The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Trump's Immigration Speech
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Via Frontpage Magazine, here is the opening from Trump’s August 31st immigration speech in Phoenix:

I’ve just landed having returned from a very important and special meeting with the President of Mexico, a man I like and respect very much. And a man who truly loves his country, Mexico.

And, by the way, just like I am a man who loves my country, the United States.

We agree on the importance of ending the illegal flow of drugs, cash, guns, and people across our border, and to put the cartels out of business.

We also discussed the great contributions of Mexican-American citizens to our two countries, my love for the people of Mexico, and the leadership and friendship between Mexico and the United States. It was a thoughtful and substantive conversation and it will go on for awhile. And, in the end we’re all going to win. Both countries, we’re all going to win.

Trump’s Mexico trip was a huge PR triumph simply because the Establishment’s theory that Immigration Restriction = Hate is so low-brow, childish, and hate-driven. Simply by wishing Mexicans in Mexico well, Trump exposed the stupidity of the elite view.

From the middle:

Today, on a very complicated and very difficult subject, you will get the truth. The fundamental problem with the immigration system in our country is that it serves the needs of wealthy donors, political activists and powerful, powerful politicians. It’s all you can do. Thank you. Thank you.

Let me tell you who it does not serve. It does not serve you the American people. Doesn’t serve you. When politicians talk about immigration reform, they usually mean the following, amnesty, open borders, lower wages. Immigration reform should mean something else entirely. It should mean improvements to our laws and policies to make life better for American citizens.

Thank you.

And here’s the ending:

We’ve admitted 59 million immigrants to the United States between 1965 and 2015. Many of these arrivals have greatly enriched our country. So true. But we now have an obligation to them and to their children to control future immigration as we are following, if you think, previous immigration waves.

We’ve had some big waves. And tremendously positive things have happened. Incredible things have happened. To ensure assimilation we want to ensure that it works. Assimilation, an important word. Integration and upward mobility.

Within just a few years immigration as a share of national population is set to break all historical records. The time has come for a new immigration commission to develop a new set of reforms to our legal immigration system in order to achieve the following goals.

To keep immigration levels measured by population share within historical norms. To select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in U.S. society and their ability to be financially self- sufficient.

We take anybody. Come on in, anybody. Just come on in. Not anymore.

You know, folks, it’s called a two-way street. It is a two-way street, right? We need a system that serves our needs, not the needs of others. Remember, under a Trump administration it’s called America first. Remember that.

Full transcript below:



TRUMP IMMIGRATION SPEECH: TRANSCRIPT AND VIDEO
August 31, 2016 Daniel Greenfield 3

“Thank you, Phoenix. I am so glad to be back in Arizona.

The state that has a very, very special place in my heart. I love people of Arizona and together we are going to win the White House in November.

Now, you know this is where it all began for me. Remember that massive crowd also. So, I said let’s go and have some fun tonight. We’re going to Arizona, OK?

This will be a little bit different. This won’t be a rally speech, per se. Instead, I’m going to deliver a detailed policy address on one of the greatest challenges facing our country today, illegal immigration.

I’ve just landed having returned from a very important and special meeting with the President of Mexico, a man I like and respect very much. And a man who truly loves his country, Mexico.

And, by the way, just like I am a man who loves my country, the United States.

We agree on the importance of ending the illegal flow of drugs, cash, guns, and people across our border, and to put the cartels out of business.

We also discussed the great contributions of Mexican-American citizens to our two countries, my love for the people of Mexico, and the leadership and friendship between Mexico and the United States. It was a thoughtful and substantive conversation and it will go on for awhile. And, in the end we’re all going to win. Both countries, we’re all going to win.

This is the first of what I expect will be many, many conversations. And, in a Trump administration we’re going to go about creating a new relationship between our two countries, but it’s going to be a fair relationship. We want fairness.

But to fix our immigration system, we must change our leadership in Washington and we must change it quickly. Sadly, sadly there is no other way. The truth is our immigration system is worse than anybody ever realized. But the facts aren’t known because the media won’t report on them. The politicians won’t talk about them and the special interests spend a lot of money trying to cover them up because they are making an absolute fortune. That’s the way it is.

Today, on a very complicated and very difficult subject, you will get the truth. The fundamental problem with the immigration system in our country is that it serves the needs of wealthy donors, political activists and powerful, powerful politicians. It’s all you can do. Thank you. Thank you.

Let me tell you who it does not serve. It does not serve you the American people. Doesn’t serve you. When politicians talk about immigration reform, they usually mean the following, amnesty, open borders, lower wages. Immigration reform should mean something else entirely. It should mean improvements to our laws and policies to make life better for American citizens.

Thank you. But if we’re going to make our immigration system work, then we have to be prepared to talk honestly and without fear about these important and very sensitive issues. For instance, we have to listen to the concerns that working people, our forgotten working people, have over the record pace of immigration and its impact on their jobs, wages, housing, schools, tax bills and general living conditions.

These are valid concerns expressed by decent and patriotic citizens from all backgrounds, all over. We also have to be honest about the fact that not everyone who seeks to join our country will be able to successfully assimilate. Sometimes it’s just not going to work out. It’s our right, as a sovereign nation to choose immigrants that we think are the likeliest to thrive and flourish and love us.

Then there is the issue of security. Countless innocent American lives have been stolen because our politicians have failed in their duty to secure our borders and enforce our laws like they have to be enforced. I have met with many of the great parents who lost their children to sanctuary cities and open borders. So many people, so many, many people. So sad. They will be joining me on this stage in a little while and I look forward to introducing, these are amazing, amazing people.

Countless Americans who have died in recent years would be alive today if not for the open border policies of this administration and the administration that causes this horrible, horrible thought process, called Hillary Clinton.

This includes incredible Americans like 21 year old Sarah Root. The man who killed her arrived at the border, entered Federal custody and then was released into the U.S., think of it, into the U.S. community under the policies of the White House Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Weak, weak policies. Weak and foolish policies.

He was released again after the crime, and now he’s out there at large. Sarah had graduated from college with a 4.0, top student in her class one day before her death.

Also among the victims of the Obama-Clinton open-border policy was Grant Ronnebeck, a 21-year-old convenience store clerk and a really good guy from Mesa, Arizona. A lot of you have known about Grant.

He was murdered by an illegal immigrant gang member previously convicted of burglary, who had also been released from federal custody, and they knew it was going to happen again.

Another victim is Kate Steinle. Gunned down in the sanctuary city of San Francisco, by an illegal immigrant, deported five previous times. And they knew he was no good.

Then there is the case of 90-year-old Earl Olander, who was brutally beaten and left to bleed to death in his home, 90 years old and defenseless. The perpetrators were illegal immigrants with criminal records a mile long, who did not meet Obama administration standards for removal. And they knew it was going to happen.

In California, a 64-year-old Air Force veteran, a great woman, according to everybody that knew her, Marilyn Pharis, was sexually assaulted and beaten to death with a hammer. Her killer had been arrested on multiple occasions but was never, ever deported, despite the fact that everybody wanted him out.

A 2011 report from the Government Accountability Office found that illegal immigrants and other non-citizens, in our prisons and jails together, had around 25,000 homicide arrests to their names, 25,000.

On top of that, illegal immigration costs our country more than $113 billion a year. And this is what we get. For the money we are going to spend on illegal immigration over the next 10 years, we could provide 1 million at-risk students with a school voucher, which so many people are wanting.

While there are many illegal immigrants in our country who are good people, many, many, this doesn’t change the fact that most illegal immigrants are lower skilled workers with less education, who compete directly against vulnerable American workers, and that these illegal workers draw much more out from the system than they can ever possibly pay back.

And they’re hurting a lot of our people that cannot get jobs under any circumstances.

But these facts are never reported. Instead, the media and my opponent discuss one thing and only one thing, the needs of people living here illegally. In many cases, by the way, they’re treated better than our vets.

Not going to happen anymore, folks. November 8th. Not going to happen anymore.

The truth is, the central issue is not the needs of the 11 million illegal immigrants or however many there may be — and honestly we’ve been hearing that number for years. It’s always 11 million. Our government has no idea. It could be 3 million. It could be 30 million. They have no idea what the number is.

Frankly our government has no idea what they’re doing on many, many fronts, folks.

But whatever the number, that’s never really been the central issue. It will never be a central issue. It doesn’t matter from that standpoint. Anyone who tells you that the core issue is the needs of those living here illegally has simply spent too much time in Washington.

Only the out-of-touch media elites think the biggest problems facing America — you know this, this is what they talk about, facing American society today is that there are 11 million illegal immigrants who don’t have legal status. And, they also think the biggest thing, and you know this, it’s not nuclear, and it’s not ISIS, it’s not Russia, it’s not China, it’s global warming.

To all the politicians, donors, and special interests, hear these words from me and all of you today. There is only one core issue in the immigration debate, and that issue is the well-being of the American people.

Nothing even comes a close second. Hillary Clinton, for instance, talks constantly about her fears that families will be separated, but she’s not talking about the American families who have been permanently separated from their loved ones because of a preventable homicide, because of a preventable death, because of murder.

No, she’s only talking about families who come here in violation of the law. We will treat everyone living or residing in our country with great dignity. So important.

We will be fair, just, and compassionate to all, but our greatest compassion must be for our American citizens.

Thank you.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton have engaged in gross dereliction of duty by surrendering the safety of the American people to open borders, and you know it better than anybody right here in Arizona. You know it.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton support sanctuary cities. They support catch and release on the border. They support visa overstays. They support the release of dangerous, dangerous, dangerous, criminals from detention. And, they support unconstitutional executive amnesty.

Hillary Clinton has pledged amnesty in her first 100 days, and her plan will provide Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare for illegal immigrants, breaking the federal budget.

