Times for American Jews who are planning to leave United States as result of Trump victory.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/11/12/us-trump-in-jews-out/

    Read More
    • Replies: @OilcanFloyd
    And hostile immigrants railing against whites is just what the Jewish power structure wants. How many of the so-called anti-zionist Jews that ally with Muslims against the "sins of America" would really do anything to harm Israel or help Palestinians at the expense of Jews in Israel? My guess is very few.

    You are a tool of the very Jews that you rant at, and you don't even know it.
  151. @Rehmat
    Fred Reed, in case you have not notice - it's the Organized Jewry which is suffering from TRUMP HANGOVER, and not the Muslim or Mexican whom Trump hates the most.....

    On November 8, Jane Eisener, editor of The Jewish Daily Forward wrote that as a White and Jewish woman, she doesn’t know what future holds for Jews under president Donald Trump. “All I know is that my daughter is crying, and I don’t know what to say,” Eisener wrote.

    On November 11, Jerusalem-based The Times of Israel claimed Donald Trump’s victory proves that most Americans are antisemitics.

    Jeffrey Goldberg, editor The Atlantic and former prison guard at Ktzi’ot, Israel’s largest detention camp for Palestinian political prisoners, compared Trump’s November 8 victory with November 8, 1938, “when the Nazi paramilitary and German civilians looted and vandalized thousands of Jewish business and synagogues burned. Jews were murdered, and estimated 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and taken to concentration camps,” lied the ZioNazi torturer.

    On November 11, Ben Sales whined at the Jewish Telegraph Agency that Donald Trump’s victory has made many Jews feel outsiders.

    David Remnick at The Jew Yorker said on November 9 that Trump’s victory is a sickening event in the history of the United States and liberal democracy.

    Hollywood acress/singer Barbra Streisand, former girlfriend of Canadian prime minister Elliott Trudeau, the late father of current prime minister Justin Trudeau said she plan to emigrate to Canada after Trump victory.

    On November 9, Jonah Engel Bromwich even posted a immigration guidelines at the Jew York Times for American Jews who are planning to leave United States as result of Trump victory.

    https://rehmat1.com/2016/11/12/us-trump-in-jews-out/

    And hostile immigrants railing against whites is just what the Jewish power structure wants. How many of the so-called anti-zionist Jews that ally with Muslims against the “sins of America” would really do anything to harm Israel or help Palestinians at the expense of Jews in Israel? My guess is very few.

    You are a tool of the very Jews that you rant at, and you don’t even know it.

    Read More
  152. @utu
    "I also want as small an increase in population as possible "

    Follow this thought and its consequences and you will find allies on the left.

    Frame the immigration issue as environmental, ecological issue.

    Frame the immigration issue as anti-bankster, anti-capitalist issue that population growth is necessary only to the bankers to make their model of growth necessitated by usurious banking feasible.

    Frame the immigration issue as anti-progress issue. The future is robotization and automation. Number of jobs will decline which is good cause people will have more leisure. The universal income will be introduced. Population growth delays on the road to progress.

    Frame the immigration issue as environmental, ecological issue.

    You mean until the Sierra Club was bought off.

    https://www.noozhawk.com/article/021712_joe_guzzardi_sierra_club

    Read More
  153. Trump may fail to make things better, but at least he won’t be doing everything in his power to make things radically worse, the way Clinton would have done. I think that counts for a great deal, so my reaction is also “Yesssss!!!”

    (Always assuming of course that Trump doesn’t have the sort of meltdown that so many hostile pundits in the media are predicting. I think that’s a lot less likely then they do, but given what I’ve seen of Trump I can’t rule out the possibility entirely).

    Read More
  154. Yes, until the Sierra Club was bought off. But I think it easily could be reversed within the environmental movement.

    Read More
  155. @MarkinLA
    Well Fred, double chain link fences topped with razor wire work pretty well at prisons. Yes you need to have something in the ground for tunneling - perhaps 1/2 inch armor plate driven 15 feet into the ground topped by the 20 foot high chain link fence. Each chain link fence is topped with razor wire. Have 3 such fences each 25 feet apart so that border patrol cars can drive between them.

