I don’t have much time to write about it, but I hope that the good that comes out of it is that people opposed to unfettered immigration will finally get pissed off and do something.
Or maybe Republicans who didn’t care before will become anti-immigration because they hate Obama.
 | superdestroyer on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | prolier than thou on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | MikeCA on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | LOADED on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | Alex on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | Judge Absalom on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
| superdestroyer on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | eradican on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | unam on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
| superdestroyer on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | Tom on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
| Tom on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | Lion of the Blogosph… on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | Sgt. Joe Friday on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
 | ironrailsironweights on What does Lisa Birnbach say ab… |
Lion of the Blogosphere 
Check out this article linked below. This is what happens when Yakov’s “nice start in a new country” NYC friend starts living his life the tried-and-true NAM way.
The guy is making about $18K/yr, is sorta supporting a gf (for how long? SMVs appear to be diverging) and a kid, receiving free food and housing aid, billed to us.
The Cathedral praises him, directing us to view him as “a young guy who’s doing all the right things” – pretty low bar, I’d say.
They try to scapegoat his employer for his woes, as if getting a few % more in his check would suddenly make all the difference. Why should they pay more? They could just replace him with Yakov’s chipper friend, who would consider their wages to be a raise.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/hamill-airport-workers-claim-victims-wage-ripoffs-article-1.2014458
Fiddlesticks
November 20, 2014 at 9:50 AM
In that article, his girlfriend says she wants to be self sufficient.
Don’t want to play the devil’s advocate here, but low tier Hispanics at least have some kind of decency for their kids, that you don’t find with blacks who abandon their children when things get out of control. Further, Hispanics (with the exception of Puerto Ricans) will hustle for more money, no questions asked if opportunity arises. You can’t say the same for blacks who become drama queens wherever they go, and expect to be treated like royalty from their employers.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 10:52 AM
JS, the Cathedral hears you. They have realized that turning the country left through sympathetic folks and schmaltz is a lot more effective than JusticeDemandPower confrontation…O’s greatest propagandist, Shepard Fairey, is exhibit A in this trend.
https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1662&bih=529&q=shepard+fairey+we+are+human
Anyway, if they had interviewed the gf at age 16, she would have said, “I want to graduate from college,” “I want to get married before I start a family.” Nothing external was stopping her from doing any of those things.
Of course, nearly all the “quotes” in the story are coached-sounding labor platitudes, e.g. “I want to support my family on my own in a union job with a living wage and benefits so I don’t need subsidies.”
Fiddlesticks
November 20, 2014 at 11:40 AM
Hispanics enrolling in college is at a all time high. Afros are at a downward trend. Hispanics become high proles like Italian Americans. Your typical negro is basically obsolete in American society.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 1:26 PM
A irony for you – Here in NYC, blacks are underrepresented/nonexistent in businesses that cater to SWPLs. They are entrenched in low skilled gov’t jobs and corporate retail with few work standards. Pretty much there aren’t any when comparing to more prestigious work settings.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 4:13 PM
This guy is a net loss for the economy. Full stop. Food and housing is a massive expense.
map
November 20, 2014 at 2:33 PM
Pissed off? This is the establishment Republican dream! Imagine, Obama takes unilateral action, there are no Republican hands on any off it, and the Republican donors still get what they want; de facto open borders. Meanwhile Republicans can stomp and shake their fists at Obama in front of the base and pretend to be REALLY MAD at Obama for doing this. Meanwhile, they get what they wanted all along done without having to actually vote for it. Win for the establishment Republicans, win for Democrats, and the working class gets another kick in the nuts.
Mike Street Station
November 20, 2014 at 10:15 AM
Mike nails it. There are probably a handful of sincere Republicans complaining about this (in the House maybe, I doubt any in the Senate) while the rest are plotzing with glee. This is all just political theater. Both sides are getting what they want, and they’re letting the lame duck Prez take the hit, a “hit” which will be greatly mollified by a compliant media that still carries water for him. Besides, aren’t the Furguson riots tomorrow going to get all the headlines going forward?
peterike2
November 20, 2014 at 12:48 PM
There is at least one Senator who opposes amnesty; Jeff Sessions. That’s basically been his cause celebre since the Senate passed their immigration bill last year/
Of course, that’s only one.