On top of that she promises uncontrolled, low-skilled immigration that continues to reduce jobs and wages for American workers, and especially for African-American and Hispanic workers within our country. Our citizens.

Most incredibly, because to me this is unbelievable, we have no idea who these people are, where they come from. I always say Trojan horse. Watch what’s going to happen, folks. It’s not going to be pretty.

This includes her plan to bring in 620,000 new refugees from Syria and that region over a short period of time. And even yesterday, when you were watching the news, you saw thousands and thousands of people coming in from Syria. What is wrong with our politicians, our leaders if we can call them that. What the hell are we doing?

Hard to believe. Hard to believe. Now that you’ve heard about Hillary Clinton’s plan, about which she has not answered a single question, let me tell you about my plan.

And do you notice all the time for weeks and weeks of debating my plan, debating, talking about it, what about this, what about that. They never even mentioned her plan on immigration because she doesn’t want to get into the quagmire. It’s a tough one, she doesn’t know what she’s doing except open borders and let everybody come in and destroy our country by the way.

While Hillary Clinton meets only with donors and lobbyists, my plan was crafted with the input from federal immigration offices, very great people. Among the top immigration experts anywhere in this country, who represent workers, not corporations, very important to us.

I also worked with lawmakers, who’ve led on this issue on behalf of American citizens for many years. And most importantly I’ve met with the people directly impacted by these policies. So important.

Number one, are you ready? Are you ready?

We will build a great wall along the southern border.

And Mexico will pay for the wall.

One hundred percent. They don’t know it yet, but they’re going to pay for it. And they’re great people and great leaders but they’re going to pay for the wall. On day one, we will begin working on intangible, physical, tall, power, beautiful southern border wall.

We will use the best technology, including above and below ground sensors that’s the tunnels. Remember that, above and below.

Above and below ground sensors. Towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall, find and dislocate tunnels and keep out criminal cartels and Mexico you know that, will work with us. I really believe it. Mexico will work with us. I absolutely believe it. And especially after meeting with their wonderful, wonderful president today. I really believe they want to solve this problem along with us, and I’m sure they will.

Number two, we are going to end catch and release. We catch them, oh go ahead. We catch them, go ahead.

Under my administration, anyone who illegally crosses the border will be detained until they are removed out of our country and back to the country from which they came.

And they’ll be brought great distances. We’re not dropping them right across. They learned that. President Eisenhower. They’d drop them across, right across, and they’d come back. And across.

Then when they flew them to a long distance, all of a sudden that was the end. We will take them great distances. But we will take them to the country where they came from, OK?

Number three. Number three, this is the one, I think it’s so great. It’s hard to believe, people don’t even talk about it. Zero tolerance for criminal aliens. Zero. Zero.

Zero. They don’t come in here. They don’t come in here.

According to federal data, there are at least 2 million, 2 million, think of it, criminal aliens now inside of our country, 2 million people criminal aliens. We will begin moving them out day one. As soon as I take office. Day one. In joint operation with local, state, and federal law enforcement.

Now, just so you understand, the police, who we all respect — say hello to the police. Boy, they don’t get the credit they deserve. I can tell you. They’re great people. But the police and law enforcement, they know who these people are.

They live with these people. They get mocked by these people. They can’t do anything about these people, and they want to. They know who these people are. Day one, my first hour in office, those people are gone.

And you can call it deported if you want. The press doesn’t like that term. You can call it whatever the hell you want. They’re gone.

Beyond the 2 million, and there are vast numbers of additional criminal illegal immigrants who have fled, but their days have run out in this country. The crime will stop. They’re going to be gone. It will be over.

They’re going out. They’re going out fast.

Moving forward. We will issue detainers for illegal immigrants who are arrested for any crime whatsoever, and they will be placed into immediate removal proceedings if we even have to do that.

We will terminate the Obama administration’s deadly, and it is deadly, non-enforcement policies that allow thousands of criminal aliens to freely roam our streets, walk around, do whatever they want to do, crime all over the place.

That’s over. That’s over, folks. That’s over.

Since 2013 alone, the Obama administration has allowed 300,000 criminal aliens to return back into United States communities. These are individuals encountered or identified by ICE, but who were not detained or processed for deportation because it wouldn’t have been politically correct.

My plan also includes cooperating closely with local jurisdictions to remove criminal aliens immediately. We will restore the highly successful Secure Communities Program. Good program. We will expand and revitalize the popular 287(g) partnerships, which will help to identify hundreds of thousands of deportable aliens in local jails that we don’t even know about.

Both of these programs have been recklessly gutted by this administration. And those were programs that worked.

This is yet one more area where we are headed in a totally opposite direction. There’s no common sense, there’s no brain power in our administration by our leader, or our leaders. None, none, none.

On my first day in office I am also going to ask Congress to pass Kate’s Law, named for Kate Steinle.

To ensure that criminal aliens convicted of illegal reentry receive strong mandatory minimum sentences. Strong.

And then we get them out.

Another reform I’m proposing is the passage of legislation named for Detective Michael Davis and Deputy Sheriff Danny Oliver, to law enforcement officers recently killed by a previously deported illegal immigrant.

The Davis-Oliver bill will enhance cooperation with state and local authorities to ensure that criminal immigrants and terrorists are swiftly, really swiftly, identified and removed. And they will go face, believe me. They’re going to go.

We’re going to triple the number of ICE deportation officers.

Within ICE I am going to create a new special deportation task force focused on identifying and quickly removing the most dangerous criminal illegal immigrants in America who have evaded justice just like Hillary Clinton has evaded justice, OK?

Maybe they’ll be able to deport her.

The local police who know every one of these criminals, and they know each and every one by name, by crime, where they live, they will work so fast. And our local police will be so happy that they don’t have to be abused by these thugs anymore. There’s no great mystery to it, they’ve put up with it for years, and no finally we will turn the tables and law enforcement and our police will be allowed to clear up this dangerous and threatening mess.

We’re also going to hire 5,000 more Border Patrol agents. Who gave me their endorsement, 16,500 gave me their endorsement.

And put more of them on the border instead of behind desks which is good. We will expand the number of border patrol stations significantly.

I’ve had a chance to spend time with these incredible law enforcement officers, and I want to take a moment to thank them. What they do is incredible.

And getting their endorsement means so much to me. More to me really than I can say. Means so much. First time they’ve ever endorsed a presidential candidate.

Number four, block funding for sanctuary cities. We block the funding. No more funds.

We will end the sanctuary cities that have resulted in so many needless deaths. Cities that refuse to cooperate with federal authorities will not receive taxpayer dollars, and we will work with Congress to pass legislation to protect those jurisdictions that do assist federal authorities.

Number five, cancel unconstitutional executive orders and enforce all immigration laws.

We will immediately terminate President Obama’s two illegal executive amnesties in which he defied federal law and the Constitution to give amnesty to approximately 5 million illegal immigrants, 5 million.

And how about all the millions that are waiting on line, going through the process legally? So unfair.

Hillary Clinton has pledged to keep both of these illegal amnesty programs, including the 2014 amnesty which has been blocked by the United States Supreme Court. Great.

Clinton has also pledged to add a third executive amnesty. And by the way, folks, she will be a disaster for our country, a disaster in so many other ways.

And don’t forget the Supreme Court of the United States. Don’t forget that when you go to vote on November 8. And don’t forget your Second Amendment. And don’t forget the repeal and replacement of Obamacare.

And don’t forget building up our depleted military. And don’t forget taking care of our vets. Don’t forget our vets. They have been forgotten.

Clinton’s plan would trigger a constitutional crisis unlike almost anything we have ever seen before. In effect, she would be abolishing the lawmaking powers of Congress in order to write her own laws from the Oval Office. And you see what bad judgment she has. She has seriously bad judgment.

Can you imagine? In a Trump administration all immigration laws will be enforced, will be enforced. As with any law enforcement activity, we will set priorities. But unlike this administration, no one will be immune or exempt from enforcement. And ICE and Border Patrol officers will be allowed to do their jobs the way their jobs are supposed to be done.

Anyone who has entered the United States illegally is subject to deportation. That is what it means to have laws and to have a country. Otherwise we don’t have a country.

Our enforcement priorities will include removing criminals, gang members, security threats, visa overstays, public charges. That is those relying on public welfare or straining the safety net along with millions of recent illegal arrivals and overstays who’ve come here under this current corrupt administration.

Number six, we are going to suspend the issuance of visas to any place where adequate screening cannot occur.

According to data provided by the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, and the national interest between 9/11 and the end of 2014, at least 380 foreign born individuals were convicted in terror cases inside the United States. And even right now the largest number of people are under investigation for exactly this that we’ve ever had in the history of our country.

Our country is a mess. We don’t even know what to look for anymore, folks. Our country has to straighten out. And we have to straighten out fast.

The number is likely higher. But the administration refuses to provide this information, even to Congress. As soon as I enter office I am going to ask the Department of State, which has been brutalized by Hillary Clinton, brutalized.

Homeland Security and the Department of Justice to begin a comprehensive review of these cases in order to develop a list of regions and countries from which immigration must be suspended until proven and effective vetting mechanisms can be put in place.

I call it extreme vetting right? Extreme vetting. I want extreme. It’s going to be so tough, and if somebody comes in that’s fine but they’re going to be good. It’s extreme.

And if people don’t like it, we’ve got have a country, folks. Got to have a country. Countries in which immigration will be suspended would include places like Syria and Libya. And we are going to stop the tens of thousands of people coming in from Syria. We have no idea who they are, where they come from. There’s no documentation. There’s no paperwork. It’s going to end badly folks. It’s going to end very, very badly.

For the price of resettling one refugee in the United States, 12 could be resettled in a safe zone in their home region. Which I agree with 100 percent. We have to build safe zones and we’ll get the money from Gulf states. We don’t want to put up the money. We owe almost $20 trillion. Doubled since Obama took office, our national debt.

