More on Immigration

I have a confession to make. I simply can not get worked up about immigration. At all. I can’t even remember if I had strong opinions about it in the past (although I wager if I had an opinion, it was a strong one).

Memeorandum has a slew of links up, and I tried to read them, and I realized that I just don’t care. I found the High School walkout story to be interesting simply because I was interested to know if there was a reason for the walk-out or if it was just kids finding a way to cut class.

To make things even worse, I don’t have any desire to educate myself about the current Senate/House legislation. The way I see it, a wall is impractical, not granting amnesty is pointless (does anyone really think we are going to round up all the illegals?), I am not convinced by arguments that illegals are an economic drain or boon (if I had to make an uneducated guess, I would argue it is a wash), and if terrorists want to sneak bombs in, they will find a way that does not involve illegals.

About the only thing I think should be done is that border states that do have to finance immigrant related activity should probably be aided in some way by the federal government, or at the very least, if required by courts and the feds to provide emergency health care or other unfunded mandates, be reimbursed so that the country as a whole is sharing the burden. I would also firebomb the INS headquarters and start from scratch, but for the love of God don’t let the Homeland Security Department or the folks behind the Prescription Drug plan anywhere near the building process.

Again, I have not studied the issue, but those are my thoughts as of now. I guess by not taking this ‘security’ issue seriously, I am clearly in league with Al Qaeda. Or the Jane Hamshers of the left. Whichever is worse.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit

263 replies
  1. 1
    Clever says:

    The Jane Hamshers of Al Qaeda?

    Or are you just in league with the left?

    Answers, dammit!

  2. 2
    Gray says:

    “Or the Jane Hamshers of the left.”

    Oh no! Not again!
    Would you pls try to memorize:
    1. There’s just ONE Jane Hamsher, she’s the one and only!
    2. Sometimes her postings are a bit confusing (just like yours), but there is no evidence whatever that she’s a muzltiple personality.

    K, since we don’t have to discuss immigrants, thank god, how about W’s ideal of democracy? Seems to be like: You elect the PM that I chose.
    “Ambassador Khalilzad said that President Bush “doesn’t want, doesn’t support, doesn’t accept” Mr. Jaafari to be the next prime minister”

  3. 3
    Marcus Wellby says:

    When Republicans propose to fine the KNOWN corporations that hire illegals, I will take them seriously on this issue. Until then it is nothing more than theatre. Enforce the existing laws and stop wasting time and tax payers money on NEW laws that will also go unenforced.

  4. 4
    Pb says:

    “I am clearly in league with Al Qaeda. Or the Jane Hamshers of the left.”

    Just so long as Jane Hamsher isn’t in league with the Jane Hamshers of the left.

  5. 5
    Sirkowski says:

    John Cole makes more sense when he’s apathic then when he cares.

  6. 6
    BIRDZILLA says:

    Our imperial senate have voted to make us part of mexico and made FOX as our new president they have put out the welcome matt to AL QUEDA they all should be impeached

  7. 7
    Blue Neponset says:

    I guess by not taking this ‘security’ issue seriously, I am clearly in league with Al Qaeda. Or the Jane Hamshers of the left. Whichever is worse.

    I would have to know your position on illegal immigrants using white phospherous rounds before I could venture a guess as to which group you are in league with.

  8. 8
    Ancient Purple says:

    Our imperial senate have voted to make us part of mexico and made FOX as our new president they have put out the welcome matt to AL QUEDA they all should be impeached

    Somebody help me here.

    That quote above is English, right?

  9. 9
    Gray says:

    “I would have to know your position on illegal immigrants using white phospherous rounds before I could venture a guess as to which group you are in league with.”

    Hmm, difficult question. John in bed with Osama or with Jane? Is one of them a Steelers fan? :P

  10. 10
    Gray says:

    “That quote above is English, right?”

    Or maybe Spenglish? And who’s that Al Queda guy? The mexican name for Al Bundy in ‘casado con cabritos’?

  11. 11
    Tony Alva says:

    Like many others John, I’ll bet that the immigration issue simply doesn’t affect your life directly in any meaningful way at this point. This is probably due to the state in which you live in according to the map of illegal immigrant population by state I saw in Newsweek last night. Here in the Atlanta area, the influx has been enormous and has come in a very short period of time. Hospital emergancy rooms are over burdaned, ESL kids are dragging down the schools, illegal hostels are popping up in neighborhoods where they didn’t exist before, etc… Like you, I had no dog in this hunt seven/eight years ago, but the problems associated with illegal immigration have arrived here despite it and I’m forced to dig in.

    I think there’s much common ground across parties here if we can all keep from polarizing it.

  12. 12
    Pooh says:

    John Cole proving Malcolm Gladwell right (er, correct) at every turn.

    Personally, I think you’re in league with El Queso of New Hampshire – mighty fine fajitas con carne they have there.

  13. 13
  14. 14

    Like John, I can’t get too worked up about this one way or another.

    That being said there has been a remarkable influx of immigrants in recent years, and I’m not sure it’s a good thing if it’s not well controlled. As you noted, there is a burden to some of these states.

    The thing, as Tony Alva notes, is that this isn’t just border states. In Iowa, for example, they’ve had to open up INS offices out in the rural areas, mainly because of an influx of people coming to work for the meat packing plants.

  15. 15
    Blue Neponset says:

    Personally, I think you’re in league with El Queso of New Hampshire – mighty fine fajitas con carne they have there.

    Pooh,

    Where in NH is El Queso?

    If you find yourself anywhere near Concord, NH and you haven’t already, check out Tio Juan’s or Hermano’s.

  16. 16
    DougJ says:

    Personally, I think you’re in league with El Queso of New Hampshire – mighty fine fajitas con carne they have there.

    Shouldn’t that be “los quesos New Hampshire”?

  17. 17
    Davebo says:

    Tony,

    Atlanta? Hah!

    I’m in Houston and we have more illegal immigrants than Atlanta has Braves fans. And yes, they are a strain on our medical facilities, cost us more in schools, and add expenses in many other ways.

    Of course there’s the flip side as well. There hasn’t been a structure built in the last 20 years that didn’t use undocumented labor. They also are helping to prop up social security by working under false social security numbers yet still paying FICA withholdings, etc.

    Heck the city even built a temporary day laborer facility for these workers to wait for work at. There was a small uproar but it quickly abated.

    Right now hispanics are marching and though they get some media attention, they really won’t accomplish much. But should they organize a work stoppage stand by to see your local economy crawling to a near halt. I don’t know how likely this is in Atlanta or here in Houston and think it’s much more likely to occur in San Diego or LA first. But once it happens and it is shown just how much power these people really have it could surely spread.

    I don’t have an answer to the problem, but I do think that many of the solutions offered are a bit silly.

  18. 18
    stasis says:

    “Hollywood activist SEAN PENN has a plastic doll of conservative US columnist ANN COULTER that he likes to abuse when angry. The Oscar-winner actor has hated Coulter ever since she blacklisted his director father LEO PENN in her book TREASON. And he takes out his frustrations with Coulter, who is a best-selling author, lawyer and television pundit, on the Barble-like doll. In an interview with The New Yorker magazine, Penn reveals, “We violate her. There are cigarette burns in some funny places. She’s a pure snake-oil salesman. She doesn’t believe a word she says.” http://www3.contactmusic.com/news/index33.htm

    Key words: “she doesn’t believe a word she says.” By contrast, the Jane Hamshers of the World (which in this case does include those might be mistaken for the Jane Hamshers of the World as well as Jane Hamsher herself) do believe what they say. And if they don’t, they don’t bother to say it!

