Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label immigration. Show all posts

Friday, October 5, 2012

Geopolitical Debate

Jonathan,
         Thanks for your thoughtful and well-articulated response, which I appreciate.  I value your contribution even if, as perhaps you’d suspect, I dissent.

         Yes, other administrations have had border agent injuries and fatalities.  That does not mean the Obama administration is not responsible for its own, especially in light of the bizarrely conceived and executed “Fast and Furious” program, and the way the administration so aggressively opposes at law the states trying to protect themselves against the hordes of illegals that now cross our borders, the total number of whom now reaches more than 13 million.
         Among those illegals are plenty of folks from the more than 30 nations we deem terrorist supporters or terrorist regimes.  We know this because of the documents they leave behind, things like bomb-making manuals, copies of the Koran, and maps of possible terrorism targets.  Yet the Obama administration seeks frequently to hinder those who want to protect us from illegal aliens and from their armed and dangerous protectors, which results in dead and injured agents and which has turned Tucson into the kidnapping capital of North America.

         Empires are attacked because of their oppression and injustice.  They are attacked in spite of  their strength, not because of it.  Whether justly or unjustly, their strength delays or prevents attack.  When I say that peace comes through strength I have in mind nations like Switzerland, which stayed at peace and remained unattacked even while two world wars raged around them on all sides.  The Swiss made the price of entry simply too high for anyone to pay.  No one wanted a piece of that snarling badger, so they left Switzerland alone.  They had peace through strength. 

         Not only do we have deadly enemies, they have killed us by the thousands.  They will kill us by the thousands more if they get the chance.  They look for that chance every day.  They have killed Israelis by the thousands too.  Indeed, they seek ways to wipe Israel off the map and are working toward that end every day, whether in the past it was Saddam Hussein lobbing SCUD missiles into Israel or paying $22,000 to the surviving families of Palestinian terrorists who died while killing Israelis, or in the present it is the Iranians who, against the will of the civilized world, seek the nuclear weapons it needs to annihilate Israel.  So great is the threat to Israel that Henry Kissinger said last week that he didn’t think Israel would exist as a nation for even 10 more years.
         And you cannot appease those who, for religious reasons, seek your death.  That is not how religious extremists think or operate.  Militant Islam has been at war with the West for centuries upon centuries.  Nothing has stopped them, whether appeasement, defeat, or something in between.  Nothing but the end of time will stop them.  As long as this world lasts, Islamic hatred for the West will continue.  We must make our policies on that basis.

         Putin is an ex-KGBer.  The “ex” is only institutional, not by personal conviction.  In his mind and methods, he is what he always was.  He is at the head of resurgent communism in Russia, which hasn’t changed its goals, just modified some of its methods.  The Chinese communists are the same in that regard.  They still mean to be what they always meant to be -- first the Asian and then the global hegemon.  They adjust their methods to their changing circumstances, but their end game is not thereby altered, only the way they get to it.
         North Korea is no threat to us, you are quite right.  They do their best to ally with some of our enemies, but they exist only at China’s will.  The Chinese could end that pathetic little regime at any moment, and no one would stop them.  The North Koreans do what they do by China’s passive, sometimes active, will and permission.  In that light, the only reason that you can go to class every day in peace, or even at all, is because of American power.  You have peace through American strength, of which China is more than well aware.  That’s what keeps them out of Taiwan, out of the disputed Senkaku islands, and out of South Korea.

         Again, Jonathan, many thanks.      
    

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Condi Rice's Speech before the RNC

Prepared Remarks at Republican Convention

Good evening. Distinguished delegates, fellow Republicans, fellow Americans.

We gather here at a time of significance and challenge. This young century has been a difficult one. I will never forget the bright September day, standing at my desk in the White House, when my young assistant said that a plane had hit the World Trade Center – and then a second one – and a third, the Pentagon. And then the news of a fourth, driven into the ground by brave citizens that died so that many others would live. From that day on our sense of vulnerability and our understanding of security would be altered forever. Then in 2008 the global financial and economic crisis stunned us and still reverberates as unemployment, economic uncertainty and failed policies cast a pall over the American recovery so desperately needed at home and abroad.