But we will get the money from Gulf states and others. We’ll supervise it. We’ll build safe zones which is something that I think all of us want to see.

Another reform, involves new screening tests for all applicants that include, and this is so important, especially if you get the right people. And we will get the right people. An ideological certification to make sure that those we are admitting to our country share our values and love our people.

Thank you. We’re very proud of our country. Aren’t we? Really? With all it’s going through, we’re very proud of our country. For instance, in the last five years, we’ve admitted nearly 100,000 immigrants from Iraq and Afghanistan. And these two countries according to Pew Research, a majority of residents say that the barbaric practice of honor killings against women are often or sometimes justified. That’s what they say.

That’s what they say. They’re justified. Right? And we’re admitting them to our country. Applicants will be asked their views about honor killings, about respect for women and gays and minorities. Attitudes on radical Islam, which our president refuses to say and many other topics as part of this vetting procedure. And if we have the right people doing it, believe me, very, very few will slip through the cracks. Hopefully, none.

Number seven, we will insure that other countries take their people back when they order them deported.

There are at least 23 countries that refuse to take their people back after they’ve been ordered to leave the United States. Including large numbers of violent criminals, they won’t take them back. So we say, OK, we’ll keep them. Not going to happen with me, not going to happen with me.

Due to a Supreme Court decision, if these violent offenders cannot be sent home, our law enforcement officers have to release them into your communities.

And by the way, the results are horrific, horrific. There are often terrible consequences, such as Casey Chadwick’s tragic death in Connecticut just last year. Yet despite the existence of a law that commands the Secretary of State to stop issuing visas to these countries.

Secretary Hillary Clinton ignored this law and refused to use this powerful tool to bring nations into compliance. And, they would comply if we would act properly.

In other words, if we had leaders that knew what they were doing, which we don’t.

The result of her misconduct was the release of thousands and thousands of dangerous criminal aliens who should have been sent home to their countries. Instead we have them all over the place. Probably a couple in this room as a matter of fact, but I hope not.

According to a report for the Boston Globe from the year 2008 to 2014 nearly 13,000 criminal aliens were released back into U.S. communities because their home countries would not, under any circumstances, take them back. Hard to believe with the power we have. Hard to believe.

We’re like the big bully that keeps getting beat up. You ever see that? The big bully that keeps getting beat up.

These 13,000 release occurred on Hillary Clinton’s watch. She had the power and the duty to stop it cold, and she decided she would not do it.

And, Arizona knows better than most exactly what I’m talking about.

Those released include individuals convicted of killings, sexual assaults, and some of the most heinous crimes imaginable.

The Boston Globe writes that a Globe review of 323 criminals released in New England from 2008 to 2012 found that as many as 30 percent committed new offenses, including rape, attempted murder and child molestation. We take them, we take them.

Number eight, we will finally complete the biometric entry-exit visa tracking system, which we need desperately. For years Congress has required biometric entry-exit visa tracking systems, but it has never been completed. The politicians are all talk, no action, never happens. Never happens.

Hillary Clinton, all talk. Unfortunately when there is action it’s always the wrong decision. You ever notice? In my administration we will ensure that this system is in place. And, I will tell you, it will be on land, it will be on sea, it will be in air. We will have a proper tracking system.

Approximately half of new illegal immigrants came on temporary visas and then never, ever left. Why should they? Nobody’s telling them to leave. Stay as long as you want, we’ll take care of you.

Beyond violating our laws, visa overstays, pose — and they really are a big problem, pose a substantial threat to national security. The 9/11 Commission said that this tracking system would be a high priority and would have assisted law enforcement and intelligence officials in August and September in 2001 in conducting a search for two of the 9/11 hijackers that were in the United States expired visas.

And, you know what that would have meant, what that could have meant. Wouldn’t that have been wonderful, right? What that could have meant?

Last year alone nearly half a million individuals overstayed their temporary visas. Removing these overstays will be a top priority of my administration.

If people around the world believe they can just come on a temporary visa and never, ever leave, the Obama-Clinton policy, that’s what it is, then we have a completely open border, and we no longer have a country.

We must send a message that visa expiration dates will be strongly enforced.

Number nine, we will turn off the jobs and benefits magnet.

We will ensure that E-Verify is used to the fullest extent possible under existing law, and we will work with Congress to strengthen and expand its use across the country.

Immigration law doesn’t exist for the purpose of keeping criminals out. It exists to protect all aspects of American life. The work site, the welfare office, the education system, and everything else.

That is why immigration limits are established in the first place. If we only enforced the laws against crime, then we have an open border to the entire world. We will enforce all of our immigration laws.

And the same goes for government benefits. The Center for Immigration Studies estimates that 62 percent of households headed by illegal immigrants use some form of cash or non-cash welfare programs like food stamps or housing assistance.

Tremendous costs, by the way, to our country. Tremendous costs. This directly violates the federal public charge law designed to protect the United States Treasury. Those who abuse our welfare system will be priorities for immediate removal.

Number 10, we will reform legal immigration to serve the best interests of America and its workers, the forgotten people. Workers. We’re going to take care of our workers.

And by the way, and by the way, we’re going to make great trade deals. We’re going to renegotiate trade deals. We’re going to bring our jobs back home. We’re going to bring our jobs back home.

We have the most incompetently worked trade deals ever negotiated probably in the history of the world, and that starts with NAFTA. And now they want to go TPP, one of the great disasters.

We’re going to bring our jobs back home. And if companies want to leave Arizona and if they want to leave other states, there’s going to be a lot of trouble for them. It’s not going to be so easy. There will be consequence. Remember that. There will be consequence. They’re not going to be leaving, go to another country, make the product, sell it into the United States, and all we end up with is no taxes and total unemployment. It’s not going to happen. There will be consequences.

We’ve admitted 59 million immigrants to the United States between 1965 and 2015. Many of these arrivals have greatly enriched our country. So true. But we now have an obligation to them and to their children to control future immigration as we are following, if you think, previous immigration waves.

We’ve had some big waves. And tremendously positive things have happened. Incredible things have happened. To ensure assimilation we want to ensure that it works. Assimilation, an important word. Integration and upward mobility.

Within just a few years immigration as a share of national population is set to break all historical records. The time has come for a new immigration commission to develop a new set of reforms to our legal immigration system in order to achieve the following goals.

To keep immigration levels measured by population share within historical norms. To select immigrants based on their likelihood of success in U.S. society and their ability to be financially self- sufficient.

We take anybody. Come on in, anybody. Just come on in. Not anymore.

You know, folks, it’s called a two-way street. It is a two-way street, right? We need a system that serves our needs, not the needs of others. Remember, under a Trump administration it’s called America first. Remember that.

 
Hide 87 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. One brilliant aspect of Mr. Trump’s Phoenix speech: he twice stated the reality that this election is our last chance to save our country, and in his further words, to “Take back our country.”

    BINGO!

    In Mexico and in Phoenix, Mr. Trump treated us to a feast of Noticing.

    • Agree: NickG
    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    It is the last chance to save the nation-state under its current Constitution, but not the last chance overall. We need to focus upon achieving self-determination, and a society where Cultural Marxism is repressed. A Trump victory represents just the start of the reaction.
  2. It will be very hard to argue with this.

    I am actually looking forward to discussing this with a few Clinton supporters.

    Hopefully, I am not the only one who feels this way.

  3. It was the best speech I’ve seen him give.

    It was non stop Trump coverage all day on CNN. Their minds are completely blown. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a presidential candidate meet with a head of state and hold a press conference with him afterward. Genius move.

    The past year has been pretty surreal, seeing things I’ve been reading about on blogs like this suddenly in the mainstream. I kinda thought America would go down without a fight. It’s nice to see I was wrong.

    Steve you asked in a post in the first half of last year what we thought about certain words concerning immigration that were being focus grouped. I thought then that maybe something big was on the horizon.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    I think the focus group post you referenced may have been this. Interesting.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/i-believe-in-this-and-its-been-tested-by-research/
    , @The Alarmist

    "It was non stop Trump coverage all day on CNN. Their minds are completely blown. "
     
    They kept the cameras on Trump all day probably bexause they secretly hoped some crazed beaner would take him out.
    , @Kevin O'Keeffe

    It was the best speech I’ve seen him give.
     
    Having seen most of it Fox News, I'll go along with that assessment. Its the best day he's had, since he was bashing Jeb! in the debates.
  4. 73% of immigrants from Central America and Mexico are on welfare.

    http://cis.org/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Native-Households

  5. @Auntie Analogue
    One brilliant aspect of Mr. Trump's Phoenix speech: he twice stated the reality that this election is our last chance to save our country, and in his further words, to "Take back our country."

    BINGO!

    In Mexico and in Phoenix, Mr. Trump treated us to a feast of Noticing.

    It is the last chance to save the nation-state under its current Constitution, but not the last chance overall. We need to focus upon achieving self-determination, and a society where Cultural Marxism is repressed. A Trump victory represents just the start of the reaction.

    • Agree: BenKenobi
    • Replies: @Wilbur Hassenfus
    The last chance went by decades ago. Now we've got penumbras and emanations and the silly putty Commerce Clause. Rule by arbitrary decree.
  6. Mr Sailer, when Trump gets elected please do not follow Farage’s lead and give up what you are doing now.

  7. A Facebook comment I keep seeing on the NYT’s report of Trump’s speech (in variations) : “Well obviously the immigration system doesn’t exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!”

    I’m not even particularly pro-Trump, but this is so maddeningly stupid it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    “Well obviously the immigration system doesn’t exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!”

    Yeah, that was the logical mistake the wily old professor lured me into in Corporate Finance 201 back in MBA school:

    Let me describe citizenism using a business analogy. When I was getting an MBA many years ago, I was the favorite of an acerbic old Corporate Finance professor because I could be counted on to blurt out in class all the stupid misconceptions to which students are prone.