  19. 19
    ImJohnGalt says:

    Tony, aren’t the problems you describe consistent with increased immigration period, rather than just illegal immigration?

    Here in Canada, 3/4 of new immigrants settle in one of three cities – Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal – a full 43% of all new immigrants settled in Toronto alone.

    I recognize that the scale may be different, but assuming that legal immigration would need to be increased to offset the illegals, isn’t the assimilation of new immigrants a problem that needs to be solved permanently, rather than delayed by deporting the existing illegal immigrants and hoping that the legal ones will distribute themselves randomly throughout the US?

    Just curious.

  20. 20
    Davebo says:

    Mexican food?

    In New Hampshire?

    Reminds me of the combination Cajun/Tex Mex place I tried in Amsterdam. How any food could be more Un-Cajun, Un-Tex Mex is beyond me!

    And to the folks running the Amigo Tex Mex restaraunt just outside of Marsailles I just wanna say “There is no such thing as Mexican Spaghetti”.

  21. 21
    tim maguire says:

    As someone who lives in a city with at least 2 million (and probably more) illegal immigrants, I don’t care either. There may be a cost to landowners near the border, but once they’re here, I don’t believe there is a cost.

    And the day I’m willing to ride my bicycle down a traffic clogged street late on a rainy Friday night in March when it’s 35 degress just so someone doesn’t have to leave the apartment for their General Tsao’s Chicken is the day I’ll lobby for that guy to be thrown out of my country.

  22. 22
    Gold Star for Robot Boy says:

    Our imperial senate have voted to make us part of mexico and made FOX as our new president they have put out the welcome matt to AL QUEDA they all should be impeached

    It’s dialogue from Star Wars: Border Disorder. Ep. 3-1/2, between Sith and A New Hope/.

  23. 23
    Tim F. says:

    I would also firebomb the INS headquarters

    Say hi to the NSA for me.

  24. 24
    Lee says:

    Keep in mind while everyone is ranting and raving that the illegals DO pay taxes (most if not all of the same ones we do).

    Here is Texas we have no income tax but sales and property taxes. Both of which they will pay even if their income is completely cash based. As someone else pointed out, if they are using a false SS# then they are also paying federal taxes.

    As for a drain on X industry (health, school, etc) there are other groups that are not illegal that also are a drain on the same industries.

    You really want to stop illegal immigration? Annex Mexico.

  25. 25
    Faux News says:

    I too “heart” Bridezilla and her entertaining posts! I think she is the love child of Vixen News (Stormy) and Darrell!

  26. 26
    SeesThroughIt says:

    Personally, I think you’re in league with El Queso of New Hampshire – mighty fine fajitas con carne they have there.

    Ah yes…I know of El Queso and their fanatic leader, El Guapo. Together, we plundered and pruned the hedges of many a small village. Then we raped the horses and rode off on the women.

  27. 27
    Davebo says:

    John,

    Ezra makes an interesting note.

    WTF?
    John Cole, noting a 500,000 person march that resulted in not one arrest and a fully peaceful walkout from LA County schools, sniffs that he “doesn’t know what to make of it” and implies that California’s immigrants are gearing up for a race riot.

    http://ezraklein.typepad.com/blog/2006/03/wtf.html

  28. 28
    Krista says:

    ImJohnGalt,

    Did you see this?

    Bush, … emphasized that he’s not resentful about some “harsh words” that have characterized the two countries’ relationship in the last few years, acknowledging that Canadians have been “skeptical” and have every right to their own opinions.

    Gee, thanks. Good to know we have your permission to think what we like, Georgie.

    “Part of the problem that we had was because of my decision to go into Iraq,” he said. “The government of both countries didn’t agree. And I understand that. War is terrible, it’s an awful thing,” the president said in remarks released Tuesday by the White House.

    It’s an especially awful thing when you don’t know what the hell you’re doing, isn’t it?

    Bush said he wants to convince Canadians, …that “we genuinely care about our friends and neighbours to the north and will work to resolve different issues in an above-board way that is mutually beneficial.”

    He can blow it out his arse, is what he can do.

    Sorry for the threadjack…had to vent. Pisses me off that that miserable bastard has been insulting us from Day 1, starting with him not even acknowledging us for taking in all those stranded travellers on 9/11, continuing with him screwing us on softwood, and then acting like we’re terrorist sympathizers ’cause we didn’t join him in Iraq, even though we’re getting our arses shot off in Afghanistan, and now he “genuinely cares” about us?

    Fuck you, Mr. President.

  29. 29
    JoeTx says:

    The “War on Immigration”, just like the “War on Christmas”. Just another trumped up diversionary tactic to take the spotlight off Bush’s failed presidency and total lack of republican accountability about anything.

    Listening to the talking hacks this morning was maddening! Talking about we should protest just like the hispanics in LA. If your gonna protest, then protest our government for not dealing with the problem and offering VIABLE solutions. They talk like the hispanics just cross the border then sit on their A$$ and wait for handouts. That maybe true for some, but most are extremely hardworking, many start their own businesses and many create net gain employment.

    they take alot of jobs, most americans wouldn’t do, and in fact, most americans would rely on welfare before taking some of the low paying jobs the hispanics take. the repubs talk about deporting them and that is a joke! It would cost BILLIONS of dollars and divert our attention away from REAL border security issues, like terrorists bringing in dirty bombs, etc…

  30. 30
    John Cole says:

    Davebo-

    A.) It is not interesting, it is a lame interpretation of what I wrote
    B.) I replied 45 minutes ago. Scroll down.

  31. 31
    John Cole says:

    I think that is the first time I have ever seen Krista mad.

    We are breaking new ground here at Balloon Juice this week. I bet I can get her to say fucktard by the end of the week.

  32. 32
    Laura says:

    Right now hispanics are marching and though they get some media attention, they really won’t accomplish much.

    I don’t think that’s completely true. Proposition 187 turned California blue. 500,000 people marching in LA was a good reminder of that. And think about all those high school kids voting in their first election. You might not be able to draw a direct line between the marches and our upcoming governor’s race or any future race, but at the very least, Arnold will think twice before praising the Minutemen again. There’s already a lot of friction between him and the conservative base. Those marches aren’t going to help.

  33. 33
    Pooh says:

    Ah yes…I know of El Queso and their fanatic leader, El Guapo.

    But he did have a few fine seasons for the Red Sox, so I heart him for that…hrmm Red Sox…I AM a communist (Quantico, VA, HELLO!)

  34. 34
    Krista says:

    LOL…you can always hope, John. I have actually lost my temper before. I don’t remember on which thread it was, however. That was more of a catfight, however. This…? This is different.

  35. 35
    ImJohnGalt says:

    Sorry for the threadjack…had to vent. Pisses me off that that miserable bastard has been insulting us from Day 1, starting with him not even acknowledging us for taking in all those stranded travellers on 9/11, continuing with him screwing us on softwood, and then acting like we’re terrorist sympathizers ‘cause we didn’t join him in Iraq, even though we’re getting our arses shot off in Afghanistan, and now he “genuinely cares” about us?

    Hey, when you’re in the low 30’s in popularity at home, you gotta find some support somewhere. I really wasn’t that pissed about him not thanking Canada in his post 9/11 speech. It was ignorant, but a) I don’t expect any better from him and b) I think Canadians would be a lot better off if they generally stopped caring what Americans think about them. They generally don’t think about us at all.
    That said, you may add to your enumeration the 4 Canadian troops killed in Afghanistan by the US National Guard Airmen. I’d prefer that when they do think about us, it is as more than targets.