Mike Street Station
November 20, 2014 at 2:35 PM
You nailed it.
SWPL2
November 20, 2014 at 12:59 PM
NO! Could an American have intuited the obvious? Incredible.
Viscount Douchenozzlé
November 20, 2014 at 9:53 PM
The rich do pretty well in Mexico. So for the TOOS diluting the independently minded Anglos might not be a bad idea. http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323734304578543731022562870. See also the movie Deficit (Mexican with subtitles on Netflix). Gives a good description of the nice life of Central and South America’s wealthy.
Curle
November 20, 2014 at 10:22 AM
Correct me if I’m wrong, and I don’t think I’m wrong. Liberals don’t care for Hispanics. There are more Liberal Whites who believe welfare is a must than there are Hispanics. Your typical obnoxious, black pandering SWPL cares about Hispanics just as much as a fly.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 11:37 AM
Liberals have clearly demonstrated that they think Hispanics suffer from discrimination that needs to be fixed, and they think they are helping Hispanics by allowing more of their family members into the country.
Lion of the Blogosphere
November 20, 2014 at 1:05 PM
Really??? In terms of NYC, where’s de Blasio’s Hispanic staff at City Hall as a good example?
When do you ever see SWPLs with a token Hispanic friend?
JS
November 20, 2014 at 1:29 PM
Inequality can’t be “fixed.” Human society will always be shaped like a pyramid (once it gets over ~100 ppl). Although now, disgustingly, there is a spire atop the pyramid, and those at the top pretend to champion the causes of the less fortunate, to gain approval of the masses, while holding their nose in the air to the salt of the earth common people who are vastly less fortunate than them. It’s all a charade – a disgusting, hypocritical charade. Americans care only about appearances. And not even physical appearance. Their behavior and most deeply held beliefs are for appearance only, and adhere to no deeper priniciples or meaning. For example, if helping the less fortunate is a principle, then they should help common middle class people, or at least not f*** them over. But that cause wouldn’t be fashionable now, would it?
shiva1008
November 20, 2014 at 8:46 PM
Liberals don’t care for Hispanics.
In contrast, until the earthquake in 2011, it was perfectly fine to deport Haitians and send Haitian boat people back to Haiti. Yet, Hispanics under the same situation get implicit encouragement and legalization?
It’s almost as if liberals are dirty racists too.
David Alexander
November 21, 2014 at 5:04 AM
Just take a look at the Zimmerman Trayvon Martin Case. White liberals had to portray a Hispanic guy as an evil White racist who oppresses black people.
JS
November 21, 2014 at 10:47 AM
The real issue when it comes to Illegal immigration should be, is it non-black?
If yes, I’m all for it. More Latin American illegals means doing away with self entitled afros, who are always a liability than an asset. Just look at Oakland, California where Mexicans have backed their ghetto black neighbors into a small corner.
Of course the far right is too cowardly to tackle the black problem directly and they’re probably too stupid to realize what a godsent these illegals have on our country, which is already utterly damaged with the black problem.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 10:42 AM
” Just look at Oakland, California where Mexicans have backed their ghetto black neighbors into a small corner.”
Or Compton:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/25/local/la-me-0126-compton-20130126
I wonder what the immigration debate would look like if white liberals were aware of this Hispanic-on-black ethnic cleansing. I doubt it would make much of a difference, though. We all know that caring really hard about black people is just status whoring moral posturing.
Robert
November 20, 2014 at 12:52 PM
Exactly Rob! Your liberal nutjobs will automatically place Hispanics on the enemy list with working class proles and Asians.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 1:35 PM
That is wishful thinking. All non-white immigration hates whitey. Remember that.
map
November 20, 2014 at 2:37 PM
@JS, I don’t think so. Hispanic-on-black violence results in cognitive dissonance for white liberals. Even if they have black and Hispanic friends, they’re almost always middle class. They subscribe to the “people of color vs. evil whitey” narrative without realizing with POCs are not a monolith. Even Hispanics who come from different backgrounds tend to hate each other. They’re more likely to ignore this stuff than anything else.
