Since I’m on the subject of Minnesota Somalis this morning, see this story about how a Supreme Court decision this week helped show us again how Socialist Open Borders advocates, like Somali US Rep Omar, are ignorant of US immigration history.
The Minnesota Democrat was slammed on social media after she tweeted her reaction to a Supreme Court decision in favor of the Trump administration’s new immigrant wealth test.
Omar quoted from Emma Lazarus’s famous poem etched on the Statue of Liberty in her tweet Monday, asking her nearly two million followers to retweet “if your immigrant ancestors wouldn’t be let in if this means tested immigration policy was in place then.”
The Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 vote on Monday on the public charge rule***, handing Trump a victory in enforcing the new immigration policy unveiled last August which allows officials to reject efforts to obtain green cards, visas and entry into the U.S. for anyone who might need to rely on public benefits, such as Medicaid and food stamps.
[….]
Omar’s finger-pointing backfired as Twitter users pointed out that when their “immigrant ancestors” did come to America, there were no welfare programs to subsidize their assimilation.
The rule requires immigration officials to assess factors including an applicant’s age, health and assets, while expanding the list of off-limits public services to include Medicaid, food stamps and housing subsidies.
Pregnant women, children, refugees, asylum seekers and certain members of the military are generally exempt.
I’m sure you’ve all seen it, or at least bits of it! White House immigration expert Stephen Miller takes down an uneducated CNN reporter—Jim Acosta.
Stephen Miller (right)—takes no prisoners!
Here is what Howie Carr saidat his website following the exchange:
It is about damn time that someone put Jim Acosta in his place.
It’s like this clown and Keith Olbermann are in a never-ending competition for the “most smug human on Earth” award. I wish we could just declare one of them the winner and send them back to their mothers’ basements.
But Jim Acosta’s smugness was cut short today by my new hero Stephen Miller.
Miller happens to be very bright, well-spoken and most importantly aggressive.
Check out this smackdown as Jim Acosta tries to claim that the White House’s immigration policies are not keeping with the “spirit” of America.
Maybe Acosta will think twice before he opens his yapper. Then again, knowing these libs–he probably won’t.
Someone should start a movement to have the poem, which changes the entire historic meaning of Lady Liberty, removed from the statue! https://refugeeresettlementwatch.org/2015/07/31/dont-let-them-use-the-lady-liberty-b-s-anymore-remove-the-poem/
Two things I was particularly interested in were these (besides Acosta’s incredible smugness). First, Acosta cannot say what is the right number of immigrants America should take.
I urge all of you to use this line of reasoning when confronted with a No Borders agitator. I saw Bill O’Reilly do it once to an advocate for not closing our southern border. He asked her what was the right number, could anyone come? no restrictions? the whole world?
She was flummoxed because even the most rabid of them know America would crash if the whole world was ‘welcomed’ to the country. They will refuse to say what is the right number!
And, secondly, I was delighted to see Miller demonstrate Acosta’s ignorance of history about the damn poem on the Statue of Liberty. I know a lot about the National Park Services’ historical parks and how they badger communities (when it suits them) to maintain historic accuracy—so why has the NPS continued to foster this historic inaccuracy about the statue? (See my post here in 2015)
If anyone really wanted to strike a blow against this ‘nation of immigrants’ mumbo-jumbo, start a campaign to remove the damn poem!
Everyone has been sending me the video of the debate in Toronto on Friday on the issue of mass migration going on literally around the world, but most visibly now in Europe.
Yesterday, I finally watched the debate and it was all everyone said it was!
Here atWorld Net Daily, reporter Leo Hohmann gives us the highlights (video is embedded in the article). He begins:
Mark Steyn delivered a stinging rebuke of the progressive stance on mass migration of mostly male Muslim refugees into Europe at a recent debate in Toronto.
Steyn faced off April 1 with opponents in the Spring Munk Debates on the issue of refugee resettlement and whether Western countries should welcome thousands of Muslims from the Middle East and Africa.
Mark Steyn
The Munk Debates, founded by Peter Munk, allow the audience to pick the winners based on online voting. When the dust had settled, Steyn’s team was declared the winner. The scores are based on how many viewers report their positions being changed on the issue from pro to con or vice versa.
When the debate started, 77 percent of viewers reported being in favor of refugee resettlement as put forth by the Emma Lazarus poem on the Statue of Liberty: “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”
By the end of the debate, only 55 percent agreed with that position and the “cons” moved from 23 percent to 45 percent.
Steyn, and his debating partner Brit Nigel Farage, won by changing the minds of 22% of the debate audience which came in stacked against them with 77% in favor of supporting those lines in the d*** Emma Lazarus poem, which by the way, I said here should be removedfrom the Statue of Liberty for its role in perpetuating a historical inaccuracy. Louise Arbour Continue Hohmann’s summaryand then near the end note this mention from Pro-refugee debater, Louise Arbour former UN Commissioner for Human Rights.