And we have seen once again that the desire for freedom is universal – as men and women in the Middle East demand it. Yet, the promise of the Arab Spring is engulfed in uncertainty; internal strife and hostile neighbors are challenging the fragile democracy in Iraq; dictators in Iran and Syria butcher their own people and threaten the security of the region; China and Russia prevent a response; and all wonder, “Where does America stand?”

Indeed that is the question of the moment- “Where does America stand?” When our friends and our foes, alike, do not know the answer to that question – clearly and unambiguously -- the world is a chaotic and dangerous place. The U.S. has since the end of World War II had an answer – we stand for free peoples and free markets, we are willing to support and defend them – we will sustain a balance of power that favors freedom.

To be sure, the burdens of leadership have been heavy. I, like you, know the sacrifices that Americans have made – yes including the ultimate sacrifice of many of our bravest. Yet our armed forces remain the sure foundation of liberty. We are fortunate to have men and women who volunteer – they volunteer to defend us on the front lines of freedom. And we owe them our eternal gratitude.

I know too that it has not always been easy – though it has been rewarding – to speak up for those who would otherwise be without a voice – the religious dissident in China; the democracy advocate in Venezuela; the political prisoner in Iran.

It has been hard to muster the resources to support fledgling democracies– or to help the world’s most desperate - the AIDs orphan in Uganda, the refugee fleeing Zimbabwe, the young woman who has been trafficked into the sex trade in Southeast Asia; the world’s poorest in Haiti. Yet this assistance – together with the compassionate works of private charities – people of conscience and people of faith - has shown the soul of our country.

And I know too that there is weariness – a sense that we have carried these burdens long enough. But if we are not inspired to lead again, one of two things will happen – no one will lead and that will foster chaos --- or others who do not share our values will fill the vacuum. My fellow Americans, we do not have a choice. We cannot be reluctant to lead – and one cannot lead from behind.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan understand this reality -- that our leadership abroad and our well being at home are inextricably linked. They know what needs to be done. Our friends and allies must be able to trust us. From Israel to Poland to the Philippines to Colombia and across the world -- they must know that we are reliable and consistent and determined. And our adversaries must have no reason to doubt our resolve -- because peace really does come through strength. Our military capability and technological advantage will be safe in Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan’s hands.

We must work for an open global economy and pursue free and fair trade – to grow our exports and our influence abroad. In the last years, the United States has ratified three trade agreements, all negotiated in the Bush Administration. If you are concerned about China’s rise – consider this fact – China has signed 15 Free Trade Agreements and is negotiating 20 more. Sadly we are abandoning the playing field of free trade – and it will come back to haunt us.

We must not allow the chance to attain energy independence to slip from our grasp. We have a great gift of oil and gas reserves here in North America that must be and can be developed while protecting our environment. And we have the ingenuity in the private sector to tap alternative sources of energy.

And most importantly, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will rebuild the foundation of American strength – our economy – stimulating private sector led growth and small business entrepreneurship. When the world looks at us today they see an American government that cannot live within its means. They see a government that continues to borrow money, mortgaging the future of generations to come. The world knows that when a nation loses control of its finances, it eventually loses control of its destiny. That is not the America that has inspired others to follow our lead.

After all, when the world looks to America, they look to us because we are the most successful political and economic experiment in human history. That is the true basis of “American Exceptionalism.” The essence of America – that which really unites us -- is not ethnicity, or nationality or religion – it is an idea -- and what an idea it is: That you can come from humble circumstances and do great things. That it doesn’t matter where you came from but where you are going.

Ours has never been a narrative of grievance and entitlement. We have not believed that I am doing poorly because you are doing well. We have not been envious of one another and jealous of each other’s success. Ours has been a belief in opportunity and a constant battle – long and hard -- to extend the benefits of the American dream to all – without regard to circumstances of birth.

But the American ideal is indeed endangered today. There is no country, no not even a rising China, that can do more harm to us than we can do to ourselves if we fail to accomplish the tasks before us here at home.