    We are breaking new ground here at Balloon Juice this week. I bet I can get her to say fucktard by the end of the week.

    Welcome back, John.

  36. 36
    Pooh says:

    Oh Muffins, did the President say something mean about the Canucks? I hate hockey too.

  37. 37
    Otto Man says:

    That quote above is English, right?

    It’s Birdzillian, I believe. I find it helps if you imagine it being said by the old guy at the end of the bar, the one who smells like Jaegermeister and failure.

  38. 38
    Punchy says:

    Mr. Cole;

    As someone above noted, I think the prob/no prob is WHOLLY dependant on geography. In KS, I can’t say I’ve even run into more than a handful of any minorities, illegal or not. Their meager population neither denies me employment nor affects my health care. But…

    …people in AZ and NM have horror stories about what 1K/month (week?) of new people can do to their hospitals and schools. This is strictly regional, and perhaps you can find a guest blogger from Cali, TX, or one of the aforementioned states to opine on the matter. Would be interesting to hear their take…

  39. 39
    JWeidner says:

    Sorry for the threadjack…had to vent.

    Hey, what’s all this aboot? Let’s sit down, have a little poutine and talk hockey, eh?

    ;) Just kidding. I love Canada!

  40. 40
    Mr Furious says:

    I had a rant on Tancredo back in December after watching one of the “60 Minutes” of the left…

    I just watched the 60 Minutes Immigration piece. You were featured prominantly spouting your anti-immigtration bullshit. Calling for “whatever billions of dollars it takes” to build a wall the length of the entire Mexican border to keep out illegal immigrants depending heavily on the argument of “protecting us from terrorists.”

    Here’s what I have to say about that:

    I just drove a van into the country from Canada, without having to so much as show an ID. Seriously. I just posed a much greater threat to the security of the homeland than any starving 16-year-old running across the desert.

    Your plan is to protect the country by wasting undetermined billions of dollars on a fucking fence, even though there’s been no evidence of terrorists entering the country from Mexico, and there actually have been terrorists with carloads of explosives apprehended coming in from Canada.

    That experts (and non-experts like myself, who merely apply common sense) acknowledge a greater threat lies in uninspected shipping containers and cargo. The reason that can’t happen? Shortage of funding.

    Oh, and let’s not forget the fact that every one of the 9/11 hijackers entered the country through proper immigration channels.

    You complete fucking incompetent dick.

    It wouldn’t be the first (or last) time you saw me angry, John…

  41. 41
    ppGaz says:

    Immigration is hardly the hideous crisis it is cooked up to be by the manipulators and demagogues. On that score, John, your take on it is pretty sensible.

    In once listened to a family member from California (my native state, so I have an interest) rant about the awful burdens on Californians caused by “all those Mexicans” coming in from the south.

    We did a little paper and pencil math and figured that her costs to fund the great burden was around $5 a month, based on the taxes she was paying.

    So after a while I said, you know what? I think you’ve gotten your five bucks worth out of me for the time being. Go rant at someone else about it.

    Never heard from her since on the topic.

    Next time somebody claims that immigration is a great burden, do the math and get a real number for that person’s burden. You might both be surprised at the actual total.

  42. 42
    ImJohnGalt says:

    What would you do
    If you were asked to give up your dreams for freedom
    What would you do
    If asked to make the ultimate sacrifice

    Would you think about all them people
    Who gave up everything they had.
    Would you think about all them War Vets
    And would you start to feel bad

    Freedom isn’t free
    It costs folks like you and me
    And if we don’t all chip in
    We’ll never pay that bill
    Freedom isn’t free
    No, there’s a hefty fuckin’ fee.
    And if you don’t throw in your buck ‘o five
    Who will?

    What would you do
    If someone told you to fight for freedom.
    Would you answer the call
    Or run away like a little pussy
    ‘Cause the only reason that you’re here.
    Is ’cause folks died for you in the past
    So maybe now it’s your turn
    To die kicking some ass

    Freedom isn’t free
    It costs folks like you and me
    And if we don’t all chip in
    We’ll never pay that bill
    Freedom isn’t free
    Now there’s a have to hook’in fee
    And if you don’t throw in your buck ‘o five
    Who will?

    You don’t throw in your buck ‘o five. Who will?
    Oooh buck ‘o five
    Freedom costs a buck ‘o five

    Copyright Trey Parker presumably and some other companies.

  43. 43
    ppGaz says:

    PS — I love all Canadians. And Canadian bacon. And Canadian Club. And Canadian Sunset.

  44. 44
    Davebo says:

    PPGaz,

    I like Malibu Coconut rum from time to time, which oddly enough is also a product of Canada.

  45. 45
  46. 46
    KC says:

    I’m a Californian John, and I’m with you.

  47. 47
    ImJohnGalt says:

    But do you love Canadian Bacon?

    Yes, but only because when it was filmed, Michael Moore was not a fat, godless communist.

    Now, however, he is a fatty-fat-fatterton.

  48. 48
    Laura says:

    When I was a kid, going to Detroit for Tigers games and then “going to Canada” for dinner was a big treat for me. I just thought that was the coolest thing. Unfortunately, that’s it for my Canadian experience.

  49. 49
    ImJohnGalt says:

    Given that this has turned into an open thread of sorts, thanks to ignorant people like me who keep threadjacking, I’d like to further foment incredulousness toward the WaPo by pointing you to a recent post by Digby.

    Hint: It has to do with the press internalizing right-wing talking points to the point that they react to bieng called “traitor!” with hurt feelings and shame rather than indignant rage.

  50. 50
    CadillaqJaq says:

    John Cole says: “I have a confession to make. I simply can not get worked up about immigration.”

    Me either.

    But ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION?: yes.

    Congress has passed immigration laws and procedures. Either use them or take them off the books. Will they? No. “Immigration” is a too great a political tool.

  51. 51
    jg says:

    No. “Immigration” is a too great a political tool.

    If it’ll put or keep republicans in office……..

  52. 52
    The Other Steve says:

    Reminds me of the combination Cajun/Tex Mex place I tried in Amsterdam. How any food could be more Un-Cajun, Un-Tex Mex is beyond me!

    The Tex-Mex restaurant I went to in Edinburgh, Scotland had to be worse. Although I gotta give the guy an A for effort of introducing the scots to something more palatable than Hagis.

  53. 53
    Paddy O'Shea says:

    Here is So Cal the sanctimony knows no bounds. You can’t help but wonder what will happen to Mr and Mrs Overweight GOP Whiteperson when they no longer have cheap illegal help to clean their homes, watch their brats and cut their lawns.

    But upset about illegal immigration? of course they are.

    The Republicans are going to run in 2006 on an anti-Mexican message. They are now in no way different from the Dixiecrats of the segregation era. And that is what we’re going to hit those bastards with here. Right between their fucking eyes.

  54. 54
    Tobin Maker says:

    You just can’t get over the humiliation of being shown up, can you, John?

  55. 55
    elledblu says:

    Like many others John, I’ll bet that the immigration issue simply doesn’t affect your life directly in any meaningful way at this point. This is probably due to the state in which you live in according to the map of illegal immigrant population by state I saw in Newsweek last night.