    A lot of this stuff can be built in factories and trucked to the work site and installed easily.

    Yes, I did some mason work in my 20′s. Not complex at all to build a wall. The footings need to be in place anyhow before a wall goes up. A backhoe can easily dig down 20, 30 feet. Concrete is secured by rebar. Concrete is cheap, rebar is too. Reinforcing both sides of the 30 foot footing is not difficult.
    Tunnels will inevitably be dug, however, the average Mexican can’t just run over our border when a nice wall is there.

    Fred, you lost, punk. When the WALL goes up, I hope your American citizenship is revoked.

    Read More
  156. >On November 9, Jonah Engel Bromwich even posted a immigration guidelines at the Jew York Times for American Jews who are planning to leave United States as result of Trump victory.

    So, it’s 1932 in America?

    Next thing you know, we”ll have massive public works projects, full employment, a restoration of , technical excellence, resurgent national and ethnic pride and dignity, and (God forbid) prosperity.
    We could possibly have national anti-smoking and pro physical fitness campaigns (God knows most Americans need it). Maybe even win a bunch of medals at the next Olympics.

    Sags mir wo der Juden sind?
    Wo sind sie geblieben?
    En realidad, a mi no me importa.

    Anyone who wants to leave is free to do so.
    Don’t let the door hit you on the backside on your way out.

    Read More
  157. *He has talked of getting American troops out of Japan and South Korea on grounds that those countries can pay for their own defense if they want it. Good idea. However, it would mean the end of the American Empire in Asia*

    William Blum on the ‘world cop’,

    *It was the cleverest protection racket since men convinced women that they needed men to protect them, for if all the men vanished overnight, how many women would be afraid to walk the streets?*

    https://williamblum.org/chapters/rogue-state/rogue-state-introduction

    Read More
  158. @Avery
    {Amercian does not have the technology to build a “Great Wall of USA,” but they always can outsource the project to others who can do it, like Chinese who can show the American they have proven experience of building Great Walls.}

    Anything else the Chinese have 'proven experience' with?
    What technological innovation was involved in building the Chinese wall?
    Nothing: lots of people and time.

    The Egyptian pyramids: now that took some doing.
    Have you Chinese figured out how thems Egyptians moved those massive shaped boulders so high and stacked them so neatly?

    As to American knowhow and technology: when did you guys put a man in space ? How many years after Americans (yes, I know USSR was first).
    This is year 2016. Technologically deficient Americans landed men on the Moon almost 50 years ago. Still waiting for China to duplicate the feat.

    And what technological innovations have Chinese come up with recently?
    Would that be escalators that keep sucking in people and crushing them to death?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcpjOIH7bG4

    Take it easy, Joe is obviously tongue in cheek.

    As for the spades of escalators mishaps,
    have it crossed your mind that it could be
    another foreign chicanery to give China a black eye ?

    NO prize for guessing who’s that foreign country I’ve in mind !

    Read More
    • Replies: @denk
    To make myself clearer,
    I'm talking about sabotage by foreign agents and/or its fifth columnists.
  159. How to build “The Wall” on our southern border:
    1. Hire Israeli design and construction firms on “design-build” contracts.
    Israelis appear to be the current world experts on building “separation barriers”
    2. Specify the Israelis will hire only Mexican citizens who live in Mexico to do the actual work.
    Israelis will function as guards and overseers.
    (These will be jobs that “Americans will not do” because the wages will be too low to pay the bills for anyone living in the U.S.)
    3. Allow the Israelis to bill the U.S Government at U.S. “prevailing wage” rates.
    4. Pay must be by performance. If foreigners (Mexican or otherwise) still infiltrate in any numbers, the design and construction firms do not get paid.

    Everybody wins.
    1. The American people get a wall
    2. Mexicans get jobs which they would not have had.
    3. Jews get rich by screwing the American people.

    However, TANSTAAFL.
    Quid pro quo:
    Following construction of The Wall, Wall Street banks must be required to prop up the Mexican economy until it become prosperous enough that few Mexicans want to cross the border al Norte.