Arbour said her definition of a “refugee,” based on the current state of armed conflict, should include “virtually every civilian who is not a combatant unless he is a war criminal.”
I can’t impress upon you enough how important it is to stop this campaign to change the definition of what defines a “refugee.”
Every chance they get the one-worlders are promoting this idea that any unhappy person on the move is a legitimate refugee entitled to special treatment wherever he or she wants to go. A legitimate refugee must be able to prove that he/she is persecuted for his religion, race, political persuasion and so forth. Someone migrating to get a job, or healthcare, or running from crime or war is NOT a legitimate refugee!
If you have never read Mark Steyn’s “America Alone: The End of the World as we Know It,”you must. Here at Amazon. When first published a decade ago, Steyn, in analyzing the demographic time bomb Europe was facing, could not have imagined the size and scope of the present invasion and how it would speed up the inevitable end of Europe as we know it.
By the way, most “refugee” advocates in the US are also attempting to expand the definition of ‘refugee’ to include the Unaccompanied Alien Children flooding our borders in recent years.
This is a portion of a comment we received yesterday to our post about the union leaders and other No Borders advocates planning to rally against a local St. Cloud, MN VFW post because the post had the temerity to allow some people to eat dinner there that the Leftists/Progressives didn’t approve of. See that postbecause there is an update about the big pro-America barbecue planned for the VFW.
The commenter, Will Servant, apparently is ignorant of the history of the Statue of Liberty and how the Emma Lazarus poem got there in the first place.
I’m posting this so you will know how to answer when the No Borders agitators try to shut you up with this babble. From Mr. Servant:
Time to get rid of the ” schmaltzy sonnet!” Let’s go on the offense for a change. Let’s find someone in Congress to introduce legislation to remove the ‘poem.’ After all, it is not historically accurate. Getting the plaque removed to a museum, although symbolic, would do more to restore immigration sanity than just about anything else we could do!
Thanks Ann.
You’ve given me enough half truths, innuendo, and opinion masquerading as truth, to last at least until Thanksgiving. I am saddened that there are people so dramatically opposed to what I consider to be righteous and Christian, the caring for the least of us. I am dismayed that there are those who think so incredibly different than I do that it is nearly impossible to even engage them in respectful dialogue. Here is a quote from the famous poem inscribed on a pedestal at the Statue of Liberty.
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Lady Liberty does not mention any exceptions. She does not say give me your preferred, only those I consider deserving. She does not say give me your huddled masses yearning to be free, as long as we don’t have to spend any money on them. She does not have an ethnic or religious litmus test to decide who gets the protection of our mighty nation, in their quest for a better life. Lady Liberty’s lamp lights the way to freedom for everybody. It cannot be extinguished for one and not the other.
Mr. Servant is displaying his ignorance of history!
Here then, for Mr. Servant’s edification, is the real history of the French gift to America—Lady Liberty—from none other thanRoberto Suro, a professor at the Annenberg School of Journalism, founding director of the Pew Hispanic Center, and published in the Washington Post(that right wing rag!).
The article is entitled, ‘She Was Never About Those Huddled Masses.’
Professor Suro tells us in no uncertain terms that the Emma Lazarus poem has to go!
The poem did not come with the statue! It’s a myth! The message of Lady Liberty was never about immigration! It is about the Declaration of Independence!
Roberto Suro:
Let’s get rid of The Poem.
I’m talking about “Give me your tired, your poor . . . ” — that poem, “The New Colossus” by Emma Lazarus, which sometimes seems to define us as a nation even more than Lady Liberty herself.
Inscribed on a small brass plaque mounted inside the statue’s stone base, the poem is an appendix, added belatedly, and it can safely be removed, shrouded or at least marked with a big asterisk. We live in a different era of immigration, and the schmaltzy sonnet offers a dangerously distorted picture of the relationship between newcomers and their new land.
The most enduring meaning conveyed by Lady Liberty has nothing do with immigration, and I say let’s go back to that. The statue’s original name is “Liberty Enlightening the World,” and the tablet the lady holds in her left hand reads “July IV, MDCCLXXVI” to commemorate the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Lady Liberty celebrates U.S. political values as a force for the betterment of humanity, as well as the bond of friendship among freedom-loving nations. That’s a powerful and worthy message.
And the message would have been the same if the statue had ended up in Philadelphia or Cleveland — both were possibilities when New York was having trouble raising money for the pedestal in the late 1870s. Far from Ellis Island, no one would associate it with immigration. Too bad, because on this subject Lady Liberty misleads more than she illuminates, especially with Lazarus’s added spin.
Read it all here, it is very useful information for the next time some No Borders know-it-all agitator tries to guilt-trip you into thinking that Lady Liberty is frowning on you (calling you a racist!) for daring to question our immigration numbers that anyone in their right mind knows are completely unsustainable today.