    As someone above noted, I think the prob/no prob is WHOLLY dependant on geography. In KS, I can’t say I’ve even run into more than a handful of any minorities, illegal or not. Their meager population neither denies me employment nor affects my health care. But…

    First, John doesn’t really strike me as the “I don’t give a rat’s ass about anything unless it personally affects me” type.

    Second, I live less than 200 miles from the Mexican border and I think John’s post is pretty much spot-on. The “not caring” is simply an acknowledgement that whatever problems caused by illegal immigration are pretty much offset by its benefits.

  56. 56
    ppGaz says:

    I like Malibu Coconut rum from time to time, which oddly enough is also a product of Canada.

    That is odd. But it’s a global world now. My Dole peaches with fruit gelatin dessert is made in Thaliand. The person who helped me get my Linksys wireless-G router going was in the Phillipines.

    But …. coconut rum? You drink coconut rum?

  57. 57
    ImJohnGalt says:

    Yeah. “Philistine” was pretty much came to mind when I read that too, ppG.

  58. 58
    Brian says:

    Proposition 187 turned California blue.

    Not sure what this means, but this proposition was passed overwhelmingly, only to be overturned by the Ninth Circuit court. To be passed, a lot of blues had to vote for it.

    Illegal immigrants are hired by people on the left as well as the right. And you can say you live in CA, but not really be affected by illegal immigrants. You can live in, say, Big Sur, or Carmel, or Eureka, and not have it impact you like it does here in SoCal.

    So, if you don’t get worked up about it, I think you may be asking the wrong questions. Think of it this way:

    Do you care at all about national sovereignty?

    Do you think there should be open borders, without restrictions?

    Do you believe that the market economy cannot withstand less illegal/legal immigrants?

    Do you think we should allow anyone to come here, or be more selective in terms of economic/social benefit to the U.S.?

    If you go to Mexico with your pregnant wife (IF she was pregnant…..using rhetorical license here, John), should you expect that child to also have Mexican citizenship (whether or not you care) and get free medical care during your stay?

    Do you think that assimilation of immigrants is important, or is it best to leave them to nurture their native culture, have bilingual programs at taxpayer expense, and be able to do business wherever in their native language and have businesses adapt to them?

    Do you believe that the issuance of Matricula Consular cards by Mexican embassies should continue and for it to be a de facto ID that’s accepted at U.S. financial institutions?

    Should Vincente Bush put any expectations of Vincente Fox to curb immigration of his citizens, enabling them through devices like instruction manuals and special police force to get immigrants across the border?

    Do you understand that illegals have to deal with criminals, mostly from their culture, preying on them on payday, stealing their hard-earned pay that often comes in the form of cash?

    Do you understand that the argument of “illegals do work that Americans won’t do” is a false argument, and that if legalized, the formerly illegal workers can enjoy the benefits of simply being a legal employee, like all of us on this thread?

    When factoring in the net “benefit” of illegals to this country, are you factoring in the billions that they send home to Mexico? Does this benefit our economy, or Mexico’s?

    Just looking for honest answers. This is not a Right vs. Left issue. we’re in this together, and while I am pro-immigration, and see no reason to deport or criminalize immigration, aren’t we abdicating our soveriegnty and national identity? We’re allowing our laws to be breached right before our eyes, and Congress is endorsing it.

    We have no right to this land because we don’t care about it.

    Trust me, if the economy makes a hard downturn, the illegals with be very unpopular. We’re too fat and happy to care now, it seems, but when things turn sour, it’ll change big time.

  59. 59
    ppGaz says:

    Maybe he uses it as a pomade.

  60. 60
    Francis says:

    there’s a point upthread worth repeating. any attempt to deal with illegal immigration that doesn’t focus on employers is like baling the ocean with a sieve.

    Illegal aliens form the labor backbone of all sorts of industries: sewing and textiles, meatbacking, agriculture, home construction, food preparation, hotel/hospitality.

    If you look closely at the management of the major corporations in those industries, I suspect you’ll find that they have a great deal of political clout no matter who’s in power.

    and frankly the rest of us like the fact that the low wages in those industries get passed on in lower prices.

    so unless you want to have a really big discussion about the 30+year stagnation of median household income, you’re just fooling yourself that fences and homeland security will have any impact.

    btw INS is no longer operative; it’s ICE (immigration and customs enforcement).

  61. 61
    ppGaz says:

    Francis, not so sure.

    The immigration drivers that I’ve read about are the factors that push immigrants out of their old surroundings and into their new ones, primarily, lousy economies which push out-migration. The lousier they are by comparison, the stronger the drivers.

    The employment of in-migrants seems to me to be simply a practice of opportunity. With immigrants streaming in and available, why not hire them?

    As for stagnation of income, I know a lot of people in a lot of households, but I don’t know one that is impacted by wage pressure from immigrants. Immigrants are not impacting mainstream middle class wage earners in terms of employment and wages. But they do impact those wage earners in terms of prices for goods and services that they buy. So what would incent those people to be riled up about in-migration?

  62. 62
    Otto Man says:

    I can’t really get excited about the illegal immigration “threat” either. This country finds a new group of immigrants to panic about every generation.

    The last couple of decades, it’s been an alternating theme of Mexicans and Arabs. Before that, we had a panic over South Asians and Southeast Asians after the Great Society immigration reforms of the 1960s and the influx of Vietnamese refugees, a panic over the Japanese “threat” in the early 1940s, a panic over “swarthy Europeans” like Italians, Greeks, Slavs and Poles in the 1920s that led to the 1924 national origins restrictions, a panic over “anarchist” Russian Jews in the 1900s and 1910s, a panic over the Chinese in the 1880s that led to the exclusion acts, a panic over the Irish immigrants behind the draft riots in the 1860s, a panic over the German influx in the 1850s, a panic over the Mexicans incorporated by land grabs in the 1840s, a panic over the French-speakers brought in through the Louisiana Purchase, etc. etc.

    If you want to get ahead of the curve on this one, buy stock in the panic over the next immigrant group. My money’s on those filthy, degenerate Swedes.

  63. 63
    Otto Man says:

    Although I gotta give the guy an A for effort of introducing the scots to something more palatable than Hagis.

    Did someone say haggis?

  64. 64
    Pooh says:

    We’re allowing our laws to be breached right before our eyes, and Congress is endorsing it.

    I had to check myself, I thought I was reading Greenwald for a second. All snark aside, this strikes me as an issue (like drugs, perscrpition and otherwise) where the forces of supply and demand largely overpower legalisms, and trying to brute-force idealogically driven laws onto the situation isn’t likely to help.

  65. 65
    stickler says:

    So what would incent those people to be riled up about in-migration?

    The death of the manufacturing sector and the wholesale disappearance of middle-class jobs.

  66. 66
    stickler says:

    If you want to get ahead of the curve on this one, buy stock in the panic over the next immigrant group. My money’s on those filthy, degenerate Swedes.

    Oh, no. I’d put money on a large number of desperate Iraqi refugees coming to our shores. Just after the last helicopter takes off from the Embassy roof in the Green Zone.

  67. 67
    ppGaz says:

    The death of the manufacturing sector

    Eh? Migrants are responsible for the “death of the manufacturing sector?”

    Prove it.

  68. 68
    ppGaz says:

    And …

    Eh? Migrants are responsible for disappearing middle-class jobs?

    Prove it.

  69. 69

    I just want to know if it’s okay to use white phosphorus in the war against illegal immigration if there’s been a cease-fire declared in the war on Christmas.

