America – deracination

Symbol of fundamental change, including DACA: Mexican flag at an immigration rally in an American city. (Possible treason? Sanctuary cities? Drivers licenses?) Mollie Tibbetts died in its name. So did a California police officer, murdered by one of many illegal immigrants. This represents another humanitarian hoax on the American people, and the deracination of America as well. It is also a signal to pass the new RAISE Act that would minimize episode of this kind. The latest: exploiting illegal immigrant children to try to facilitate open borders.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

To fully understand the panic of the Left and its unrestrained hostility to Donald Trump, we must discern that at stake is America’s national identity. Indeed, this is what Trump’s s slogan “making America great again” is all about.

The Kennedy plan to change America

Now, the title of this article is related to the title of Ann Coulter’s book, Adios America! (2015). Coulter’s book reveals the left-wing insight and strategy by the Kennedy clan (John, Robert, and Teddy).

The Kennedys discerned how the Democratic Party could not only beat the Republican Party in a single presidential election, but how to win that office repeatedly, without interruption, for a least a generation and thus shape the American way of life well into the future.

Before continuing, ponder this passage from Coulter’s book:

In the 10 elections since Mr. Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1932 victory, no democratic candidate has received more than 50 percent of the white vote. In the past five elections, only one candidate – Mr. Jimmy Carter in 1976 – received more than 40 percent.… Few Americans realize it, but the Democratic Party would have lost every presidential election from 1968 and to the present if only whites had been allowed to vote. Jimmy Carter carried only 47 percent of the white vote in 1976, but was elected because his 83 percent support from blacks more than made up the deficit. Bill Clinton did even worse among white voters, getting only 39 percent of their vote in 1992 and 43 percent in 1995. But Clinton, too, got five out six black votes … enough to give him wins over George Bush in 1992 and Bob Dole in 1996 (p. 85)

Extra ballots? No, extra voters

The Kennedys realized that the only way to win an election was not by changing its campaign rhetoric, but by changing the demographic character of the electorate! Since the Democrats invariably won a preponderant majority of the black or let us say non-Caucasian vote, all that was needed to win one presidential election after another was to liberalize the immigration laws so as to facilitate an influx to the United States of people from Third World, especially Hispanics in general and Mexicans in particular.

Therefore, once the Democrats controlled the Executive Branch, they could supplement liberal immigrant laws with administrative practices that would multiply the immigrant population by means of

  1. family reunification policies;
  2. entitlements such as hospital care and maternity benefits; and
  3. legal aid, and relaxed policies for obtaining a driver’s license.

Leaving aside the influx of illegal immigrants, Coulter notes that two-thirds of all legal immigrants enter America via family unification policies. But this means, she says, that “America has no say about the single largest category of immigrants and we end up with gems like the Boston Marathon bombers, and one hundred thousand Somalis in Minnesota. Entire villages from Pakistan are dumped on the country, based not on their expertise in nuclear engineering, but because everyone in the village is related to the first guy who got in”’ (p. 233)!

Only one candidate stands for America without apology

The preceding information explains the Democratic Party’s desire for third world immigrants. That lust is not entirely absent in Republicans such as Marco Rubio. That worthy advocates amnesty for various illegal immigrants. The constitution-oriented Ted Cruz rejects this but with vague qualifications.

Only Donald Trump comes down hard on immigration. But he tarnishes his republican credentials with his liberal position on same sex marriage and his record of supporting liberal democrats.

Is it any wonder that the eminent political scientist, Samuel Huntington, who is concerned about the influx of Hispanics, authored a book entitled Who Are We?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.