    One day he asked: “If you were running a publicly traded company, would it be acceptable for you to create new stock and sell it for less than it was worth?”

    “Sure,” I confidently announced. “Our duty is to maximize our stockholders` wealth, and while selling the stock for less than its worth would harm our current shareholders, it would benefit our new shareholders who buy the underpriced stock, so it all comes out in the wash. Right?”

    “Wrong!” He thundered. “Your obligation is to your current stockholders, not to somebody who might buy the stock in the future.”

    That same logic applies to the valuable right of being an American citizen and living in America.

    Just as the managers of a public company have a fiduciary duty to the current stockholders not to diminish the value of their shares by selling new ones too cheaply to outsiders, our leaders have a duty to the current citizens and their descendants.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/sailer-vs-taylor-round-ii-citizenism-vs-white-nationalism

    , @dearieme
    "it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius": a doff of the hat, Sir.
    , @Pericles
    “Well obviously the immigration system doesn’t exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!”

    Not for the Americans, but for the interests of the illegals (future Americans).
  8. @Patrick Harris
    A Facebook comment I keep seeing on the NYT's report of Trump's speech (in variations) : "Well obviously the immigration system doesn't exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!"

    I'm not even particularly pro-Trump, but this is so maddeningly stupid it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius.

    “Well obviously the immigration system doesn’t exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!”

    Yeah, that was the logical mistake the wily old professor lured me into in Corporate Finance 201 back in MBA school:

    Let me describe citizenism using a business analogy. When I was getting an MBA many years ago, I was the favorite of an acerbic old Corporate Finance professor because I could be counted on to blurt out in class all the stupid misconceptions to which students are prone.

    One day he asked: “If you were running a publicly traded company, would it be acceptable for you to create new stock and sell it for less than it was worth?”

    “Sure,” I confidently announced. “Our duty is to maximize our stockholders` wealth, and while selling the stock for less than its worth would harm our current shareholders, it would benefit our new shareholders who buy the underpriced stock, so it all comes out in the wash. Right?”

    “Wrong!” He thundered. “Your obligation is to your current stockholders, not to somebody who might buy the stock in the future.”

    That same logic applies to the valuable right of being an American citizen and living in America.

    Just as the managers of a public company have a fiduciary duty to the current stockholders not to diminish the value of their shares by selling new ones too cheaply to outsiders, our leaders have a duty to the current citizens and their descendants.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/sailer-vs-taylor-round-ii-citizenism-vs-white-nationalism

    • Replies: @Anonym
    How did you of all people get that wrong? Pretty sure you were an immigration skeptic from before then, no?

    Selling equity unecessarily is bad but worse when the company is in the growth phase. Growth that can happen organically will turn $1 to $10, funded from your own company's returns before the growth plateaus. Give away enough of the equity and your $1 will only turn to $5 or $3. The bigger the company the harder it is to sustain growth. Inevitably.

    The immigration analogy is being able to sustain a 5 child family in the 1940s vs a 2 child family in 2010s in a dog eat dog world. Why turn your country into India or China before time?
  9. @no name
    It was the best speech I've seen him give.

    It was non stop Trump coverage all day on CNN. Their minds are completely blown. I don't think I've ever seen a presidential candidate meet with a head of state and hold a press conference with him afterward. Genius move.

    The past year has been pretty surreal, seeing things I've been reading about on blogs like this suddenly in the mainstream. I kinda thought America would go down without a fight. It's nice to see I was wrong.

    Steve you asked in a post in the first half of last year what we thought about certain words concerning immigration that were being focus grouped. I thought then that maybe something big was on the horizon.

    I think the focus group post you referenced may have been this. Interesting.

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/i-believe-in-this-and-its-been-tested-by-research/

  10. I loved the speech. It was the first Trump speech that both the fire and spontaneity of the stadium stump speeches and the focus and brilliance of the policy speeches. This was one for the ages. Taken together with the triumphant diplomatic trip to Mexico, this is the most astounding political coup I can remember. The lead up with the “to be determined” waffling was brilliant as well. The idiot press took the bait hook line and sinker, and now are stuck with having given huge exposure to this particular speech. I’m really looking forwards to watching them squirm. Ending it with the families of the victims was absolutely the right move.

    • Agree: Old fogey
  11. The only way this could be better is if he was 50 rather than 70.

    • Replies: @DCThrowback
    Don't worry, Kris Kobach is taking good notes.
    , @Harry Baldwin
    When he was 50 he wasn't yet prepared to handle the hatestorm that he knew would ensue. That also explains his aborted starts at running for president in the past. Eventually you reach the age of not giving a shit.
  12. Trump to Mexico has connotations of Nixon to China.
    You know he won’t sell the pass and it makes him look Presidential.

  13. @Patrick Harris
    A Facebook comment I keep seeing on the NYT's report of Trump's speech (in variations) : "Well obviously the immigration system doesn't exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!"

    I'm not even particularly pro-Trump, but this is so maddeningly stupid it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius.

    “it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius”: a doff of the hat, Sir.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can't tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn't tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there's a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    , @Anonymous
    Hey, not every Prius driver is a pinko. Some of us just like the idea of giving a small amount to the Japanese so as to not have to give a large amount to the Arabs. And are tightass bastards.
  14. Brilliant. Hillary can’t make that sort of trip because she’d fall down the aircraft steps, or fall asleep in public, or have a seizure, so Trump makes the visit and comes across as vigorous.

  15. @Steve Sailer
    “Well obviously the immigration system doesn’t exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!”

    Yeah, that was the logical mistake the wily old professor lured me into in Corporate Finance 201 back in MBA school:

    Let me describe citizenism using a business analogy. When I was getting an MBA many years ago, I was the favorite of an acerbic old Corporate Finance professor because I could be counted on to blurt out in class all the stupid misconceptions to which students are prone.

    One day he asked: “If you were running a publicly traded company, would it be acceptable for you to create new stock and sell it for less than it was worth?”

    “Sure,” I confidently announced. “Our duty is to maximize our stockholders` wealth, and while selling the stock for less than its worth would harm our current shareholders, it would benefit our new shareholders who buy the underpriced stock, so it all comes out in the wash. Right?”

    “Wrong!” He thundered. “Your obligation is to your current stockholders, not to somebody who might buy the stock in the future.”

    That same logic applies to the valuable right of being an American citizen and living in America.

    Just as the managers of a public company have a fiduciary duty to the current stockholders not to diminish the value of their shares by selling new ones too cheaply to outsiders, our leaders have a duty to the current citizens and their descendants.

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/sailer-vs-taylor-round-ii-citizenism-vs-white-nationalism

    How did you of all people get that wrong? Pretty sure you were an immigration skeptic from before then, no?

    Selling equity unecessarily is bad but worse when the company is in the growth phase. Growth that can happen organically will turn $1 to $10, funded from your own company’s returns before the growth plateaus. Give away enough of the equity and your $1 will only turn to $5 or $3. The bigger the company the harder it is to sustain growth. Inevitably.

    The immigration analogy is being able to sustain a 5 child family in the 1940s vs a 2 child family in 2010s in a dog eat dog world. Why turn your country into India or China before time?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    "How did you of all people get that wrong?"

    I've gotten a lot of things wrong, especially when I was 22. But I do remember some of my mistakes, which seems to make me the One-Eyed Man in the Kingdom of the Blind.

  16. @dearieme
    "it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius": a doff of the hat, Sir.

    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can’t tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn’t tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there’s a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    I don't like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom.
    , @PiltdownMan

    Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac...Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius...
     
    The Honda Insight is the Cadillac of hybrids in Los Angeles. Chili Palmer says so.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=SG&hl=en-GB&v=naVBpaR5U5Q

    , @Desiderius

    When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.
     
    Got any data on that from the 21st Century?

    The history books I've seen recently have elbowed aside those names to make even more room for Lefty favorites.
    , @Chrisnonymous
    When I drove through California and the Southwest last autumn, I rented a Cadillac SUV. Now THAT was a nice drive.
    , @Crawfurdmuir
    I don't understand why the name "Prius" was chosen for the car. It's a Latin adverb that means "before" or "formerly," and what it that supposed to signify with respect to an automobile?

    Furthermore it reminds one of the legal term nisi prius, referring in the U.S. to a court where civil actions are tried before a single judge without a jury, and to prions, the infectious agents causative of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, kuru, scrapie, and "mad cow disease." These do not impress me as favorable associations.
  17. @Anonym
    How did you of all people get that wrong? Pretty sure you were an immigration skeptic from before then, no?

    Selling equity unecessarily is bad but worse when the company is in the growth phase. Growth that can happen organically will turn $1 to $10, funded from your own company's returns before the growth plateaus. Give away enough of the equity and your $1 will only turn to $5 or $3. The bigger the company the harder it is to sustain growth. Inevitably.

    The immigration analogy is being able to sustain a 5 child family in the 1940s vs a 2 child family in 2010s in a dog eat dog world. Why turn your country into India or China before time?

    “How did you of all people get that wrong?”

    I’ve gotten a lot of things wrong, especially when I was 22. But I do remember some of my mistakes, which seems to make me the One-Eyed Man in the Kingdom of the Blind.

    • Replies: @Anonym
    True.

    I think it helps to have the sort of avaristic and competitive personality to get the idea of when to sell equity or not. Most people who deal with such things don't put that much thought into it from what I can see. Someone else's money.
    , @Wells
    In the land of the blind the One-Eyed man is k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶ a misfit.
  18. @Steve Sailer
    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can't tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn't tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there's a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    I don’t like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom.

    • Replies: @SFG
    It's become known as a feminine car, which would then make sense given that women are smaller. Market segmentation--you don't have enough guys buying the car to complain about the legroom.
    , @Mr. Anon
    "I don’t like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom."