  70. 70
    ppGaz says:

    I just want to know if it’s okay to use white phosphorus in the war against illegal immigration

    Yes, in the Red States.

  71. 71
    leefranke says:

    Do you think that assimilation of immigrants is important, or is it best to leave them to nurture their native culture, have bilingual programs at taxpayer expense, and be able to do business wherever in their native language and have businesses adapt to them?

    This has been a problem with every wave of immigration in our countries history.

    Here in Texas in the mid 1800s half of the towns in central Texas spoke German as their language. Some even had official documents in German. My dad still remembers church services only in German as late as the 1930s.

    They will be assimilated, they will become part of the Borg…err US Culture. :)

  72. 72
    Dennis says:

    Current plan – Hate them. Make them sneak in. Don’t know who they are. Don’t know how many there are. Suspect them all. Find work under the table. Don’t pay taxes. Pay a price in social services. Criminalize them.

    Their plan – All the above. Criminalize everyone.

    Better plan – Let them in. Photgraph them. Fingerprint them. Give them ID. Let them find work. Make them pay taxes. If they succeed give them citizenship.

  73. 73
    Krista says:

    John? You there?

  74. 74
    Krista says:

    Fucktard.

  75. 75
    Krista says:

    Sorry.

  76. 76
    ImJohnGalt says:

    Man, that was funny.

  77. 77
    Steve says:

    Hahahaha!

  78. 78
    stickler says:

    Eh? Migrants are responsible for disappearing middle-class jobs?

    NO. Sorry for being cryptic. What will happen (hell, is already happening) is this: good, middle-class jobs are being shipped overseas.

    Middle-class job-seekers are thus cast into the vast sea of service-sector job-seekers. Thirty years ago these jobs may have paid decent wages, but with the vast influx of minimally-educated immigrants, average wages have plummeted.

    Middle-class (well, formerly-middle-class) Americans face the reality of the New Labor Market: Supply vs. Demand.

    Thus ‘incentivizing’ them to blame The Brown Other.

  79. 79

    If you want to get ahead of the curve on this one, buy stock in the panic over the next immigrant group. My money’s on those filthy, degenerate Swedes.

    Too late. Already been there.

    Read ‘Main Street’ by Sinclair Lewis. Huge influx of Norwegians, Swedes, Finns up here in Minnesota back at the turn of the century. For years, the nominee for the Communist party was a son of finnish immigrants up north, can’t remember his name now. He passed away a few years back.

  80. 80

    Krista – What is this, your own personal isntant messenger? :-)

  81. 81
    ppGaz says:

    Thus ‘incentivizing’ them to blame The Brown Other.

    Ah, okay. Sorry.

    You were describing the modern-day “Mongol horde” scare.

    —-//

    In other news, Native Americans are calling for the deportation of all illegal white European immigrants to north America since 1600, and their descendants. The indigenous people claim that the whites have taken jobs, and consumed resources that would otherwise have gone to the aboriginal people.

  82. 82
    DougJ says:

    Not sure what this means, but this proposition was passed overwhelmingly, only to be overturned by the Ninth Circuit court. To be passed, a lot of blues had to vote for it.

    Bri-Bri, it means that after Prop 187 passed, California became a largely Democratic state, Ahnuld notwithstanding. It’s odd that you begin your post with this piece of ignorance and then go on to correctly assess the situation. That’s something that a spoofer would do.

  83. 83
    Brian says:

    DougJ,

    I’m a native of CA and L.A., and I’ve always known this state to be “blue”. But, that’s just my memory, polluted by all sorts of non-native ingredients ingested, mostly during my formative years.

    That said, may I add a list of questions addressing the demand side:

    Are we willing to turn the cheek while entire industries (agriculture, tourism, manufacturing) are propped up with illegal labor?

    Did Cesar Chavez not express his disdain for support of illegal immigration because of its downward effect on wages, which plays nicely into the hands of employers?

    Should we shame Americans who are comfortable economically yet knowingly procure the services of illegal aliens just to cut their own costs?

    Is it possible that an entire generation of American youngsters are being raised to look down on certain labor categories, because it’s considered “immigrant work”, when it’s actually very decent, dignified labor? (Don’t think strawberry picking, but McD’s, mowing lawns, etc.)

    Further to the above point, does the downward force on wages and the negative perception of labor performed by illegal immigrants devalue labor, a value that this country was built on? And is the innocent (or not-so-innocent) victim of this devaluation the immigrant him/herself?

    In accepting so many poor, uneducated immigrants, are we setting ourselves (and the immigrants) up for short-term economic gain, but long-term failure? What economy do we want?

    Do we really give a damn about the price of a head of lettuce when determining such major issues as national sovereignty and economic health? If illegals get (shock!) the pay they deserve, or if we clamp down on employers, and result is higher prices, will we not survive?

    What are we willing to penalize employers? Felony? Misdemeanor? Jail? The punishment should fit the crime, and the biggest criminals are the employers in this whole affair, so what’s reasonable? I honestly have no idea. But giving the employers a pass is a ridiculously unfair approach, and won’t change a damned thing.

  84. 84
    scs says:

    John, immigration probably doesn’t interest you much because you are not affected by it. I’m not sure if WV is a hotspot for immigration- in fact, probably not. I mean, I’m just guessing here, I could be wrong. But immigration is spreading like wildfire all over the country and I’m sure it will hit WV soon. I’ve noticed a marked increase in my present state just in the last few years. I do my polling by what I call the Wal-Mart test. A few years ago, certain Wal-Marts I’ve visited had only few Mexican looking people. Now every year, there are more and more and I would say that Mexicans now may be the larger share of the customers at Wal-MArt, depending on what time of day you go. That is a huge increase, and I don’t even live in a border state. Logic dictates that this cannot go on like this, there is a limit to everything and if present trends continue, it will become an uncontrollable problem. That’s why it is the hot issue now as compared to say even 5 years ago. The ‘problem’ is mushrooming.

  85. 85
    jg says:

    La Rasa

  86. 86
    ppGaz says:

    Can anyone explain how the “trends” Brian decries, which have been going on in my part of the country (Arizona and California) for 25 years, are due to illegal immigration, whose numbers haven’t changed much (in the last hundred years, to my knowledge) until just very recently (say, since the year 2000)?

    Fifteen years ago, you couldn’t count on getting your order right at a fast food joint because the counter was staffed with unemployable dunderheads who barely spoke English …. but you see, fifteen years ago, virtually nothing had changed in the immigration situation since — leaving out WWII — probably 1920, in any significant statistics. Oh yeah, the percentage of Italians went down and the percentage of Mexicans has gone up. But total immigration (sum of legal and illegal) as a percentage of the total population …. pretty steady.

    And by the way, Brian fans, suppose you suddenly staff all the Golden Arches with white kids from Beverly Hills High School. Do you REALLY think SoCal patrons are going to pay ten dollars for a Big Mac, fries and a drink?

    Who is kidding fucking whom here?

  87. 87
    Perry Como says:

    A few years ago, certain Wal-Marts I’ve visited had only few Mexican looking people.

    Best. Troll. Ever.

  88. 88

    Around The ‘Sphere March 29, 2006

    Our linkfest taking you to some interesting posts from all over the blogo-you-know-what. Links refect various viewpoints that may not necessarily reflect…

  89. 89
    Jess says:

    Now every year, there are more and more and I would say that Mexicans now may be the larger share of the customers at Wal-MArt, depending on what time of day you go. That is a huge increase, and I don’t even live in a border state. Logic dictates that this cannot go on like this, there is a limit to everything and if present trends continue, it will become an uncontrollable problem.

