08/17/2010
In June, Peter Brimelow dealt with a sad case: Steve Chapman Still Gets An “F” ON Immigration — But, Hey, He’s Still EmployedChapman, apparently a now-rare specimen of a WASP male in the MSM, has been languishing at the Chicago Tribune for almost 30 years. As Peter pointed out, part of the price of survival has been remaining resolutely ignorant on the Immigration issue.
But it is all hands on deck for the Treason Lobby at present as they rush to deal with the Birthright Citizenship squall which has erupted this summer. Chapman has been forced to demonstrate his feeble grasp of the issues once again.
Giving birth to fears The real reasons illegal immigrants have babies Chicago Tribune August 15 2010 (thriftily recycled in Reason Giving Birth to Immigration Fears Why birthright citizenship is nothing to worry about August 16 2010 — A for efficiency, guys) proceeds by failing to state the Anchor Baby issue properly. Chapman admits that Birth Tourism exists but downplays the numbers. He tries to suggest that the balance of the problem consists only of those who immigrate (as opposed to visit) specifically to have children
At most, only 15 percent of the mothers arrived here in a mode of expectancy.
In reality, as I noted last Thursday
… opponents sometimes dishonestly maintain that only the ability to sponsor parents for legal residency when 21 is at issue. But in fact a citizen child is eligible for a lush array of benefits, many of which like food stamps can be shared with family members. Furthermore the possession of a citizen child does in fact sway opinion when deportation is in question (for no good reason).
Furthermore, Chapman completely fails to address the political dimension. I repeat:
As things stand right now, the Open Borders crowd apparently cannot push through Amnesty. But time is on their side. As the illegal invasion breeds, heavily subsidized by the American Taxpayer, the future voting patterns of the country inevitably shift.Abolishing Birthright Citizenship will drastically slow this process down, producing a Swiss situation. Abolition does not address the economic or social damage done by excessive immigration, but it does address the political problem — quite effectively. That is why the nation-destroyers including the Neoconservatives are so hysterical. They see it robs them of something they had banked on — and might split away their Cheap Labor Lobby allies too
In one respect, however, Chapman does some good journalism. He has managed to get the Plutocrat of the Immigration Reform movement the Federation For American Immigration Reform (FAIR) on the record on this question (which cannot be done by searching on their website).
The more sober opponents of illegal immigration don’t think birthright citizenship is much of a draw. When I called Ira Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, he said, "It’s probably one factor among many. Most people come because of better economic opportunities." Change the Constitution, and they'd keep coming.
The behavior of FAIR and CIS in this controversy is incredible. VDARE.com’s friends in the DC Immigration Reform outfits (we do have some — they are anxious not to be named) tell us that it has been impossible to find sponsorship in this Congress for an employment-motivated moratorium, for instance. Here they have volunteers and they respond with discouragement. Whose side are they on?
NumbersUSA is an honorable exception.
Tell Steve Chapman to study up some more
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.