    Read More
  160. How high the wall? 40 feet. Fred, try raising a 41 foot ladder.

    Oh, and put razor wire on the top.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    How high the wall? 40 feet. Fred, try raising a 41 foot ladder.
     
    Mexicans are clever little monkeys. You, obviously, are insufficiently intelligent to figure out the easy solution, but a Mexican will toss up a pulley on a grapnel hook, and hoist a 41-foot ladder without breaking stride.
  161. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Unz Reader
    How high the wall? 40 feet. Fred, try raising a 41 foot ladder.

    Oh, and put razor wire on the top.

    How high the wall? 40 feet. Fred, try raising a 41 foot ladder.

    Mexicans are clever little monkeys. You, obviously, are insufficiently intelligent to figure out the easy solution, but a Mexican will toss up a pulley on a grapnel hook, and hoist a 41-foot ladder without breaking stride.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    ...but a Mexican will toss up a pulley on a grapnel hook, and hoist a 41-foot ladder without breaking stride.
     
    Enterprise and creativity, just what America needs. Is this the 40 foot wall citizenship test?
  162. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Start from making E-Verify work consistently and for all.
    News has Trump and his team are already thinking of starting with it.

    Read More
  163. @John Jeremiah Smith

    How high the wall? 40 feet. Fred, try raising a 41 foot ladder.
     
    Mexicans are clever little monkeys. You, obviously, are insufficiently intelligent to figure out the easy solution, but a Mexican will toss up a pulley on a grapnel hook, and hoist a 41-foot ladder without breaking stride.

    …but a Mexican will toss up a pulley on a grapnel hook, and hoist a 41-foot ladder without breaking stride.

    Enterprise and creativity, just what America needs. Is this the 40 foot wall citizenship test?

    Read More
  164. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    In an interview with CBS’s 60 Minutes that airs on Sunday – his first since winning the election – Trump insisted that he will build the wall that was a vital part of his presidential campaign.

    ‘What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, where a lot of these people, probably two million, it could be even three million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate,’ Trump said.

    ‘But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally.’

    Don’t take thought for it, Mexico is going to get a little more crowded than it already is, but the privileged area where you live will be left unaffected.

    Read More
  165. Fred, do you recall the iron curtain. You might want to check your history. They had a wall to keep people in and it worked rather well.

    Read More
  166. Jeeze !
    So what gets Trump elected is the Wall that he promised, which is supposed to keep those ‘Mexican criminals’ out innit ??

    What the rest of the world are more interested is, how this supposedly ‘anti-war pragmatist’ gonna keep that criminal armed gang, aka the murkkan military in ???

    Read More
  167. @denk
    Take it easy, Joe is obviously tongue in cheek.

    As for the spades of escalators mishaps,
    have it crossed your mind that it could be
    another foreign chicanery to give China a black eye ?

    NO prize for guessing who's that foreign country I've in mind !

    To make myself clearer,
    I’m talking about sabotage by foreign agents and/or its fifth columnists.

    Read More
  168. Trump won a battle. Not a war. Trump is president elect. Hillary is not president elect. The mighty corporate media has been neutered. Join the celebration and never mind that Trump is not the Messiah.

    Read More
  169. Never mind the wall, why waste materials and labor when we could have a 2000 mile long prison on the Mexican border for white collar criminals whose real cost is five times what is reported and one hundred times the cost of street crime, granting freely that fraud and treason doesn’t produce videos as exciting as cop shows.

    Read More
  170. Citizenship is not a right – it is a privilege.

    Let him take away the citizenship of those who do not deserve it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @John Jeremiah Smith

    Citizenship is not a right – it is a privilege.
     
    Nope. Constitutionally, it's a right.
  171. All right, we have him. My reaction to Trump’s victory is barely of interest to me, and so it may be that the world is not waiting in quiet desperation for an account….And then I wondered how much I should be delighted. I am not a particularly enthusiastic Trump fan. The man seems radically incoherent, almost nutty.