    The one time I drove one (a rental), I found the visibility to be poor too. Looking in the rearview mirror, it was hard to tell just what I was looking at.
    , @Pericles
    Built for tiny asians, hollywood actors, etc.
  19. One thing to keep in mind is that this is Peña Nieto. He isn’t really well thought of in Mexico, a bit like Dubya. There’s this hilarious video in several musical variations, but the speech (it’s in English) with the subtitles has it’s own appeal.

    • Replies: @Thirdtwin
    "One thing to keep in mind is that this is Peña Nieto."

    Yes, it seems like just yesterday we were goofing on this...


    http://tinyurl.com/z9um6uo
  20. @dearieme
    I don't like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom.

    It’s become known as a feminine car, which would then make sense given that women are smaller. Market segmentation–you don’t have enough guys buying the car to complain about the legroom.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    The Prius in 2004 revived the late 1970s Econobox shape on a somewhat larger scale and with much higher quality manufacturing. That's become a pretty popular shape over the last dozen years because it makes sense. A lot of vehicles now look like small minivans.
  21. @SFG
    It's become known as a feminine car, which would then make sense given that women are smaller. Market segmentation--you don't have enough guys buying the car to complain about the legroom.

    The Prius in 2004 revived the late 1970s Econobox shape on a somewhat larger scale and with much higher quality manufacturing. That’s become a pretty popular shape over the last dozen years because it makes sense. A lot of vehicles now look like small minivans.

  22. @Steve Sailer
    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can't tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn't tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there's a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac…Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius…

    The Honda Insight is the Cadillac of hybrids in Los Angeles. Chili Palmer says so.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=SG&hl=en-GB&v=naVBpaR5U5Q

  23. @no name
    It was the best speech I've seen him give.

    It was non stop Trump coverage all day on CNN. Their minds are completely blown. I don't think I've ever seen a presidential candidate meet with a head of state and hold a press conference with him afterward. Genius move.

    The past year has been pretty surreal, seeing things I've been reading about on blogs like this suddenly in the mainstream. I kinda thought America would go down without a fight. It's nice to see I was wrong.

    Steve you asked in a post in the first half of last year what we thought about certain words concerning immigration that were being focus grouped. I thought then that maybe something big was on the horizon.

    “It was non stop Trump coverage all day on CNN. Their minds are completely blown. “

    They kept the cameras on Trump all day probably bexause they secretly hoped some crazed beaner would take him out.

  24. @Steve Sailer
    "How did you of all people get that wrong?"

    I've gotten a lot of things wrong, especially when I was 22. But I do remember some of my mistakes, which seems to make me the One-Eyed Man in the Kingdom of the Blind.

    True.

    I think it helps to have the sort of avaristic and competitive personality to get the idea of when to sell equity or not. Most people who deal with such things don’t put that much thought into it from what I can see. Someone else’s money.

  25. @dearieme
    "it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius": a doff of the hat, Sir.

    Hey, not every Prius driver is a pinko. Some of us just like the idea of giving a small amount to the Japanese so as to not have to give a large amount to the Arabs. And are tightass bastards.

    • Replies: @candid_observer
    I'm sure that there's no car that even approaches the Prius in the sheer quantity of virtue signalling bumper stickers. Really, they shouldn't be allowed to put bumper stickers on their car for reasons of redundancy: yeah, you're driving a Prius, of course you've voted for Obama and are going to vote for Hillary--we get it already, please now remove yourself from my face.

    The only exceptions should be those who, like you, own a Prius for different reasons. Bumper stickers can then be used like asterisks to note the anomaly.
    , @The Last Real Calvinist

    Hey, not every Prius driver is a pinko. Some of us just like the idea of giving a small amount to the Japanese so as to not have to give a large amount to the Arabs.

     

    Bingo. When we Calvinists visited the ancestral village in Iowa this past summer, we met up with a guy I've knows since I was a kid. He's a hardcore conservative, but owns two Priuses. I laughed when he mentioned that, but he said they're so economical it make sense for him.
  26. @anon
    The only way this could be better is if he was 50 rather than 70.

    Don’t worry, Kris Kobach is taking good notes.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    And Sheriff Clarke. And General Flynn. The Nationalist bench will gain depth rapidly as success encourages more prospects to try out for the team.

    Think about this one, if you're willing to risk dislocating your jaw from grinning too hard: Pray that Hillary's health improves so that she can last long enough to watch Ivanka Trump sworn in as the first female President!
  27. the Establishment’s theory

    Do you really think it’s a theory and not just the usual casual slander?

  28. @Maj. Kong
    It is the last chance to save the nation-state under its current Constitution, but not the last chance overall. We need to focus upon achieving self-determination, and a society where Cultural Marxism is repressed. A Trump victory represents just the start of the reaction.

    The last chance went by decades ago. Now we’ve got penumbras and emanations and the silly putty Commerce Clause. Rule by arbitrary decree.

    • Replies: @Maj. Kong
    I would not be the type to confuse New Deal liberalism with CultMarx's legal wing, known as "critical law theory". The courts are intended to be the weakest of the three branches, with the legislature being the strongest. While the courts, for instance, have upheld affirmative action, a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress would end it outside of private institutions. (And if we want to be really nasty, we could force leftist institutions to adopt a Hillsdale-like policy of no federal money)
  29. @Steve Sailer
    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can't tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn't tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there's a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.

    Got any data on that from the 21st Century?

    The history books I’ve seen recently have elbowed aside those names to make even more room for Lefty favorites.

  30. I don’t like the Prius. People are always throwing bricks at them.

    • LOL: dearieme
  31. The speech wouldn’t have gotten a pass in an old-fashioned college rhetoric class but it was nonetheless brilliant and is likely to be wildly successful. Any decent American reading that speech is bound to be swayed by it; to ask why didn’t I know these things, why have other politicians refused to address them with policies similar to those suggested by Mr. Trump, how can I vote for anyone who doesn’t support similar policies? And the particular beauty of this speech is that the MSM cannot ignore it, they cannot rationally attack it, and their irrational attacks are likely to bring more voters into the Trump fold.

    While BO was playing golf and the Hildabeast was coping with whatever ails her over another of her four-day weekends, Trump had a productive meeting with a very important and too often neglected head of state and followed that with a major policy speech addressing the issues covered in that meeting. Of the three Trump is clearly the most presidential.

    • Replies: @Old fogey
    Well said, "Sayin."
  32. @Steve Sailer
    "How did you of all people get that wrong?"

    I've gotten a lot of things wrong, especially when I was 22. But I do remember some of my mistakes, which seems to make me the One-Eyed Man in the Kingdom of the Blind.

    In the land of the blind the One-Eyed man is k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶ a misfit.

    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Wrong! In the Land of the Blind, the one-eyed man is Cyclops Boo-Yah, Dark Lord of Startle Pranks.
  33. One thing to keep in mind is that this is Peña Nieto. He isn’t really well thought of in Mexico, a bit like Dubya.

    Keept it in mind for the day that stuff like this registers at all in American politics? Well, it’ll probably get a ping or two from our media now, because Trumpitler, but you know what I mean.

  34. @dearieme
    I don't like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom.

    “I don’t like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom.”

    The one time I drove one (a rental), I found the visibility to be poor too. Looking in the rearview mirror, it was hard to tell just what I was looking at.

    • Replies: @NickG
    A BMW 320 diesel returns similar if not better economy and is a far better car in every way. 0-62 mph in 7.5 seconds. Fuel economy is better than 4.6 litres per 100 km (50 miles per US gallon) or about 60 miles per US gallon for the Efficient Dynamics model - which is a bit slower.
  35. “We’ve admitted 59 million immigrants to the United States between 1965 and 2015.”

    He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional."

    In case you missed it, Trump agrees in assimilation. That is, integration and upward mobility. Positive things have happened. For ALL legal immigrants, white and non-white.

    No Muslim ban. No mass repatriations of n0n-white American citizens. No restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance.

    [Heads just exploded by white nationalist Alt-Righters].
  36. That speech was everything an immigration restrictionist could have ever dreamed of! I had multiple Trumpgasms and later bathed the Aftertrump.

    • Replies: @iSteveFan
    I liked it so much I headed over to donaldjtrump.com to make a donation.
  37. @StAugustine
    One thing to keep in mind is that this is Peña Nieto. He isn't really well thought of in Mexico, a bit like Dubya. There's this hilarious video in several musical variations, but the speech (it's in English) with the subtitles has it's own appeal.

    “One thing to keep in mind is that this is Peña Nieto.”

    Yes, it seems like just yesterday we were goofing on this…

    http://tinyurl.com/z9um6uo

  38. @Steve Sailer
    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can't tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn't tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there's a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    When I drove through California and the Southwest last autumn, I rented a Cadillac SUV. Now THAT was a nice drive.

  39. And they’ll be brought great distances. We’re not dropping them right across. They learned that. President Eisenhower. They’d drop them across, right across, and they’d come back. And across.

    Then when they flew them to a long distance, all of a sudden that was the end. We will take them great distances. But we will take them to the country where they came from, OK?

    I loved it when he mentioned this. It immediately reminded me of this passage from a Christian Science Monitor story about Operation Wetback.

    Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

    Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

    The sea voyage was “a rough trip, and they did not like it,” says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.

    • Replies: @BenKenobi
    Trump name-dropping Eisenhower like that was amazing.

    How many people are learning about Operation Wetback today as a result? Trump killed it yesterday.
  40. @no name
    It was the best speech I've seen him give.

    It was non stop Trump coverage all day on CNN. Their minds are completely blown. I don't think I've ever seen a presidential candidate meet with a head of state and hold a press conference with him afterward. Genius move.

    The past year has been pretty surreal, seeing things I've been reading about on blogs like this suddenly in the mainstream. I kinda thought America would go down without a fight. It's nice to see I was wrong.