More than at any other time in history –the ability to mobilize the creativity and ambition of human beings forms the foundation of greatness. We have always done that better than any country in the world. People have come here from all over because they believed in our creed – of opportunity and limitless horizons. They have come from the world’s most impoverished nations to make five dollars not fifty cents– and they have come from the world’s advanced societies – as engineers and scientists -- to help fuel the knowledge based revolution in the Silicon Valley of California; the research triangle of North Carolina; in Austin, Texas; along Route 128 in Massachusetts – and across our country.

We must continue to welcome the world’s most ambitious people to be a part of us. In that way we stay perpetually young and optimistic and determined. We need immigration laws that protect our borders; meet our economic needs; and yet show that we are a compassionate people.

We have been successful too because Americans have known that one’s status at birth was not a permanent station in life. You might not be able to control your circumstances but you could control your response to your circumstances. And your greatest ally in doing so was a quality education.

Let me ask you, though, today, when I can look at your zip code and can tell whether you are going to get a good education – can I really say that it doesn’t matter where you came from – it matters where you are going. The crisis in K-12 education is a grave threat to who we are.

My mom was a teacher – I have the greatest respect for the profession – we need great teachers – not poor or mediocre ones. We need to have high standards for our students – self-esteem comes from achievement not from lax standards and false praise. And we need to give parents greater choice – particularly poor parents whose kids – most often minorities -- are trapped in failing neighborhood schools. This is the civil rights struggle of our day.

If we do anything less, we will condemn generations to joblessness, hopelessness and dependence on the government dole. To do anything less is to endanger our global economic competitiveness. To do anything less is to tear apart the fabric of who we are and cement a turn toward grievance and entitlement.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan will rebuild us at home and inspire us to lead abroad. They will provide an answer to the question, “Where does America stand?” The challenge is real and these are tough times. But America has met and overcome difficult circumstances before. Whenever you find yourself doubting us – just think of all the times that we have made the impossible seem inevitable in retrospect.

America’s victorious revolutionary founding – against the greatest military power of the time; a Civil War – hundreds of thousands dead in a brutal conflict – but emerging a stronger union; a second founding – as impatient patriots fought to overcome the birth defect of slavery and the scourge of segregation; a long struggle against communism – that ended with the death of the Soviet Union and the emergence of Europe, whole free and at peace; the will to make difficult decisions, heart-wrenching choices in the aftermath of 9/11 that secured us and prevented the follow-on attacks that seemed preordained at the time.

And on a personal note– a little girl grows up in Jim Crow Birmingham – the most segregated big city in America - her parents can’t take her to a movie theater or a restaurant – but they make her believe that even though she can’t have a hamburger at the Woolworth’s lunch counter – she can be President of the United States and she becomes the Secretary of State. Yes, America has a way of making the impossible seem inevitable in retrospect. But of course it has never been inevitable – it has taken leadership, courage and an unwavering faith in our values.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have the experience and the integrity and the vision to lead us – they know who we are, what we want to be and what we offer the world.

That is why this is a moment – an election – of consequence. Because it just has to be – that the most compassionate and freest country on the face of the earth – will continue to be the most powerful!

May God Bless You – and May God continue to bless this extraordinary, exceptional country – the United States of America.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