    Wow. That’s just so…I don’t even know where to start. It’s like navigating a road trip with someone and finding out they’re working from an atlas from Mars.

    SCS: I mean this in a friendly way, but you seriously need to grow up. You are frighteningly sheltered, and as you say, logic dictates that you cannot go on like this, and that if present trends continue, it WILL become an uncontrollable problem. There is no viable way to live like this in a multicultural society based on hundreds of years of immigration. Please, for your own sake, get over it.

  90. 90
    Matt says:

    I dunno, I think SCS may be on to something–I mean, nothing is going to get the red staters more worked up than a bunch of brown folk clogging up the aisles at Wal-Mart.

  91. 91
    Matt says:

    As far as immigration goes, I can’t get too worked up over it either. In fact, if anything, it seems to me a bit of a red herring. If the job market tanks, it’s not because more people are coming in, it’s because more good jobs are leaving.

    Re. stickler and Brian’s comment on service-industry jobs 30 years ago–I rather suspect many of those jobs were performed by African Americans for around the same relative pay as the illegal immigrants currently performing them receive. And, hell, it wouldn’t surprise me if most of the anti-immigration rhetoric being mouthed today isn’t just a rehash of the nonsense spread about the African American underclass in those days.

  92. 92
    DecidedFenceSitter says:

    BTW for those people talking about the ease of going from Canada to the US – no longer. According to at least what I’ve heard, passports are now required.

    As a former Vermonter who used to drive over the border to go clubbing and drink at age 18 (legally), I am saddened.

  93. 93
    the friendly grizzly says:

    John: You don’t care because you likely live where shop-keepers understand and speak English. Your emergency rooms are still open. You have not seen entire neighborhoods that ten years ago were clean and quiet turned into garbage-strewn bazaars full of noise and crime.

    I just got out of California about eight months ago. I moved to the United States. Anyone could see where California is headed: Aztlan/Mecha politicians like Art Torres, Antonio Villaregosa, and Cruz Bustamante elected, and re-elected. More and more old but nice Los Angeles and Ventura County neighborhoods turned to slums. Hospitals closing because they can’t afford the unfunded federal mandate that requires them to provide, among other things, care for Maria when she is carrying her 8th kid.

    The real shame of this is how the legal, hard-working Mexican is being stigmatized by the rest. These are fine, gracious, decent people, but they are getting tarred with the brush of the illegal.

    My folks did it by the rules. Others are still waiting in line and will be set back even further by this new law that gives Congress cheap lawncare and wet-nurses for the kids they have, but have no time for.

  94. 94
    Krista says:

    Krista – What is this, your own personal isntant messenger?

    It was by request from John. My heart really wasn’t in it, though.

  95. 95
    Oberon says:

    As someone who worked in an industry that employed lots of Hispanic immigrants, I can tell you how to drop the illegal population in half: crack down on the employers.

    Most of the illegals are here to finding paying jobs. If jobs for illegals dropped in half, so would the population of illegals.

    The system is a joke: show me two pieces of paper and you’re hired. It’s ILLEGAL for the employer to do any further investigation just because someone is foreign.

    But no politician wants to take on Big Business and Small Business.

  96. 96
    Al Maviva says:

    Security, or generous welcoming and warm/fuzzy immigration policy: pick one.

    The Sensenbrenner bill (House) is 1/3d about “workplace enforcement.” It would crack down about equally on employers of illegals, and the illegals in the workplace. One thing it posits is an automated check of immigration records (in place of the “facial inspection” of I-9 forms), and the check would have to be completed before an individual could be employed. The feds are making noises about how doing that efficiently (with few database errors, quick turnaround time and prompt redress for people wronged by the system) would be damn near impossible to do logistically and within the constraints of existing USCIS and ICE budgets/manpower limitations. While workplace enforcement, or “demand reduction” would probably substantially curb the employment of illegals, I’d be surprised to see it make it into law – a right/left coalition (Chamber of Commerce Republicans, Senate Dems)opposes it and the implementers are grumbling about it.

  97. 97
    ppGaz says:

    SCS: I mean this in a friendly way

    You’ve been had. She’s a troll.

    It’s an act.

  98. 98
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    At some point, someone really ought to mention NAFTA. See, NAFTA states that capital and money can move a will across the North American Free Trade Zone, i.e. Canada, the United States and Mexico.

    Why, exactly, should labor not have the same freedom of movement? Isn’t labor a part of the market as well?

    Open the border and quit the damned whining.

  99. 99
    Darrell says:

    Better plan – Let them in. Photgraph them. Fingerprint them. Give them ID. Let them find work. Make them pay taxes.

    So as long as they succeeded in intentionally breaking our immigration laws to jump the line over those immigrants already waiting to legally obtain their green cards and visas, you have no problem rewarding the lawbreakers with ID’s and legitimacy. Incredible when you think about it

  100. 100
    ppGaz says:

    Why, exactly, should labor not have the same freedom of movement? Isn’t labor a part of the market as well?

    Nominated for Most Intelligent Post on this subject so far.

  101. 101
    ppGaz says:

    Incredible when you think about it

    What’s incredible is you and your big, stupid mouth.

    When are you going to answer the questions that have been put to you?

  102. 102
    ppGaz says:

    Security, or generous welcoming and warm/fuzzy immigration policy: pick one.

    Can you show that “security” and a “welcoming” policy are not compatible?

    You might start by defining the terms.

    Can you do it in less than 10,000 words?

  103. 103
    Darrell says:

    not granting amnesty is pointless (does anyone really think we are going to round up all the illegals?),

    Following JC’s ‘logic’, crime is so prevalent here, we’ll never be able to round up the criminals, so let’s not even try.

    Implementation of SS cards with biometric data would be cheap and easy to implement… and make it much, much easier to crack down on employers. If illegals can’t get work, they will leave without having to be “rounded up” as JC and others claim who make the solution seem like an insurmountable mountain which we should not even attempt to solve… no matter how wrong it is

    Foreigners who enter our country ALREADY TODAY have to submit to fingerprint and retina scans cross checked in a database when they pass immigration. The technology is there and in place. Yet SS cards have no photo or biometric info. If getting new photos every several yrs is too much, then only biometric fingerprint and/or retina data is more than adequate. Again, the technology and databases are already in place and being used for those entering our country. Why the f*ck isn’t that same technology used on SS cards so we can crack down on employers?

  104. 104
    stasis says:

    “According to at least what I’ve heard, passports are now required.”

    Passports are not required, but unless you are carrying a driver’s liscence from the border state, they are highly advisable. Saves a lot of time.

    Which is sad, as [another former Vermonter], for many years I crossed the border (to go clubbing in Montreal!) at Swanton without ever once being asked for any ID by either the American or Canadian authorities. (though they would go through your trunk on the way home looking for “tax-free” goods). I still go to Canada a lot, but the crossing the border experience is a far cry from what it once was. It is not a smart use of border patrol talent and resources to harrass obvious Canadians and Americans … those guys are smart, you just open your mouth and start to talk and they know where you are “really” from.

  105. 105
    Otto Man says:

    Nominated for Most Intelligent Post on this subject so far.

    Seconded. Excellent point.

  106. 106
    Darrell says:

    Open the border and quit the damned whining.

    No sovereignity, dilution of the value of citizenship, no borders. Do you people really believe that nonsense, or are your posts just brain farts without thought?