    Steve you asked in a post in the first half of last year what we thought about certain words concerning immigration that were being focus grouped. I thought then that maybe something big was on the horizon.

    It was the best speech I’ve seen him give.

    Having seen most of it Fox News, I’ll go along with that assessment. Its the best day he’s had, since he was bashing Jeb! in the debates.

  41. @iSteveFan

    And they’ll be brought great distances. We’re not dropping them right across. They learned that. President Eisenhower. They’d drop them across, right across, and they’d come back. And across.

    Then when they flew them to a long distance, all of a sudden that was the end. We will take them great distances. But we will take them to the country where they came from, OK?
     

    I loved it when he mentioned this. It immediately reminded me of this passage from a Christian Science Monitor story about Operation Wetback.

    Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

    Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

    The sea voyage was "a rough trip, and they did not like it," says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.
     

    Trump name-dropping Eisenhower like that was amazing.

    How many people are learning about Operation Wetback today as a result? Trump killed it yesterday.

  42. @Anonymous
    Hey, not every Prius driver is a pinko. Some of us just like the idea of giving a small amount to the Japanese so as to not have to give a large amount to the Arabs. And are tightass bastards.

    I’m sure that there’s no car that even approaches the Prius in the sheer quantity of virtue signalling bumper stickers. Really, they shouldn’t be allowed to put bumper stickers on their car for reasons of redundancy: yeah, you’re driving a Prius, of course you’ve voted for Obama and are going to vote for Hillary–we get it already, please now remove yourself from my face.

    The only exceptions should be those who, like you, own a Prius for different reasons. Bumper stickers can then be used like asterisks to note the anomaly.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    Ok, boys (some girls, here) first one to spot a Prius with a Trump bumper sticker wins an all-expenses-paid trip to________? Courtesy of _______?
    Anyone remember Mad-Libs? I did spot a "Hillary for Prison 2016" lawn sign by a wild and crazy guy in town.
  43. @Patrick Harris
    A Facebook comment I keep seeing on the NYT's report of Trump's speech (in variations) : "Well obviously the immigration system doesn't exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!"

    I'm not even particularly pro-Trump, but this is so maddeningly stupid it makes me want to throw bricks at the nearest Prius.

    “Well obviously the immigration system doesn’t exist for the interests of Americans, it exists for future Americans!”

    Not for the Americans, but for the interests of the illegals (future Americans).

  44. One thing that really does impress me is Trump’s energy level — and at age 70 no less.

    He flies to Mexico, meets with the President of Mexico, gives a press conference, flies to Arizona, and gives the speech of his life.

    I’ll have what he’s having.

    All the while, Hillary is somewhere falling down and coughing, then catching 40 thousand winks because of all the exertion.

    • Replies: @Lurker

    I’ll have what he’s having.
     
    Melania?
  45. @dearieme
    I don't like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom.

    Built for tiny asians, hollywood actors, etc.

  46. @Mr. Anon
    "I don’t like the Prius. Hopeless lack of headroom and legroom."

    The one time I drove one (a rental), I found the visibility to be poor too. Looking in the rearview mirror, it was hard to tell just what I was looking at.

    A BMW 320 diesel returns similar if not better economy and is a far better car in every way. 0-62 mph in 7.5 seconds. Fuel economy is better than 4.6 litres per 100 km (50 miles per US gallon) or about 60 miles per US gallon for the Efficient Dynamics model – which is a bit slower.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    I was in a big BMW in June: absurdly difficult to clamber in and out.
    , @Former Darfur
    Although I have owned several diesel vehicles amd loved them, I wouldn't buy a diesel car or light truck made after the early to mid 2000s. The nonsensical emissions requirements have made the add-on equipment too invasive and hard to maintain and expensive.

    CNG or propane make much more sense now.
  47. @Jus' Sayin'...
    The speech wouldn't have gotten a pass in an old-fashioned college rhetoric class but it was nonetheless brilliant and is likely to be wildly successful. Any decent American reading that speech is bound to be swayed by it; to ask why didn't I know these things, why have other politicians refused to address them with policies similar to those suggested by Mr. Trump, how can I vote for anyone who doesn't support similar policies? And the particular beauty of this speech is that the MSM cannot ignore it, they cannot rationally attack it, and their irrational attacks are likely to bring more voters into the Trump fold.

    While BO was playing golf and the Hildabeast was coping with whatever ails her over another of her four-day weekends, Trump had a productive meeting with a very important and too often neglected head of state and followed that with a major policy speech addressing the issues covered in that meeting. Of the three Trump is clearly the most presidential.

    Well said, “Sayin.”

  48. @candid_observer
    I'm sure that there's no car that even approaches the Prius in the sheer quantity of virtue signalling bumper stickers. Really, they shouldn't be allowed to put bumper stickers on their car for reasons of redundancy: yeah, you're driving a Prius, of course you've voted for Obama and are going to vote for Hillary--we get it already, please now remove yourself from my face.

    The only exceptions should be those who, like you, own a Prius for different reasons. Bumper stickers can then be used like asterisks to note the anomaly.

    Ok, boys (some girls, here) first one to spot a Prius with a Trump bumper sticker wins an all-expenses-paid trip to________? Courtesy of _______?
    Anyone remember Mad-Libs? I did spot a “Hillary for Prison 2016″ lawn sign by a wild and crazy guy in town.

  49. @Mr. Anon
    "We’ve admitted 59 million immigrants to the United States between 1965 and 2015."

    He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional.

    “He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional.”

    In case you missed it, Trump agrees in assimilation. That is, integration and upward mobility. Positive things have happened. For ALL legal immigrants, white and non-white.

    No Muslim ban. No mass repatriations of n0n-white American citizens. No restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance.

    [Heads just exploded by white nationalist Alt-Righters].

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous

    No Muslim ban.

     

    I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don't love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me.
    , @Mr. Anon
    You must have me confused with someone who remotely gives a f**k what you think.
    , @Kudzu Bob
    You missed the part of Trump's speech that mentioned keeping "immigration measured by population share within historical norms," although the Huffington Post did not, calling it a White Nationalist proposal.
    , @Brutusale
    I would imagine some of Trump's comments have the same shelf life as "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor!".
  50. «And especially after meeting with their wonderful, wonderful president today.»
    Heh. The kiss of death. The president of Mexico is done for.

  51. @DCThrowback
    Don't worry, Kris Kobach is taking good notes.

    And Sheriff Clarke. And General Flynn. The Nationalist bench will gain depth rapidly as success encourages more prospects to try out for the team.

    Think about this one, if you’re willing to risk dislocating your jaw from grinning too hard: Pray that Hillary’s health improves so that she can last long enough to watch Ivanka Trump sworn in as the first female President!

  52. @Mike Street Station
    That speech was everything an immigration restrictionist could have ever dreamed of! I had multiple Trumpgasms and later bathed the Aftertrump.

    I liked it so much I headed over to donaldjtrump.com to make a donation.

  53. @Corvinus
    "He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional."

    In case you missed it, Trump agrees in assimilation. That is, integration and upward mobility. Positive things have happened. For ALL legal immigrants, white and non-white.

    No Muslim ban. No mass repatriations of n0n-white American citizens. No restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance.

    [Heads just exploded by white nationalist Alt-Righters].

    No Muslim ban.

    I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don’t love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don’t love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me."

    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.
  54. @NickG
    A BMW 320 diesel returns similar if not better economy and is a far better car in every way. 0-62 mph in 7.5 seconds. Fuel economy is better than 4.6 litres per 100 km (50 miles per US gallon) or about 60 miles per US gallon for the Efficient Dynamics model - which is a bit slower.

    I was in a big BMW in June: absurdly difficult to clamber in and out.

  55. @Chrisnonymous

    No Muslim ban.

     

    I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don't love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me.

    “I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don’t love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me.”

    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.

    • Replies: @Jack Hanson
    Yesterday was a rough day, huh buddy?
    , @whorefinder
    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.

    What are the five stages of grief?

    Looks like our little soft-headed troll is onto bargaining. I wouldn't call it denial, since he's stopped denying that Trump will become president and that Trump will implement tougher immigration policies. So I deduce that instead he's bargaining with Trump's posture---"Ok, you'll build a wall and deport some criminal immigrants, but you won't, you know, ban my explosive comrades in anti-Western brotherhood!"

    Bargaining. Should be interesting how long he stays at this stage until he gets to acceptance.

  56. @Corvinus
    "I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don’t love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me."

    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.

    Yesterday was a rough day, huh buddy?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Not in the slightest. Hillary and Trump are both bad news. I'm voting libertarian.

    Anyways, I would be more concerned about yourself. Prominent members of the Alt Right find fault with those "current Americans" who trace their ancestry to the Irish, the Germans, the Italians, and the Slavs. Why? Well, since their relatives were "allowed" to enter America, their undesirable traits have eroded and diluted the customs and traditions created by the original founders of the United States, the English. It is not an issue of being white, but being non-English.

    To quote, "The American civic heritage does not "transcend ethnicity", as I [Vox Day], or any other American Indian, can tell you. And it is restricted by geographic extent. The Chinese, the Portuguese, the Swedes, and the British are not Americans...[Moreover], there is nothing exceptional about America except its superior founding stock and its geographic advantages, both of which are now significantly reduced."

