Despite all appearances to the contrary, from the one-sidedness of the reporting to the insertion of the author’s own biographical details, this is offered as a news article, not an op-ed. Read through it yourself and savor the lemony sourness of class resentment. KP told me last week that the reason she’s so hung up on amnesty opponents’ alleged fear of “brown-skinned illegal immigrants” is because America tolerated mass immigration from European locales like Sicily throughout the 19th and early 20th century, and only now that the flow is coming from an, ahem, “brown” country are we getting itchy about the borders. I told her that it’s not a function of where they’re coming from; if it was, most amnesty opponents wouldn’t also support generous legal immigration policies for Mexico. It’s a function of two things: (1) the sheer, astounding volume of movement across the border and (2) the rise of multiculturalism, which has weakened the imperative to assimilate. Combine those two things and you’re not so much taking in immigrants as annexing small nations of people, which is a hairy proposition no matter who’s involved. According to the Bloomberg piece, Sicilian immigration was no more than 1,000 or so a year before 9/11, which of course obviates the volume problem, but since we’re not about to make exceptions for non-Mexican illegals — nor should we — they’ll simply have to pay the price of the public’s reaction to the tidal wave of illegals from the south. If Sicilians don’t like it, let them take it up with Calderon.
“Indeed part of Mexico is moving into the United States, but unfortunately that includes drug runners, gang violence and the Spanish language supplanting English,” said Tancredo. “I’m sure the people of Mexico would be extremely grateful if Calderon showed as much concern over the well being of Mexicans unlucky enough to still live there as he does for the people who have successfully fled his country.”
Tancredo added, “If Mexico thinks we need some sort of permission slip to act unilaterally in our country’s best interest, they have another thing coming.”
“Perhaps Calderon should take a refresher course on geography, because Mexico does in fact end at the Rio Grande,” concluded Tancredo, pointing out Mexico’s hypocrisy in criticizing U.S. immigration policy as their own country boasts one of the harshest border enforcement programs in North America, as they just deported thousands of illegal aliens from the southern border of Mexico last month.
Exit question: With Iraq news set to dominate September, how much time will they devote to immigration at tomorrow night’s Fox debate? Over/under is five minutes.