  107. 107
    GOP4Me says:

    So as long as they succeeded in intentionally breaking our immigration laws to jump the line over those immigrants already waiting to legally obtain their green cards and visas, you have no problem rewarding the lawbreakers with ID’s and legitimacy. Incredible when you think about it

    It is, isn’t it Darrell? Behold the moonbat left, behold the “reality-based community,” in all its dubious, logic-defying, fantasy-embracing glory.

    I think we should ship these illegal people to Belize, just to make them walk home and teach them a lesson. I also think we not only need a fence along the border (along BOTH borders, for that matter), we need machine gun nests in that fence. THAT will teach them not to come steal our jobs and degrade our language and our politics and our culture.

    Those people may not be Al Qaeda, and they may not be weakening America by attacking our lives; but they ARE terrorists, in that they terrorize our economy and take jobs away from decent Americans. I think it’s time that the American government and the American military made a stand on the Rio Grande and on and on the Missouri Compromise line and on the high seas off the Pacific coast, a stand for the lives and standard of living of all decent, hard-working Americans.

    BTW, if you think Americans wouldn’t take the jobs that illegal immigrants currently work, wait until they leave. Watch those wages climb to levels Americans will be comfortable with.

  108. 108
    Darrell says:

    But no politician wants to take on Big Business and Small Business

    Good post Oberon. What is lost in the debate is that only a small percentage of Big business and Small businesses use illegal labor to any significant extent. Those businesses exploit illegal labor while passing the costs (schooling of kids, healthcare, law enforcement, etc) to Joe Taxpayer. An overwhelming percentage of voters are opposed to this situation if you believe the surveys. This sh*t needs to stop, and we need to crackdown like bastards on the businesses that hire illegal aliens. Start with fines, but give jail time to employers who are repeat offenders

    That’s where the Repub congress f*cked up so badly. Those idiots wanted to make the illegal immigrants felons rather than the businesses who hire them. The idiots also tried to criminalize churches who help these illegals. Now they have no credibility to handle this issue that urgently needs to be dealt with… and Dems, as a party, won’t touch the immigration issue with a 10 ft pole, as they know damn well their union supporters, black community, and other Dems will abandon them if they line up with giving amnesty to illegals

  109. 109
    Tulkinghorn says:

    Sam Hutcheson Says:

    At some point, someone really ought to mention NAFTA. See, NAFTA states that capital and money can move a will across the North American Free Trade Zone, i.e. Canada, the United States and Mexico.

    Why, exactly, should labor not have the same freedom of movement? Isn’t labor a part of the market as well?

    Open the border and quit the damned whining.

    Heres my idea of a fair deal. We will take whatever poor people Mexicao wants to send us provided they have to accept our rich folks. Let in all the Texas plutocrats and oil barons, open up their economy and laws so that the republicans can go about raping that country as badly as they try to rape the US.

  110. 110
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    With hesitancy, I’ll engage Darrell:

    No sovereignity, dilution of the value of citizenship, no borders.

    If your concern is sovereignty you should be lobbying to repeal NAFTA. The trade agreement is established law and has been for nearly a decade. It’s not unusual for nations to come to trade agreements, of course. It is in fact one of those things that nations do, especially in the global marketplace of modern times. The point is that if you’re going to have an open trade policy for North America (or “the Americas”, which is the next one on the list) it’s irrational and immoral to not extent that open trade policy to the labor half of the market equation.

    Nothing about extending NAFTA to labor would remove from any member nation the right to make it’s own laws and policies. It would simply bring outmoded border policies into line with modern trade agreements. That is to say, you would simply be replacing one set of soveriegn policies (border policy) with another set of soveriegn policies (NAFTA.)

    I am at a loss as to how opening trade with continental neighbors would dilute the value of citizenship. A Mexican citizen living in Los Angeles would not have the right to vote in elections there. It’s a trade agreement, not a mass annexation of citizenry.

    As to “no borders”, that’s simply the diretion of world history. Fighting the trend is pointless and irrational at heart. Nation states will eventually be replaced, most likely by market states (i.e. NAFTA like agreements), just as monarchical states and imperial states were replaced by nation states in the past. History doesn’t stop just because you don’t like the way it is going.

  111. 111
    ImJohnGalt says:

    Passports are not required, but unless you are carrying a driver’s liscence from the border state, they are highly advisable. Saves a lot of time.

    Which is sad, as [another former Vermonter], for many years I crossed the border (to go clubbing in Montreal!) at Swanton without ever once being asked for any ID by either the American or Canadian authorities. (though they would go through your trunk on the way home looking for “tax-free” goods). I still go to Canada a lot, but the crossing the border experience is a far cry from what it once was. It is not a smart use of border patrol talent and resources to harrass obvious Canadians and Americans … those guys are smart, you just open your mouth and start to talk and they know where you are “really” from.

    “obvious” Canadians? Hm.

    That said, starting at the end of 2006, the US Government will require that you show a passport on the Canadian border to regain entry into the US. That means that not only do Canadians that want to go to the US now need a passport, but any American citizen who visits Canada must produce a passport to gain re-entry. The alternative is to get a new national ID card that the US government is supposedly issuing or going to issue.
    Linky

  112. 112
    ppGaz says:

    No sovereignity, dilution of the value of citizenship, no borders. Do you people really believe that nonsense, or are your posts just brain farts without thought?

    STFU, Darrell. You can’t, or won’t, answer any of the most basic and simple questions put to you about the true nature of immigration in this country in the last 100 years. You don’t know a thing about it.

    You know what else? Your Potemkin president, the little alcoholic, has embraced one policy in the last five years that actually speaks well of his ability to lead this country, and that’s his immigration stance as expressed just a few days ago in a fine speech …. and you don’t even have enough sense to talk about that speech and policy and stand behind your president.

  113. 113
    ppGaz says:

    We will take whatever poor people Mexicao

    You might want to re-write the message on the Statue of Liberty, then.

    Or we could rename the statue, and call it the Darrell Statue of Sovereignty. Replace the lamp with a sword, that kind of thing.

  114. 114
    Darrell says:

    I am at a loss as to how opening trade with continental neighbors would dilute the value of citizenship

    Nice straw man. I objected not to free trade, but to this statement: “Open the border and quit the damned whining”.

    If you disagree with me, then do it without making up strawmen shit

  115. 115
    ppGaz says:

    Dems, as a party, won’t touch the immigration issue

    No, Darrell, it’s you who won’t touch it, because you don’t know anything about it. All you can do is sit here and spout Limbaughisms and other righty radio talking points.

    What percentage of the American population comes in via immigration, combined legal and illegal, on average over the last 75-100 years?

  116. 116
    ppGaz says:

    With hesitancy, I’ll engage Darrell:

    You’ll be in our prayers.

  117. 117
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    Nice straw man. I objected not to free trade, but to this statement: “Open the border and quit the damned whining”.

    I’m not sure you understand what “straw man” actually means. Nonetheless, my post above was specifically about the incongruity between NAFTA, which as you may know is a trade agreement, and the inability of labor (i.e. workers, i.e. people from Mexico, i.e. immigrants) to actually move freely within the free trade zone. When I say “open the border and quit the damned whining” all I’m suggesting is that we abide by our soveriegnly entered into trade agreements with our allies and neighbors.

  118. 118
    Darrell says:

    When I say “open the border and quit the damned whining” all I’m suggesting is that we abide by our soveriegnly entered into trade agreements with our allies and neighbors.

    So in other words, you are suggesting that free trade agreements such as NAFTA = ceding our sovereignity.. Is that right?