    Reduced by whom? Undesirable white and non-white immigrants, past and present. Just because you claim to be a white American, well, sorry to inform you...you are white, but not an American.
  57. @Steve Sailer
    I like the Prius. Granted, this is regional, but in Los Angeles they are kind of like the Model T was in 1912. The Prius is the best in its class of car while not being terribly expensive. So a Prius owner could be as rich as Larry David or Jake Gyllenhaal or could be not very rich at all. You can't tell from what kind of car the Prius owner drives, just as you couldn't tell how rich Model T buyers were from what car they bought. Henry Ford liked it that way. Then Alfred Sloan came along at GM and devised a five brand hierarchy from Chevrolet to Cadillac that showed off just how rich the buyers of GM cars were. Granted, that was a brilliant marketing move by GM. But there's a reason that Alfred Sloan is a niche icon to MBA marketing majors, while the average American still thinks of Henry Ford as a great American. (When they ask high school seniors these days to list famous American men who were never President, Henry Ford ranks up with there with Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Mark Twain, and Martin Luther King, which is actually pretty cool.)

    Tesla has come along and and done a GM on the Prius, allowing rich guys to show off how rich they are by how expensive of a car they can buy.

    I don’t understand why the name “Prius” was chosen for the car. It’s a Latin adverb that means “before” or “formerly,” and what it that supposed to signify with respect to an automobile?

    Furthermore it reminds one of the legal term nisi prius, referring in the U.S. to a court where civil actions are tried before a single judge without a jury, and to prions, the infectious agents causative of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, kuru, scrapie, and “mad cow disease.” These do not impress me as favorable associations.

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    They aren't too good at Engrish. Fairlady, Donkey Kong , etc, etc.

    When I was in the hi-fi thing we had to endure endless requests for "Restrum Erectric", that was funny, too.
  58. @Corvinus
    "I guess you missed the part where he said some people who don’t love us are incompatible and we have the sovereign right to refuse them. Sounds like a Muslim ban to me."

    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.

    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.

    What are the five stages of grief?

    Looks like our little soft-headed troll is onto bargaining. I wouldn’t call it denial, since he’s stopped denying that Trump will become president and that Trump will implement tougher immigration policies. So I deduce that instead he’s bargaining with Trump’s posture—”Ok, you’ll build a wall and deport some criminal immigrants, but you won’t, you know, ban my explosive comrades in anti-Western brotherhood!”

    Bargaining. Should be interesting how long he stays at this stage until he gets to acceptance.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "I wouldn’t call it denial, since he’s stopped denying that Trump will become president and that Trump will implement tougher immigration policies."

    Trump may become President, or he may not become President. Those who say "he will" or "he won't", well, that is their opinion.

    "bargaining with Trump’s posture—”Ok, you’ll build a wall and deport some criminal immigrants, but you won’t, you know, ban my explosive comrades in anti-Western brotherhood!”

    It's denial on your part because you really clung your hopes that he would call for an outright ban in his agenda. He may revert to it if he becomes president, or he may not. We shall see.
  59. @candid_observer
    One thing that really does impress me is Trump's energy level -- and at age 70 no less.

    He flies to Mexico, meets with the President of Mexico, gives a press conference, flies to Arizona, and gives the speech of his life.

    I'll have what he's having.

    All the while, Hillary is somewhere falling down and coughing, then catching 40 thousand winks because of all the exertion.

    I’ll have what he’s having.

    Melania?

  60. Now we know why he didn’t use his regular plane to fly to Mexico – this one has special engines that run on SJW tears.

  61. @Jack Hanson
    Yesterday was a rough day, huh buddy?

    Not in the slightest. Hillary and Trump are both bad news. I’m voting libertarian.

    Anyways, I would be more concerned about yourself. Prominent members of the Alt Right find fault with those “current Americans” who trace their ancestry to the Irish, the Germans, the Italians, and the Slavs. Why? Well, since their relatives were “allowed” to enter America, their undesirable traits have eroded and diluted the customs and traditions created by the original founders of the United States, the English. It is not an issue of being white, but being non-English.

    To quote, “The American civic heritage does not “transcend ethnicity”, as I [Vox Day], or any other American Indian, can tell you. And it is restricted by geographic extent. The Chinese, the Portuguese, the Swedes, and the British are not Americans…[Moreover], there is nothing exceptional about America except its superior founding stock and its geographic advantages, both of which are now significantly reduced.”

    Reduced by whom? Undesirable white and non-white immigrants, past and present. Just because you claim to be a white American, well, sorry to inform you…you are white, but not an American.

  62. @whorefinder
    Unless Trump actually states he is going to outright prohibit Muslim immigrants from entering, or is going to deport Muslim-American citizens, there is no ban.

    What are the five stages of grief?

    Looks like our little soft-headed troll is onto bargaining. I wouldn't call it denial, since he's stopped denying that Trump will become president and that Trump will implement tougher immigration policies. So I deduce that instead he's bargaining with Trump's posture---"Ok, you'll build a wall and deport some criminal immigrants, but you won't, you know, ban my explosive comrades in anti-Western brotherhood!"

    Bargaining. Should be interesting how long he stays at this stage until he gets to acceptance.

    “I wouldn’t call it denial, since he’s stopped denying that Trump will become president and that Trump will implement tougher immigration policies.”

    Trump may become President, or he may not become President. Those who say “he will” or “he won’t”, well, that is their opinion.

    “bargaining with Trump’s posture—”Ok, you’ll build a wall and deport some criminal immigrants, but you won’t, you know, ban my explosive comrades in anti-Western brotherhood!”

    It’s denial on your part because you really clung your hopes that he would call for an outright ban in his agenda. He may revert to it if he becomes president, or he may not. We shall see.

  63. @anon
    The only way this could be better is if he was 50 rather than 70.

    When he was 50 he wasn’t yet prepared to handle the hatestorm that he knew would ensue. That also explains his aborted starts at running for president in the past. Eventually you reach the age of not giving a shit.

  64. @Anonymous
    Hey, not every Prius driver is a pinko. Some of us just like the idea of giving a small amount to the Japanese so as to not have to give a large amount to the Arabs. And are tightass bastards.

    Hey, not every Prius driver is a pinko. Some of us just like the idea of giving a small amount to the Japanese so as to not have to give a large amount to the Arabs.

    Bingo. When we Calvinists visited the ancestral village in Iowa this past summer, we met up with a guy I’ve knows since I was a kid. He’s a hardcore conservative, but owns two Priuses. I laughed when he mentioned that, but he said they’re so economical it make sense for him.

  65. @Wilbur Hassenfus
    The last chance went by decades ago. Now we've got penumbras and emanations and the silly putty Commerce Clause. Rule by arbitrary decree.

    I would not be the type to confuse New Deal liberalism with CultMarx’s legal wing, known as “critical law theory”. The courts are intended to be the weakest of the three branches, with the legislature being the strongest. While the courts, for instance, have upheld affirmative action, a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress would end it outside of private institutions. (And if we want to be really nasty, we could force leftist institutions to adopt a Hillsdale-like policy of no federal money)

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    (And if we want to be really nasty, we could force leftist institutions to adopt a Hillsdale-like policy of no federal money)


    We should have done that when we could, in the sixties.
  66. @Corvinus
    "He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional."

    In case you missed it, Trump agrees in assimilation. That is, integration and upward mobility. Positive things have happened. For ALL legal immigrants, white and non-white.

    No Muslim ban. No mass repatriations of n0n-white American citizens. No restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance.

    [Heads just exploded by white nationalist Alt-Righters].

    You must have me confused with someone who remotely gives a f**k what you think.

  67. @Wells
    In the land of the blind the One-Eyed man is k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶ a misfit.

    Wrong! In the Land of the Blind, the one-eyed man is Cyclops Boo-Yah, Dark Lord of Startle Pranks.

  68. @Corvinus
    "He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional."

    In case you missed it, Trump agrees in assimilation. That is, integration and upward mobility. Positive things have happened. For ALL legal immigrants, white and non-white.

    No Muslim ban. No mass repatriations of n0n-white American citizens. No restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance.

    [Heads just exploded by white nationalist Alt-Righters].

    You missed the part of Trump’s speech that mentioned keeping “immigration measured by population share within historical norms,” although the Huffington Post did not, calling it a White Nationalist proposal.

  69. “You missed the part of Trump’s speech that mentioned keeping “immigration measured by population share within historical norms”.

    You do realize that the 1924 Immigration Act set NO limits on immigration from Latin American countries. Is that not a “historical norm”?

    Moreover, this act ensured that limited numbers would come from Eastern and Southern Europe because these people were deemed “undesirable”. I thought it was beneficial to” preserve the ideal of American homogeneity”, yet these fine whites were denied opportunities to be “imported”.

    • Replies: @Kudzu Bob
    The Immigration Act of 1924 kept America almost ninety percent White for several decades. There's your historical norm.
  70. If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.

    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    That's Lady Lurleen Evita Cacklepants Cankles to you, bub.
  71. Edit window still too short:

    Oops, wrong thread.

  72. You missed the part of Trump’s speech that mentioned keeping “immigration measured by population share within historical norms,” although the Huffington Post did not, calling it a White Nationalist proposal.

    So, America from 1776 to 1965 (and certainly from 1924 to 1965) was White Nationalist. Hey, sure, we’ll take it.

  73. Amazing stuff. Trump might actually win!

  74. @Corvinus
    "He mentioned 1965. I wonder if that was intentional."

    In case you missed it, Trump agrees in assimilation. That is, integration and upward mobility. Positive things have happened. For ALL legal immigrants, white and non-white.

    No Muslim ban. No mass repatriations of n0n-white American citizens. No restoration of the pre-1965 demographic balance.

    [Heads just exploded by white nationalist Alt-Righters].

    I would imagine some of Trump’s comments have the same shelf life as “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor!”.

  75. @Corvinus
    "You missed the part of Trump’s speech that mentioned keeping “immigration measured by population share within historical norms".

    You do realize that the 1924 Immigration Act set NO limits on immigration from Latin American countries. Is that not a "historical norm"?

    Moreover, this act ensured that limited numbers would come from Eastern and Southern Europe because these people were deemed "undesirable". I thought it was beneficial to" preserve the ideal of American homogeneity", yet these fine whites were denied opportunities to be "imported".

