Immigrants: where they come from, or who they are?
An assumption that goes with the story of s***holeGate is that what Trump was saying was “Let’s favor people from Norway over people from s***hole countries like Haiti and in Africa.” That makes him a racist and a mean one at that, in the eyes of the MSM and a great many people who read it.
I happened across the following interview with Tom Cotton. He was at that meeting, and he has a different impression about what was said. His answer goes to the actual issues involved (amazing, isn’t it?) rather than semantics: the question of whether Trump is judging people by national origin or by each person’s individual characteristics, beliefs, and skills, and which is a more desirable way to go about setting up an immigration policy. It went like this:
According to that, it was Durbin and Graham who wanted to continue the program of favoritism based on national origins, and Trump who wants to end it and substitute skills-based admission policies. This is congruent with Trump’s public utterances as well as being congruent with Durbin and Graham’s policy positions.
So what Trump may have actually said was something like this: Why would we want to favor people from certain countries, in particular from certain s***hole [or some other pejorative word] countries like Haiti? Hey, if you’re going to favor a country, why not Norway instead, a first-world country? (That’s what’s known as a rhetorical question). And then Trump might have continued with something like: It’s all the wrong way to go, favoring one country over another—as I’ve said repeatedly, we need a completely different, skills-based system.
And Durbin (and perhaps Graham) started salivating at the thought that he now could get some aides together and “brief” them (so that they could tell the press) on the fact that in the meeting, Trump had called some mostly-black nations “s***holes” and said we should favor Norwegians! Hey, what a racist moron that Trump is!
I think that’s probably very very close to what actually happened.
This.
PROGS would say that that’s a shitty report on shitholes.
vanderleun:
And I would say that’s a shitty retort to a shitty report on shitholes.
Senator Cotton is a lot more patient than I. I admire him for sitting there and making his points as that idiot repeated the same mantra over and over–frequently interrupting. I don’t think I could. In fact, as I watched, I reacted with some impolite language.
Interestingly enough, numerous media shills have claimed that Graham verified Durbin’s allegations. Not true. In typical Graham fashion, he has talked around the question, creating an impression, but never saying anything specific.
I applaud Senator Cotton for not pulling his punches, and stating more than once that Durbin has been caught lying about what was said in previous WH meetings.
just when some commenters here praised President Trump for holding an open meeting regarding immigration leaving the RINOs and democrats no room to make up fake stories and lie about what the President have said, Trump did the stupid thing and hold a closed meeting with these same RINOs and democrats without having the whole meeting recorded. I am mad with Trump not learning anything from the comey meeting and fell for the same trap again, record everything. If you said bad things, not recording will not help you since the RINOs and democrats would spill the beans anything, why not record everything to leave them no room to lie?
In a second wapo story, the quote was modified to include 2nd half of stmt “places like Norway and Asia”.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-tense-profane-white-house-meeting-on-immigration/2018/01/15/13e79fa4-fa1e-11e7-8f66-2df0b94bb98a_story.html?utm_term=.5e7973d28447
Nyuck. Nyuck. Nyuck.
Why has almost no one in the press questioned Durbin’s account of the meeting? Why has almost no one in the press pointed out that Durbin blabbing about shit holes made a DACA agreement almost impossible? Why has almost no one in the press pointed out that the so-called bipartisan consensus gave Trump almost nothing that he wanted?
just like most truly important things in America immigration reform will never happen because Republicans won’t make a deal when there is a liberal president giving democrats all the credits and hispanic votes and Democrats won’t a deal when there is a conservative president giving republicans all the credits and hispanic votes.
I’m with you Oldflyer, John is freakin’ annoying as all get out.
This seems very unlikely.
1. Durbin and Graham were part of the Gang of 8. Here’s what Sen Jeff Flake (R) had to say about them:
2. Back on Nov 1, Graham had this to say, The Washington Times (not Post) reported:
3. The Graham-Durbin framework includes:
A. “The diversity visa lottery would be eliminated, and those 50,000 visas would be reallocated”
B. “It prevents “chain migration” by barring DREAMers from sponsoring their parents. ”
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/1/16/16879632/daca-bill-durbin-graham
Manju:
What Graham said on November first is irrelevant. It’s now over two months later, and just try to find exactly what was in that bill that was during that infamous meeting! Graham and Durbin haven’t published a paper explaining it, and there are somewhat varying reports on what was in it.
But almost everyone agreed that the context for the discussion in which the dreadful s-word came up was the diversity visa favoritism towards certain failed countries. If everyone was in agreement that that program would end, Trump’s purported words make zero sense. You may think he’s stupid, but I think you’ll agree he’s not so stupid as to argue vociferously about something on which everyone is in accord.
From my research—although it’s hard to determine what the proposal Graham and Durbin brought actually was, the videos of Cotton and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen (see the latter here) made it clear that there was marked disagreement on that program or something very much like it, or some portion of it.
Cotton said:
That’s when the alleged s-hole remark is supposed to have occurred. Clearly, the issue involved favoring certain third-world countries rather than vetting in some other way (skills, education, etc.).
An excellent commentary from a LEGAL immigrant to America, Sarah Hoyt.
https://pjmedia.com/trending/epithet-fits-wear/
“…You don’t like to be called a sh*thole? Very well. Stop being one. Give less consideration to your “image” in the world and more to how your country functions. Stop the corruptocracy. Enforce honesty and the rule of law. Reform your schools. Stop the rampaging of the drug lords.
Stop expecting the U.S. to take your troublemakers with or without visas and to send you back the product of their labor. The U.S. is not obligated to take whoever wishes to come here. The floods of immigrants willing to work for nothing distort our labor market and corrupt our rule of law.
Instead of calling President Trump names, consider the names your country deserves. When the flood of immigrants is equal across the border, perhaps you’ll be allowed to cast stones, but right now? Right now you depend on us. And you don’t get to influence our decision on who comes into our house or not. Because it is not your decision.
…”
RTWT
From another legal immigrant, from South Africa to Australia, posting on Sarah Hoyt’s own blog, laying it on the line. (paragraphing added)
https://accordingtohoyt.com/2018/01/16/telling-the-hard-truth-by-dave-freer/
“…If — like me — you’re a migrant, then: ‘Why are we having these people from a shit-hole come here?’ asserts the most valuable lesson any migrant could possibly get to make that migration a happy, successful experience both for them and the country they move to.
Migrants are migrating because their birth-country is, for some reason, a shit-hole to them. They need the new country to accept them. And that needs a two pronged approach that everyone has been too ‘sensitive’ and ‘kind’ to bluntly tell them.
It’s like the alcoholic again. You’re not actually doing them any favors pretending they don’t stink and they haven’t fallen asleep in their own vomit. You can certainly help them by telling them if they give up the booze they can be a decent bloke. BUT they have to leave the booze behind and accept it was a problem. The alcoholic that can’t do that, and the migrant that can’t do that… are never going to get any better. And just as not even the best effort in the world can do anything for an alcoholic who hasn’t decided themselves to give it up and change, not all the ‘kindness’ in the world will help a migrant who brings the shit-hole with themselves, telling themselves it is not a problem. All they’re doing is making a new shit-hole.
I still hold that migrants can add value and be welcome, no matter where they come from. But it’s a huge hill for them (not others, not their host country) to climb, a lot of blood and treasure to catch up on — and a shit-hole, and all that goes with it, to leave behind. Anything else will end in tears. Working hard on it, leaving your past —culture, country, language — behind, and embracing the new, will have the citizens meet you half way, help you along, and welcome you. Migrants need to know this, accept this.
Not saying this openly is not doing anyone a favor.”
A couple of articles on immigration reform from LA Times.
VD Hanson is always worth reading.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-hanson-dreamer-agenda-20180114-story.html
“…Setting aside the reality of the Dreamer pool, the Democrats’ method of fighting for DACA suggests that they are broadly in favor of letting immigration dysfunction continue apace. Why else would they refuse to give President Trump any significant concessions in the DACA negotiations – no wall, no end to chain migration, no cessation of visa lotteries?
They know that if this generation of Dreamers gets a pass without broader reform,it will be followed by another and another, all expecting the same eventual exemptions.
Democrats once used to talk about ending outright illegal immigration. They worried that it put downward pressure on wages. They thought it eroded union efforts and sapped political support among Democrats’ blue-collar base, while overtaxing finite social services to the detriment of the American underclass.
In the current age of identity politics, a new generation of progressive Democrats has recalibrated mass illegal immigration as a godsend.
…”
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-goldberg-diversity-strength-20180115-story.html
“…All of these analogies can take you only so far. Thomas Sowell once said, “The next time some academics tell you how important diversity is, ask how many Republicans there are in their sociology department.”
There’s a growing body of evidence that even if diversity– the kind that results from immigration – once made America stronger, it may not be doing so anymore. Robert Putnam, a liberal sociologist at Harvard, found that increased diversity corrodes civil society by eroding shared values, customs and institutions. People tend to “hunker down” and retreat from civil society, at least in the short and medium term.
…”
On the diversity question, one of the commenters at Hoyt’s blog makes the point that an intelligent, productive, assimilable immigrant — even from a (shall we say) dysfunctional country is just as “diverse” as a less intelligent, uneducated, ghettoized immigrant from the same place.
Durbin is yet another corrupt hack politician from the State of Illinois ( Madiganistan? )
He has funneled millions of Federal Tax Dollars to his wife’s consultancy firm. Which, I suppose is typical behavior for a politician from anywhere.
Thank our Lord for President Trump.
MAGA!
Here is where some immigrants come from — a great personal story:
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/01/what_i_learned_in_peace_corps_in_africa_trump_is_right.html
“…
We think the Protestant work ethic is universal. It’s not. My town was full of young men doing nothing. They were waiting for a government job. There was no private enterprise. Private business was not illegal, just impossible, given the nightmare of a third-world bureaucratic kleptocracy. It is also incompatible with Senegalese insistence on taking care of relatives.
All the little stores in Senegal were owned by Mauritanians. If a Senegalese wanted to run a little store, he’d go to another country. The reason? Your friends and relatives would ask you for stuff for free, and you would have to say yes. End of your business. You are not allowed to be a selfish individual and say no to relatives. The result: Everyone has nothing.
The more I worked there and visited government officials doing absolutely nothing, the more I realized that no one in Senegal had the idea that a job means work. A job is something given to you by a relative. It provides the place where you steal everything to give back to your family.
I couldn’t wait to get home. So why would I want to bring Africa here? Non-Westerners do not magically become American by arriving on our shores with a visa.
For the rest of my life, I enjoyed the greatest gift of the Peace Corps: I love and treasure America more than ever. I take seriously my responsibility to defend our culture and our country and pass on the American heritage to the next generation.
African problems are made worse by our aid efforts. Senegal is full of smart, capable people. They will eventually solve their own country’s problems. They will do it on their terms, not ours. The solution is not to bring Africans here.
We are lectured by Democrats that we must privilege third-world immigration by the hundred million with chain migration. They tell us we must end America as a white, Western, Judeo-Christian, capitalist nation — to prove we are not racist. I don’t need to prove a thing. Leftists want open borders because they resent whites, resent Western achievements, and hate America. They want to destroy America as we know it.
As President Trump asked, why would we do that?
We have the right to choose what kind of country to live in. I was happy to donate a year of my life as a young woman to help the poor Senegalese. I am not willing to donate my country. “
Another story on where they come from and who they are.
https://www.redstate.com/slee/2018/01/17/current-immigration-system-threat-national-security-new-doj-report-says-yes/
“On Tuesday, the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security released a report that indicated roughly three out of four individuals “convicted of international terrorism-related charges between September 11, 2001 and December 31, 2016 are foreign-born individuals who entered the United States through our immigration system,” according to an official release from the White House. The report also indicates nearly 2000 individuals were removed by ICE due to national security concerns, and that 2017 saw 2.5K DHS run-ins with individuals traveling to the U.S. and known to be named on the terrorist watch list.
…
That said, the report is without doubt intended to prop up the desire of the current administration to put an end to things like the hard-to-control chain migration system and provide justification for tighter border security. But calling those efforts “anti-immigration” rather than “pro-national security” might be a bit disingenuous.“