@map, A lot of Hispanics aspire to be high prole and to be accepted by white high proles, who they view as middle class. The racial tensions will always be there, but like Sailer noted in his recent VDare article, republicans can win a significant portion of the Hispanic vote if they can subtly paint democrats as the Black Party. Hispanics hate hate hate black people.
Robert
November 20, 2014 at 5:44 PM
@Robert,
Rob, you don’t seem to understand something. The mass immigration of Hispanics is not a population exchange. it’s not like we are importing Mexicans and exporting Blacks. Whatever Hispanics “aspire” to be does not change their cost to White people. Whites are still crowded out of their homes and neighborhoods and made to pay exorbitant taxes so Mexicans can leave here. Did you miss the part of the article where the Mexican was getting his housing and food for free?
map
November 20, 2014 at 7:50 PM
@map You’re misreading me. I don’t support Hispanic immigration to the US. I was simply making a point about the feelings that Hispanics have toward white people.
Robert
November 21, 2014 at 8:58 AM
Rob, I’ve come across many Hispanics (with the exception of Puerto Ricans) who dislike blacks just as much as your right wing extremist. Ok, they aren’t your middle class assimilated types. But how many affable, black middle class individuals you’ve come across? Not many, and even the black middle class secretly resents everybody else because they know they’re living a legacy and not the future.
Intermarriage between the different Hispanic groups are on the rise. It’s only the losers such as the Puerto Ricans in NYC who embrace liberalism and associate themselves with blacks.
JS
November 21, 2014 at 11:02 AM
Do you guys remember that Italian greaseball Steve Ercolino who was shot dead in the Empire State Building as a result of his bullying of a lesser guy? Lion made a post awhile back. He apparently was engaged to an atrocious looking “mamacita” Hispanic woman. And Lion made a statement that Hispanics get along well with White proles.
JS
November 21, 2014 at 11:12 AM
@JS “And Lion made a statement that Hispanics get along well with White proles.”
I’m too lazy and drunk right now to look it up, but I don’t think that’s what he said. I think his point was that white proles and Hispanic proles are similar, which is something I agree with. If Roissy and PA disagree, I’d suspect it’s because neither of them actually have any experience dealing with Hispanic proles. I doubt Lion does, either, but he’s right on this one.
Robert
November 21, 2014 at 8:00 PM
Rob, There are many pizzerias in NYC that are still managed by Italians making authentic pizza. The Italian owners seem to love the Hispanic guys who work for them. And it’s not only because they work hard. A lot of these guys speak perfect English and joke with them all the time with all kinds of prolish discussions. This might be a casual observation, but I don’t think SWPLs would be in a good position with them. And Italians hate blacks like the plague, so that’s out of the question.
JS
November 23, 2014 at 12:08 PM
JS on November 21, 2014 at 11:12 am: Do you guys remember that Italian greaseball Steve Ercolino who was shot dead in the Empire State Building as a result of his bullying of a lesser guy? He apparently was engaged to an atrocious looking “mamacita” Hispanic woman.
—
Atrocious? Atrociously delicious!
The Abbot of Lufford
November 29, 2014 at 8:51 PM
Federal immigration policy trumps anything government at any level can do about improving the lot of average people.
For example, the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act did more to increase inequality in the US than any minimum wage law, tax cut or push for welfare reform ever did.
McFly
November 20, 2014 at 10:44 AM
These people aren’t getting deported anyway and this could create a boon for anti-immmigration forces. So we’ll see whether this is good in long run or not.
Hepp
November 20, 2014 at 12:10 PM
Exactly my point!
