U.S.A. – -(Ammoland.com)- “A new report released … by the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNA), SEIU, and Georgia local organizations reveals that over 96,000 newly naturalized Americans in the state, who naturalized between 2016 and 2020, could significantly influence the outcome of the 2022 midterm elections,” the National Partnership for New Americans (NPNSA)/Service Employees International Union (SEIU) immigration group CASA announced August 24. “This number exceeds over eight times the state’s November 2020 presidential election margin of victory and the 2021 Senate runoff election margin of 93,272 votes.”
“This voting bloc, called New American Voters, is racially and ethnically diverse, with a majority coming from Asia (37,773 or 39%) and the Americas (34,479 or 36%), followed by new citizens coming from Africa (15,510 or 16%),” the release elaborates. “These groups respectively are larger than the 11,779-vote margin of victory during the November 2020 presidential election.”
“This campaign is non-partisan,” NPNA Executive Director Nicole Melaku claims. “New American voters have the power to shape electoral outcomes, and will be drawn to the polls by a variety of issues, especially around the anti-immigrant sentiment and policies that continue to permeate our country.”
“The current immigrant and refugee rights movement is part of the larger fight for racial and economic justice and central to the struggle against right-wing authoritarianism,” NPNA asserts on Facebook. That means they’re “left-wing.” But say they’re not strictly partisan, meaning not strictly Democrats. It’s fair to ask if their partnership with SEIU means their sympathies are more along the lines of communism.
“Georgia used to be a solidly red state,” Breitbart observes. “However, the growing number of legal and illegal migrants recruited by businesses has allowed the Democrats to gain state seats and to win a national Senate majority in 2021 when Georgians elected two Democrat Senators.”
The Senate, of course, is where confirmations are made. It’s also the body holding back more ambitious infringements by the House, such as the so-called “assault weapons” ban and a host of other “gun laws.”
“The mass inflow of Democratic-voting legal immigrants is protected by the Georgia business groups,” the Breitbart report continues. “The groups — including agriculture, construction, retail, and landlords — strongly favor the extraction of additional workers, consumers, and renters from foreign countries, by both legal and illegal migration.”
They’re the “rope-selling capitalists” that Lenin (or some other communist leader) supposedly bragged about.
Surprisingly, no gun group dares utter a peep about immigration, both legal and illegal, and its effects on government recognition of the right to keep and bear arms. It’s like they’re afraid the media and the Democrats are going to brand them xenophobes and haters as if that’s not exactly what they do already. Either that or some of their leaders are compromised by conflicting priorities.
Regardless, while they’re avoiding the issue using a phony “single issue” excuse that ignores the greatest threat to gun owners, the Democrats are pushing toward an unchallengeable majority. They’ll attain supermajorities in state and federal legislatures that will be able to pass whatever anti-gun edicts they want and nominate and confirm judges who will uphold them.
In any case, it’s neither hateful nor xenophobic for any nation-state to determine that the security and the interests of its citizens mean they don’t just let anybody in whenever they want. “Secur[ing[ the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,” is a prime directive of the Constitution, and failing to do that is a failure (or planned subversive abuse) of delegated powers.
Bottom line: Those who are intent on changing the culture are telling us what they’re going to do. Our “gun rights leaders” are silent on informing their members and rallying them to exert political pressure.
And as for those voices advocating an effort to recruit newcomers rather than “alienate” them, while no one should discourage that, note the proponents never include an estimate for what reaching millions is going to cost, how effective it will be, where the money to do it is supposed to come from, what the best venues for market penetration are, what to do when targeted media outlets deny editorial and ad space, and what the plan is for when social media decides to cancel accounts for spreading claims overridden by “fact checkers.”
Let this continue, and it won’t be too many more elections before it’s all a moot point anyway.