According to the L.A. Times, Arizona Lawyer – Clint Bolick co-wrote the “Immigration Wars: Forging an American 
Solution” book with Jeb Bush, but why does it appear the book is not in support of an earned pathway to legal citizenship? Is this the legacy Clint Bolick wants to be part of here in Arizona? Really, dude? Did Bolick just go there? The man who claims to be a Goldwater believer and who serves as director of the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation in Phoenix is now on record for not being in support of a pathway to citizenship. I shouldn’t be surprised … after all I live in the anti-immigrant arm pit of hell when SB 1070 was launched from our Wild Wild Western State of Arizona. Whatever happened to “…Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice … that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue….”?
Why is Jeb Bush not in support of an earned pathway to citizenship reminiscent of taxation without representation policies?
More importantly, why can’t Jeb support a type of Mexican Adjustment Act that resembles the Cuban Adjustment Act? Doesn’t Bush and Bolick know that Cuban immigrants are flowing into the United States via Mexico?
Aren’t all men created equal?
Did you know that once an immigrant from Cuba touches foot on our land — they receive tax payer monies for at LEAST one year? That’s right. Cuban Immigrants receive tax payer funded government benefits. Some Cuban immigrants receive tax payer funded government benefits for years. I am a fan of the Cuban Adjustment Act, but I am ALSO a fan of legal immigration that will help all other immigrants, too, in the same manner. From the Irish undocumented immigrants in Massachusetts and New York, to the Mexicans in the southwestern part of the United states … we need to fix the broken immigration system in a way that is fair and just.
Creating a class where my people pay into the federal tax revenue system — yet, not allowing them to vote is simply wrong.
At its core, the Boston Tea Party was a conflict over taxation, and you may recall to your memory and be familiar with the phrase “taxation without representation,” which developed in this era. So why would Bush support people contributing to federal taxes without the ability to have voting rights? Unlike their British brethren, the people living in the 13 colonies did not have direct representatives in the British parliament. Because of that, the colonists had no way to vote for how they would be taxed or who would represent them. And because of this lack of representation, the British government was free to tax the colonists in any way — and for any amount — that it saw fit. With no way to fight taxation and no way to claim their rights, many colonists feared that their property could be taken away through debilitating taxes.
Here is some disturbing news from the L.A. Times:
Half a year later, the proposal, fleshed out in a newly released book, has landed in the midst of a radically changed political environment. Bush’s proposal – that illegal immigrants could become permanent legal residents, but not citizens – would have been toward the left end of Republican debate last summer. Now it is more conservative than the stance taken by several Republican senators, including Bush’s friend and Florida protege, Marco Rubio.
And Bush, who had hoped his book, “Immigration Wars: Forging an American Solution,” would help set the agenda for his party, has instead spent the last two days struggling to find his footing and fending off accusations that he was undermining Senate negotiations and siding with hard-liners in the House.
“The idea of immediately giving illegal immigrants a pathway to become citizens was seen as a wildly liberal idea. A year later it strikes some as wildly conservative,” said Clint Bolick, the conservative Arizona lawyer who wrote the book with Bush. “It just shows how quickly the political terrain is shifting.” FULL STORY >>>