Lion of the Blogosphere
November 20, 2014 at 1:08 PM
It’s too late. The time for old stock Americans to move against immigration was the 80s. That was the last shot. But Reagan got gulled on amnesty by the lying Democrats, and that was that. Another couple of decades of weepy propaganda — they are “living in the shadows!” boo hoo! — and the general Leftward movement of the white electorate, plus the anti-white (ahem…. “anti-racist”) shaming efforts, have all worked to perfection.
The immigrant credo should be “Once you get in, you win!” Because you pretty much are set after that.
peterike2
November 20, 2014 at 1:49 PM
So Pete, are heading off from this “once great country” anytime soon? I’m a young guy in my 30s, and I know I will not be here in a year from now.
It’s get tiring to whine about America’s problems after awhile, especially for a boomer, which are justified but of no avail.
JS
November 20, 2014 at 4:26 PM
Eventually both the Democrats and RINOs will see the need for a border fence. Unfortunately, the purpose of the fence they end up building will be to keep taxpaying, English speaking Americans of European descent from escaping the multicultural socialist paradise our Dear Leader is creating for us.
Sgt. Joe Friday
November 20, 2014 at 2:20 PM
Also, pure cynical politics plays a role in the push for legal and illegal immigration from Latin America (and to a lesser extent, the rest of the Third World). The black population has pretty much stabilized in this country at 12-13% of the overall U.S. population. Blacks already vote 90% or more for the Democratic candidate, most of the time. The Democrats have essentially maxed out their possible vote draw in the black community. Blacks can be taken for granted by the Democrats for the moment.
On the other hand, the white middle and working classes are trending Republican. The SWPL white elite and their NAM allies look on the white middle and working classes with disdain, bordering on contempt. Any real attempt by the Democrats to culturally and/or economically appeal to whites risks a fracturing of the top-bottom coalition the Democrats have assembled. Also, SWPL whites are, like blacks, not maintaining a TFR of 2.1 or greater. If anything, SWPLs are having fewer children than anyone, so there is no future vein of SWPL voters to be mined there for the Democrats.
That leaves the Hispanic vote as the default cohort of future voters. The real test is going to be can the Democrats integrate the Hispanics into their top-bottom coalition without driving even more non-elite whites into the GOP or without provoking a fracture between the disparate factions in their ramshackle coalition?
Oswald Spengler
November 20, 2014 at 2:23 PM
that leaves the Hispanic vote as the default cohort of future voters. The real test is going to be can the Democrats integrate the Hispanics into their top-bottom coalition without driving even more non-elite whites into the GOP or without provoking a fracture between the disparate factions in their ramshackle coalition?
Yes.
In my mind the resulting question will be whether or not whites will continue voting for a party that grows increasingly reluctant to run white candidates, especially white males. Obama doesn’t seem to find it difficult to find some NAM fruit or nut to nominate for virtually every opening under his auspices, so future candidates will feel pressured to behave in the same way.
Blacks and Hispanics tend to run off at the mouth without the slightest hint of diplomacy, so at some point they’ll just blatantly clamor for exclusively NAM candidates only, without the slightest hesitation. You could already see this 3 years ago during the “Occupy” movement where a lot of the black leaders would shout down white speakers by telling them that “white males need to STFU” or something to that effect.
For instance, this election marked this first time that the Deep South does not have a single white male Democrat (blue dog) in Congress with the defeat of John Barrow of Georgia. In fact, Mary Landrieu is the only white congressperson left from the Deep South, and she may lose her runoff.
The trend will only continue to spread north and west to wherever you have a significant percentage of NAMs as part of the electorate. (Oregon is probably safe for white Democratic candidates for a while, lol)
Camlost
November 20, 2014 at 5:42 PM
People who benefit the most from immigration, benefit directly and immediately – they can hire immigrants at cheaper wages, they can pat themselves on the back for their moral stance, etc. People who are harmed by immigration are mostly harmed indirectly, over a long period of time or can write off the harm (being raped by an immigrant, say) as a one-off freak occurence. In a democracy that makes it hard to mobilize against immigration even if most Americans are generally opposed. He who shouts louder and longest wins.
Peter Akuleyev
November 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM