Yesterday, there was a rollout of the new legal immigration bill supported by President Trump. The two senators sponsoring the bill (Tom Cotton and Sonny Perdue) spoke as did Stephen Miller. Miller took questions at the White House briefing of the day. It was an amazing spectacle.
First, Miller got attacked for promoting a "racist" bill. Jim Acosta of CNN lectured Miller that the provision that give priority to immigrants who speak English was a repudiation of the poem on the Statue of Liberty that says "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." According to Acosta, the poem says nothing about speaking English. Acosta said that this new priority for English speakers would end the long American tradition of following the words on the Statue of Liberty by taking only people from the UK or Australia. (I'm not making this up. Acosta, the moron, really said this.)
Miller's response was perfect. He asked Acosta in which decades did the USA follow the philosophy on the Statute, and then he pointed out that in the 1960's the USA took 300,000 legal immigrants per year, in the 1980s we took 500,000 per year. Even in the 2000's we took about 750,000 per year. Under this bill, we would take more than that. There is no limitation on immigration; there is simply a preference system set up to give priority to immigrants who would be 1) immediate family members of US citizens, 2) speakers of English, 3) people with skills needed in the USA, and 4) people who were prepared to make significant investments in the USA (thereby creating jobs). Miller pointed out that taking more people than was the case in the years that Acosta pointed to as the good old days could hardly be racist. Miller also denounced Acosta's "cosmopolitan" view that only people in the UK or Australia spoke English. People all around the world speak English. A great many immigrants from India and Pakistan speak English. The same is true of people from many other countries.
After this exchange, the internet blew up. Miller was accused repeatedly of anti-Semitism. After all, he used the word "cosmopolitan", a description that the Nazis once used to attack Jews. This was, of course, moronic. Acosta is not Jewish. On the other hand, Miller is Jewish. So the lefties on the internet decided to attack as anti-Semitic a Jew who used the word "cosmopolitan" to describe a non-Jew. It's beyond ridiculous, but it is all over the place nevertheless.
Think about it. A plan is put forward that would help the low paid workers of America by reducing the number of unskilled workers pouring into the USA as immigrants. That would raise wages! A bigger percentage of the unskilled Americans who would benefit most from this plan are black and Hispanic. And what is the Democrat/media response? The plan that benefits black and Hispanics is racist. It's not a sensible position.
Think about it some more. The plan promotes immigration by people with skills we need who will be easier to assimilate because they speak English and who could provide investment needed for economic growth. The left's response is to scream racism and anti-Semitism. Don't they have any actual arguments? Is everything they don't like automatically racist? They surely seem to think so.
First, Miller got attacked for promoting a "racist" bill. Jim Acosta of CNN lectured Miller that the provision that give priority to immigrants who speak English was a repudiation of the poem on the Statue of Liberty that says "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." According to Acosta, the poem says nothing about speaking English. Acosta said that this new priority for English speakers would end the long American tradition of following the words on the Statue of Liberty by taking only people from the UK or Australia. (I'm not making this up. Acosta, the moron, really said this.)
Miller's response was perfect. He asked Acosta in which decades did the USA follow the philosophy on the Statute, and then he pointed out that in the 1960's the USA took 300,000 legal immigrants per year, in the 1980s we took 500,000 per year. Even in the 2000's we took about 750,000 per year. Under this bill, we would take more than that. There is no limitation on immigration; there is simply a preference system set up to give priority to immigrants who would be 1) immediate family members of US citizens, 2) speakers of English, 3) people with skills needed in the USA, and 4) people who were prepared to make significant investments in the USA (thereby creating jobs). Miller pointed out that taking more people than was the case in the years that Acosta pointed to as the good old days could hardly be racist. Miller also denounced Acosta's "cosmopolitan" view that only people in the UK or Australia spoke English. People all around the world speak English. A great many immigrants from India and Pakistan speak English. The same is true of people from many other countries.
After this exchange, the internet blew up. Miller was accused repeatedly of anti-Semitism. After all, he used the word "cosmopolitan", a description that the Nazis once used to attack Jews. This was, of course, moronic. Acosta is not Jewish. On the other hand, Miller is Jewish. So the lefties on the internet decided to attack as anti-Semitic a Jew who used the word "cosmopolitan" to describe a non-Jew. It's beyond ridiculous, but it is all over the place nevertheless.
Think about it. A plan is put forward that would help the low paid workers of America by reducing the number of unskilled workers pouring into the USA as immigrants. That would raise wages! A bigger percentage of the unskilled Americans who would benefit most from this plan are black and Hispanic. And what is the Democrat/media response? The plan that benefits black and Hispanics is racist. It's not a sensible position.
Think about it some more. The plan promotes immigration by people with skills we need who will be easier to assimilate because they speak English and who could provide investment needed for economic growth. The left's response is to scream racism and anti-Semitism. Don't they have any actual arguments? Is everything they don't like automatically racist? They surely seem to think so.
No comments:
Post a Comment