In Support of Gingrich on Pro-family Amnesty

Newt Gingrich rightly proposes that we permit illegal aliens who have been here for, say, 25 years, who have a job, a generation or two of family history, and demonstrable ties to the community, to remain in the country, along with their families.  To break up that rooted, responsible, and productive family, Gingrich argues, is an anti-family action, and ought not be the policy of Republicans who wish to be truly pro-family.
In response to Gingrich’s proposal, I’ve heard a man ask, “But what if the illegal alien murders someone in your family, how pro-family is that?  The question is ill-conceived on several counts.
First, it is sub-rational.  It forgets that suppositions are not telling arguments.  We all can suppose things that support our views.  Doing so does not prove that we are right or that the other side is mistaken.  After all, one might suppose an illegal alien whose heroic actions saved the life of one of your family members.  And if you had deported that person, and as a result your son or daughter now were dead because the hero had been banished, how pro-family is that?
Second, to suppose that the person in question will become a murderer flies in the face of the evidence.  It ignores a quarter-century of peaceable character and conduct, such as getting and holding a significant job, paying taxes, getting married and raising a family, consistently paying rent or a mortgage, and community ties and contributions, like church membership -- none of which suggests in any meaningful way that we are dealing with a murderer.  If such persons are potential murderers, then we all are, including the person who made this insulting supposition.
In short, neither side in the debate, whether for or against Gingrich, will deem the other side’s suppositions convincing.  That’s because suppositions are not conclusive.
Third, and this is not a supposition:  There's typically a statute of limitations (or of repose) on crimes, especially non-violent crimes like this.   We rightly understand that the time to prosecute eventually runs out.  The statute of limitations is not a reward for crimes; it's a recognition that the intervening years normally yield new conditions and consequences that ought to be taken into account, conditions and consequences like the deterioration of evidence and of memory, on the one hand, and the unintentional punishment of innocent persons, such as the children who committed no crime, children who were born in America and are legal US citizens, on the other.  Those children committed no crime and must not be deported along with their parents in order to keep the family together.  Nor ought they to be deprived of their parents, if their parents are sent away without them.  That's not how we treat law-keeping, natural born citizens.
If possible, we might want to write a law to that effect, which Gingrich calls “creating legality.”

In Support of Gingrich on Pro-Family Amnesty

Newt Gingrich rightly proposes that we permit illegal aliens who have been here for, say, 25 years, who have a job, two or three generations of family history, and demonstrable ties to the community, to remain in the country, along with their families.  To break up that rooted, responsible, and productive family, Gingrich argues, is an anti-family action, and ought not be the policy of Republicans who wish to be truly pro-family.
In response to Gingrich’s proposal, I’ve heard a man ask, “But what if the illegal alien murders someone in your family, how pro-family is that?  The question is ill-conceived on several counts.
First, it is sub-rational.  It forgets that suppositions are not telling arguments.  We all can suppose things that support our views.  Such suppositions are easily conjured.  Conjuring them does not prove that we are right or that the other side is mistaken.  After all, one might just as easily suppose an illegal alien whose heroic actions saved the life of one of your family members.  And if you had deported that person, and as a result your son or daughter now were dead because the hero had been banished, how pro-family is that?
Second, to suppose that the person in question will become a murderer flies in the face of the evidence.  It ignores a quarter-century of peaceable character and conduct, such as getting and holding a significant job, paying taxes, getting married and raising a family, consistently paying rent or a mortgage, and community ties and contributions, like church membership -- none of which suggests in any meaningful way that we are dealing with a murderer.  If such persons are potential murderers, then we all are, including the person who made this insulting supposition.
In short, neither side in the debate, whether for or against Gingrich, will deem the other side’s suppositions convincing.  That’s because suppositions are not conclusive.
Third, and this is not a supposition:  There's typically a statute of limitations (or of repose) on crimes, especially non-violent crimes like this.   We rightly understand that the time to prosecute eventually runs out.  The statute of limitations is not a reward for crimes; it's a recognition that the intervening years normally yield new conditions and consequences that ought to be taken into account, conditions and consequences like the deterioration of evidence and of memory, on the one hand, and the unintentional punishment of innocent persons, such as the children who committed no crime, children who were born in America and are legal US citizens, on the other.  Those children committed no crime and must not be deported along with their parents in order to keep the family together.  Nor ought they to be deprived of their parents, if their parents are sent away without them.  That's not how we treat law-keeping, natural born citizens.
To the ideological purist, this approach might seem too conciliatory, too compromising.  But politics is the art of the possible, not the pure.  To deport more than 10 million persons seems neither possible nor good.  In most cases, the ideologically pure is not possible, though sometimes it is.  Given the enormity of the undertaking, I doubt that this is one of those times. 
We might want to write a law and a statute of limitations to enshrine Gingrich's chosen effect, which he calls “creating legality.”  When we do, we start the clock on the day of entry, or as close to it as we can reasonably determine.  To be clear, we are talking here about granting legal residency, not citizenship.