    The Immigration Act of 1924 kept America almost ninety percent White for several decades. There’s your historical norm.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The Immigration Act of 1924 kept America almost ninety percent White for several decades. There’s your historical norm."

    What specific groups of Europeans were considered more desirable than other Europeans? THAT is your historical norm.
  76. @Kudzu Bob
    The Immigration Act of 1924 kept America almost ninety percent White for several decades. There's your historical norm.

    “The Immigration Act of 1924 kept America almost ninety percent White for several decades. There’s your historical norm.”

    What specific groups of Europeans were considered more desirable than other Europeans? THAT is your historical norm.

    • Replies: @Kudzu Bob
    You've gone from implying that the 1924 Immigration Act didn't keep America White to complaining that it favored some Whites at the expense of others. Suit yourself.
  77. @Corvinus
    "The Immigration Act of 1924 kept America almost ninety percent White for several decades. There’s your historical norm."

    What specific groups of Europeans were considered more desirable than other Europeans? THAT is your historical norm.

    You’ve gone from implying that the 1924 Immigration Act didn’t keep America White to complaining that it favored some Whites at the expense of others. Suit yourself.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You’ve gone from implying that the 1924 Immigration Act didn’t keep America White to complaining that it favored some Whites at the expense of others. Suit yourself."

    The Immigration Act of 1924 favored certain groups--those from Western and Northern Europe. This piece of legislation indeed kept “immigration measured by population share within historical norms". Thus, it focused on ethnicity rather than race. Yet, it did not set any limits for immigrants from Canada or Mexico or Central/South America. Historical norms, right?

    So, if your ancestors are from places other than W-N Europe, or Canada or Mexico or Central/South America, they (and you) are not part of the historical norm as you lauded.

  78. @Kudzu Bob
    You've gone from implying that the 1924 Immigration Act didn't keep America White to complaining that it favored some Whites at the expense of others. Suit yourself.

    “You’ve gone from implying that the 1924 Immigration Act didn’t keep America White to complaining that it favored some Whites at the expense of others. Suit yourself.”

    The Immigration Act of 1924 favored certain groups–those from Western and Northern Europe. This piece of legislation indeed kept “immigration measured by population share within historical norms”. Thus, it focused on ethnicity rather than race. Yet, it did not set any limits for immigrants from Canada or Mexico or Central/South America. Historical norms, right?

    So, if your ancestors are from places other than W-N Europe, or Canada or Mexico or Central/South America, they (and you) are not part of the historical norm as you lauded.

    • Replies: @Kudzu Bob
    You already mentioned this (rather well-known feature) of the 1924 Immigration Act, and I already responded that the United States stayed 90% White while it was in effect, leaving unspoken the obvious fact the United States did not begin to brown-out until Hart-Celler was signed by LBJ in 1965. Is there some point that you are attempting to make?
  79. @Corvinus
    "You’ve gone from implying that the 1924 Immigration Act didn’t keep America White to complaining that it favored some Whites at the expense of others. Suit yourself."

    The Immigration Act of 1924 favored certain groups--those from Western and Northern Europe. This piece of legislation indeed kept “immigration measured by population share within historical norms". Thus, it focused on ethnicity rather than race. Yet, it did not set any limits for immigrants from Canada or Mexico or Central/South America. Historical norms, right?

    So, if your ancestors are from places other than W-N Europe, or Canada or Mexico or Central/South America, they (and you) are not part of the historical norm as you lauded.

    You already mentioned this (rather well-known feature) of the 1924 Immigration Act, and I already responded that the United States stayed 90% White while it was in effect, leaving unspoken the obvious fact the United States did not begin to brown-out until Hart-Celler was signed by LBJ in 1965. Is there some point that you are attempting to make?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Wake up, the 1924 Immigration Act was NOT about race, but about ethnicity. From the nativist perspective, this "brown out" had already occurred in the late 1800's with Italians, Poles, and Slavs--"darker" Europeans--who were deemed less desirable. Hart-Celler enabled other "darker" ethnic groups to enter our country.
  80. @Kudzu Bob
    You already mentioned this (rather well-known feature) of the 1924 Immigration Act, and I already responded that the United States stayed 90% White while it was in effect, leaving unspoken the obvious fact the United States did not begin to brown-out until Hart-Celler was signed by LBJ in 1965. Is there some point that you are attempting to make?

    Wake up, the 1924 Immigration Act was NOT about race, but about ethnicity. From the nativist perspective, this “brown out” had already occurred in the late 1800′s with Italians, Poles, and Slavs–”darker” Europeans–who were deemed less desirable. Hart-Celler enabled other “darker” ethnic groups to enter our country.

    • Replies: @Kudzu Bob
    Yes, the 1924 Immigration Act was obviously about ethnicity, and just as obviously it had the effect of keeping America White, as can be seen by what happened when it was replaced with Hart-Celler forty-one years later.

    Evidently you are afflicted with anterograde amnesia, like the unfortunate protagonist of Memento. Alas, I am unable to provide you with the assistance that you need, although it is possible that the editorial staff of the Huffington Post might be of help. You should definitely email them your thoughts on the matter.
  81. @Svigor
    If memory serves, Jews voting 2-to-1 for Cankles over Trump would be at the high end of Jewish support for a Republican presidential candidate.

    That’s Lady Lurleen Evita Cacklepants Cankles to you, bub.

  82. @Maj. Kong
    I would not be the type to confuse New Deal liberalism with CultMarx's legal wing, known as "critical law theory". The courts are intended to be the weakest of the three branches, with the legislature being the strongest. While the courts, for instance, have upheld affirmative action, a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress would end it outside of private institutions. (And if we want to be really nasty, we could force leftist institutions to adopt a Hillsdale-like policy of no federal money)

    (And if we want to be really nasty, we could force leftist institutions to adopt a Hillsdale-like policy of no federal money)

    We should have done that when we could, in the sixties.

  83. @Crawfurdmuir
    I don't understand why the name "Prius" was chosen for the car. It's a Latin adverb that means "before" or "formerly," and what it that supposed to signify with respect to an automobile?

    Furthermore it reminds one of the legal term nisi prius, referring in the U.S. to a court where civil actions are tried before a single judge without a jury, and to prions, the infectious agents causative of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, kuru, scrapie, and "mad cow disease." These do not impress me as favorable associations.

    They aren’t too good at Engrish. Fairlady, Donkey Kong , etc, etc.

    When I was in the hi-fi thing we had to endure endless requests for “Restrum Erectric”, that was funny, too.

  84. @NickG
    A BMW 320 diesel returns similar if not better economy and is a far better car in every way. 0-62 mph in 7.5 seconds. Fuel economy is better than 4.6 litres per 100 km (50 miles per US gallon) or about 60 miles per US gallon for the Efficient Dynamics model - which is a bit slower.

    Although I have owned several diesel vehicles amd loved them, I wouldn’t buy a diesel car or light truck made after the early to mid 2000s. The nonsensical emissions requirements have made the add-on equipment too invasive and hard to maintain and expensive.

    CNG or propane make much more sense now.

  85. @Corvinus
    Wake up, the 1924 Immigration Act was NOT about race, but about ethnicity. From the nativist perspective, this "brown out" had already occurred in the late 1800's with Italians, Poles, and Slavs--"darker" Europeans--who were deemed less desirable. Hart-Celler enabled other "darker" ethnic groups to enter our country.

    Yes, the 1924 Immigration Act was obviously about ethnicity, and just as obviously it had the effect of keeping America White, as can be seen by what happened when it was replaced with Hart-Celler forty-one years later.

    Evidently you are afflicted with anterograde amnesia, like the unfortunate protagonist of Memento. Alas, I am unable to provide you with the assistance that you need, although it is possible that the editorial staff of the Huffington Post might be of help. You should definitely email them your thoughts on the matter.

  86. “Yes, the 1924 Immigration Act was obviously about ethnicity, and just as obviously it had the effect of keeping America White…”

    It obviously had the effect of keeping America less non-Southern and Eastern European and more Western Hemispherean.

    “Evidently you are afflicted with anterograde amnesia, like the unfortunate protagonist of Memento. Alas, I am unable to provide you with the assistance that you need, although it is possible that the editorial staff of the Huffington Post might be of help. You should definitely email them your thoughts on the matter.”

    No thanks. I have no use for Huff Po.

    • Replies: @Kudzu Bob
    No, you definitely should get in touch with HuffPo. You and they can have hours and hours of fun autistically REEEEEEEEEE-ing at one another, the editors there insisting correctly that Trump's proposal implicitly favors Whites, you insisting incorrectly that the 1924 Act did not preserve America's White majority (along with a little help from the occasional mass deportation of Hispanics, of course, such as the one during the Depression as well as Eisenhower's Operation Wetback two decades later).
  87. @Corvinus
    "Yes, the 1924 Immigration Act was obviously about ethnicity, and just as obviously it had the effect of keeping America White..."

    It obviously had the effect of keeping America less non-Southern and Eastern European and more Western Hemispherean.

    "Evidently you are afflicted with anterograde amnesia, like the unfortunate protagonist of Memento. Alas, I am unable to provide you with the assistance that you need, although it is possible that the editorial staff of the Huffington Post might be of help. You should definitely email them your thoughts on the matter."

    No thanks. I have no use for Huff Po.

    No, you definitely should get in touch with HuffPo. You and they can have hours and hours of fun autistically REEEEEEEEEE-ing at one another, the editors there insisting correctly that Trump’s proposal implicitly favors Whites, you insisting incorrectly that the 1924 Act did not preserve America’s White majority (along with a little help from the occasional mass deportation of Hispanics, of course, such as the one during the Depression as well as Eisenhower’s Operation Wetback two decades later).

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Hundreds of POWs may have been left to die in Vietnam, abandoned by their government—and our media.