Part 6: Congress and corporate profits come first over Americans
“Fourth, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated. I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50 percent dropout rate from high school.”
In this continuing interview, you may be disheartened at the lack of leadership in Congress to work for the best interests of Americans.
Bromwell Ault states:
Finally, Congress’ most far reaching failure to understand the consequences of its own actions was its make-over of our immigration laws during the Johnson administration in 1965. Overturning a century of successful policy keyed to assimilation, which well served the interests of both host Americans and new entrants, the 1965 Act set new policy for the sources, numbers and entry requirements of our immigration process. Traditional skill based admissions from WCIV’s European nations were discarded in favor of third world admissions based on family ties.
The very foreseeable results were dramatic increases in the numbers and ethnic make-up of new 
arrivals, as well as the financial costs of providing social and economic support for them and their dependents which has been estimated to amount to about $300 billion annually5 net of any tax, fees or other payments by them. Sen. Edward Kennedy of MA, who served as the main force in spearheading this bill through Congress, claimed it would not alter the numbers or the nature of our immigration program and Congress passed the Act over the protests of those who understood the numbers and could project their impact on our country.
These points have been debated for decades, but today we face a new and far more serious challenge than the one of just providing the minimal amounts of legislation and funding necessary to meet the government’s basic needs.
We have arrived at a stage of almost continual stalemate in which our elected leaders engage in constant quarreling over their ideological credentials to govern with the result that the real work of government is held hostage by both parties, and the critical time, efforts and energy needed to provide effective government are lost.
In our age, this loss is magnified and accelerated by the social changes that have resulted from near steroidal expansion of our media and technological sectors. In all of these areas — government, communications, science — their rapid and extensive transformations have opened up ssures in our society.
Previously, under a wide range of national challenges — our founding, westward expansion, industrialization, three major wars (one civil and two world), and GD — we were able to call upon our historical cohesion to overcome the obstacles that seemed to block our path and obscure our destiny.
We no longer have that capability. The same aura of contention that pervades our government is mirrored in our people. Call it what we may — malaise, fatigue, corruption, uncertainty, decadence, greed, decline, dogmatism, incompetence, privilege, power, any or all of these — America is now suffering the effects of government that functions only fitfully under a failing leadership. All too often its minimal achievements are managed by stopgap measures, continuing resolutions or enactments that offer partial results or funding. We are barely nibbling at the edges of the major issues that face our nation and the perils to which they expose us.
Admissions such as these, although necessary if we are to survive, are never pleasant, and yet they demand and deserve to be heard. The fact is there are far too many Americans who dismiss them with comments such as, “We’re not in that bad shape” or “We’ll get through, we always do”.
They seem to think that our past successes assure us of continuing dominance over our enemies. They fail to remember that our victories were forged by citizens with a common will, purpose and courage to draw upon, and they are wrong in assuming it is still available on demand. It is gone now, replaced by a culture of drugs and violence, the confusion of our national identity and our disregard of our historic Constitutional values.
All of these offer opportunities to our enemies. Our values are not beyond our reach; they can be reclaimed, but only by a truly national effort of commitment. There are other forces now working against us and WCIV. They view our present failures of leadership as invitations to dislodge WCIV as the world’s preeminent cultural, economic and political entity and to diminish, and then collapse, America’s WCIV and global leadership positions.
Some of these forces are new; some are old and making a new effort. They are China, Russia, Islam and many of the world’s poor populations which through our advancing technology have been allowed to see and hear the differences between life in the third and the developed worlds. Whatever their identity or background, they share among themselves, and with other cultural and commercial interests, the desire to do away with WCIV’s symbolic and actual superiority. And they also share longstanding resentment of differences in race, wealth, ethnicity, government, education, appearance, climate, natural resources, etc.
Both the two Communist states of the vast Asian landmass and the resurgent “sword of Islam” believe that their path to total power would be facilitated by the demise of WCIV and the U.S. In fact, it would only set up a confrontation for dominance between secular, godless world Communism and the faith of militant Islam proclaimed by Mohammad in the Qur’an. As each has its own legal, financial and political forms from which no variations are allowed, western thought about human, social, property, religious, political and cultural freedoms will vanish unless Europe and America can mount a strong defense.
Europe has already moved with alarming haste to accept the social and political dysfunction that has accompanied three years of unchecked, mostly male, Muslim migrants. Its popular will to resist the Muslim invasion is now capable only of small, not large, responses and is overshadowed at the state level by willingness to accommodate migrant demands for status, residence and social support.
Beyond the state level, matters deteriorate further as the European Union (EU) exercises the power of its multi- nation bureaucracy to spend expensive (in time and money) ways to manage, receive and shelter the continuing stream of entrants now arriving from Africa, the Near East (NE), Afghanistan, Turkey and Pakistan.
© 2018 Frosty Wooldridge – All Rights Reserved
E-Mail Frosty: frostyw@juno.com