    Freddy, you’re actually learning something, Old Dog; I guess I should keep posting it seems to be helping you a bit.

    Read More
  172. @Kyle McKenna
    Fred always jumps to the defense of Mexicans, but even if Mexicans (and other third-world immigrants) were everything he imagines them to be, I still wouldn't want 100 million of them in my country, and that's roughly how many we've had since the nation-wrecking Hart-Celler legislation. Sorry, I don't want 100 million foreigners in my country, and BTW no other country would want this either. "Quantity has a Quality all its own."

    Speaking of quotes, here are Donald Trump’s actual words, speaking to Republicans at the primary debate:

    “We have done a tremendous disservice not only to the Middle East — we’ve done a tremendous disservice to humanity. The people that have been killed, the people that have been wiped away — and for what? It’s not like we had victory. It’s a mess. The Middle East is totally destabilized, a total and complete mess. I wish we had the 4 trillion dollars or 5 trillion dollars. I wish it were spent right here in the United States on schools, hospitals, roads, bridges, and everything else that is all falling apart!”

    Is it so wrong to want to take care of your own country, when it's falling apart? If you prefer Mexico, I certainly don't mind your living in Mexico and doing what you think is best for Mexico.

    But just as your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins, your right to export your undesirables ends where my border begins. Contrary to MSM propaganda, the wrecked and trashed third world does not actually enjoy the right to wreck and trash the United States of America, or even Europe for that matter.

    Very well said.

    Read More
  173. John Jeremiah Smith [AKA "Kip Russell"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @colm
    Citizenship is not a right - it is a privilege.

    Let him take away the citizenship of those who do not deserve it.

    Citizenship is not a right – it is a privilege.

    Nope. Constitutionally, it’s a right.

    Read More
  174. Fred – The Soviet Union had a huge border but was able to prevent illegal movement over it. Extremely poor countries in Eastern Europe had very tight border control. The Great Wall of China was built by a culture having only a small fraction of the material resources of our culture. We spent trillions on useless wars in the Middle East producing instability that is now threating the existence of Western Civilization but apparently we don’t have the resources to defend our own borders.

    If the US Armed Forces cannot secure our southern border what the hell are they good for? We are a nuclear power who are being overrun by a massive invasion. If we can’t fight them off we are doomed.

    Maybe we should contract out the defense of our southern border to Putin. Judging from what’s going on in Syria he seems to be far more effective at the use of military force than our own armed services.

    Read More
  175. @Old fogey
    Hearing Trump say that he wanted to negotiate with Putin, not fight, was enough for me. That was the major reason that I voted for him.

    Me too. Let peace break out. Most folks seem to think that’s a good idea. Been a good idea since forever. Just not for those in the highly — very highly — profitable death-machine business.

    The vast sums spent of the military are not about defense. Not really. They are about an economic way of life for all those on the receiving end of the money spigot. The “defense” business as a capitalist profit center is a poison chalice, looting the country for the benefit of patriot parasites.

    Read More
  176. @Carlton Meyer
    Trump can order the US Army back to the US border, which it left in 1945. The Border Patrol didn't even exist until 1924. He can do this without any new law or approval by Congress. Just 10,000 troops would make a big difference and cost little. For those confused by propaganda that this cannot be done, here are facts:

    http://www.g2mil.com/border.htm

    Exactly, my thought. Bring the troops back from Okinawa, South Korea, and Germany and station them along the order, one every 500 feet round the clock. No rough treatment for anyone trying to cross, not at all, just a very polite escort into custody and then a return to the other side. Perhaps even provide the application forms for legal entry, even a nice lunch and cold drink. Practicing courtesy and respect for the humanity of others, and in doing so, respect for your own humanity, are virtues that are rewarding to everyone. In short order, all illegal cross-border flows would stop. Mission accomplished.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Fred Reed Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Not What Tom Jefferson Had in Mind
Sounds Like A Low-Ranked American University To Me
Very Long, Will Bore Hell Out Of Most People, But I Felt Like Doing It
It's Not A Job. It's An Adventure.
Cloudy, With Possible Tidal Wave