  119. 119
    ppGaz says:

    do it without making up strawmen shit

    Says Darrell “Alfalfa” Limbaugh.

  120. 120
    SeesThroughIt says:

    BOTH borders, for that matter), we need machine gun nests in that fence. THAT will teach them not to come steal our jobs and degrade our language and our politics and our culture.

    And have you seen what the queers are doing to the soil? I like you, Stuart. You aren’t like the other people here in the trailer park.

    Those people may not be Al Qaeda, and they may not be weakening America by attacking our lives; but they ARE terrorists, in that they terrorize our economy and take jobs away from decent Americans.

    Now that is some mighty fine trollin’. I underestimated you, Stuart. Your trolling has come so far so quickly.

  121. 121
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    So in other words, you are suggesting that free trade agreements such as NAFTA = ceding our sovereignity.. Is that right?

    As I said previously,

    “Nothing about extending NAFTA to labor would remove from any member nation the right to make it’s own laws and policies. It would simply bring outmoded border policies into line with modern trade agreements. That is to say, you would simply be replacing one set of soveriegn policies (border policy) with another set of soveriegn policies (NAFTA.)”

    Open borders do not cede national soveriegnty. The nation is free to make laws and enter into agreements as it will. There is no power forcing the nation to enter into agreements or pass laws against its better judgement. As such, I fail to see where your “cedeing our soveriegnty” gambit is going. It smells suspiciously like a red herring.

    The problem here is the existence of two separate sets of soveriegnly entered into codes. The first is the border policy, specifically as it relates to the border with Mexico. The second is NAFTA. Both of these codes of law were entered into freely by the United States. They tend to contradict one another.

    (Of course, NAFTA doesn’t actually extend free trade to labor, which is the problem, but in a perfect world it obviously would. Labor is, after all, part of the free market. Locking labor in border-boxes while letting capital move freely gives unfair advantage to management over labor in the marketplace.)

    Still, none of this cedes any sort of soveriegnty at any level.

  122. 122
    ppGaz says:

    Open borders do not cede national soveriegnty

    We won’t be overwhelmed by all the Canadian bacon, then?

  123. 123
    jg says:

    Rather than fuck up Iraq we could help make our neighbor the kind of place its citizens don’t want to flee. Or we can wait until all those nice catholics south of the border convert to islam. At that point I’ll support Darrells closed border policy.

  124. 124
    GOP4Me says:

    And have you seen what the queers are doing to the soil? I like you, Stuart. You aren’t like the other people here in the trailer park.

    The less said about homosexuals, the better. They make the depredations illegal immigrants perpetrate on this magnificent country look like a birthday party in comparison. Illegal immigrants merely sap our national strength and treasure; homosexuals, on the other hand, are invoking the black curse of God upon us all. Even though most of them don’t believe in Him, the net result of their conduct is the same. Not that I’d expect the majority in our nation to see this menace, blinded as they are by the decadent distractions of a culture in decay, as they are blinded to the progress in Iraq by the moonbat media’s nightly drumroll of explosions and angry street-loons railing about how much they hate America for freeing them. Only a fool would take any of this seriously, but as the saying goes, no one ever went broke underestimating the American public’s intelligence. (Or their moral fiber, for that matter, as the city of San Francisco, Sodom of the Pacific, demonstrates with ample clarity.)

    Who’s Stuart?

  125. 125
    Brian says:

    And by the way, Brian fans, suppose you suddenly staff all the Golden Arches with white kids from Beverly Hills High School. Do you REALLY think SoCal patrons are going to pay ten dollars for a Big Mac, fries and a drink?

    Who is kidding fucking whom here?

    The heated rhetoric. The name calling (directed at other commenters). The pretense to moral authority and/or superior knowledge of the topic, so others should just “STFU”. The deliberate manufacture of facts ($10 Big Macs) as a defense.

    This is the Left.

    I put up at least two dozen questions in above comments. They were directed at the topics of illegal immigrants, and the companies who hire them. I was hoping it might stimulate some intelligent discussion, or that someone else would succeed in the effort. But it doesn’t seem possible.

    Since the attitude here, with few exceptions, is that national demarcations in the form of borders, and in fact the very idea of national sovereignty, is some quanit concept that is trumped by the flow of labor which can’t be controlled through policy, and that immigration as it is occuring now is really no different than at any other time in our country’s history, and that laws against illegal immigration are silly. The gist of this thread is a whistling in the dark that there is no problem, and there won’t be a problem.

    One thing that Sam mentioned, but I left out, is the impact of the free trade agreements (NAFTA, GATT) on illegal immigration. This can’t be ignored, and it’s someting we can’t point to another country as being the cause. I know I may sound conspiratorial, but the Council on Foreign Relations that dreams up this stuff is based right here in the States, and seems to be operating as some shadow government.

  126. 126
    ppGaz says:

    I put up at least two dozen questions in above comments

    They were loaded, misleading questions, deserving nothing but a smackdown.

    And listen, asshole, you have been seen to be the king of rabble-rousing rhetoric when you want to be. If you can’t take it, don’t dish it out … stop whining.

    I can write in any voice under the sun, and I think you can too. So why don’t you cut the crap?

    And why don’t you address the points I aimed at your crummy post?

    This kind of flowery prose is not useful:

    the very idea of national sovereignty, is some quanit concept that is trumped by the flow of labor

    Sovereignty is not incompatible with the flow of labor any more than it is with the flow of goods or capital. Neither is security incompatible with those flows.

    Beating your chest and claiming otherwise is just theatrics. As you know.

  127. 127
    Brian says:

    Or their moral fiber, for that matter, as the city of San Francisco, Sodom of the Pacific, demonstrates with ample clarity.

    Speaking of which, see how they treated a visiting group of evangelical youth recently. Mark Leno reminds me of certain commenters here on Buffoon Juice.

  128. 128
    Darrell says:

    Locking labor in border-boxes while letting capital move freely gives unfair advantage to management over labor in the marketplace

    That statement could only be true if the labor on the other side so superior as to overcome the inherent advantage of being local. We have skills and products they need, they have skills and products we need.

    Border policies are not replaced by free trade policies as you have suggested. They are independent of one another. For example, it is possible for a country to have free trade and closed borders.

    What exactly is your point?

  129. 129
    Brian says:

    They were loaded, misleading questions, deserving nothing but a smackdown.

    And listen, asshole, you have been seen to be the king of rabble-rousing rhetoric when you want to be. If you can’t take it, don’t dish it out … stop whining.

    I can write in any voice under the sun, and I think you can too. So why don’t you cut the crap?

    And why don’t you address the points I aimed at your crummy post?

    This kind of flowery prose is not useful

    Intelligent. Why do you think you deserve a response when you write to me like this? Why should anyone who writes like this deserve even this much attention from me?

  130. 130
    Darrell says:

    Speaking of which, see how they treated a visiting group of evangelical youth recently

    Ah yes, the ever so tolerant left

  131. 131
    ppGaz says:

    Why should anyone who writes like this deserve even this much attention from me?

    I’m sure you’re about to tell us, Brian.

  132. 132
    ppGaz says:

    Intelligent. Why do you think you deserve a response

    Thank you.

    And what in the world makes you think I want a response?

    Didn’t your mother teach you what a dismissive tone means? It means, go away.

  133. 133
    jg says:

    Tastes great!

    Less filling!

  134. 134
    Darrell says:

    At that point I’ll support Darrells closed border policy

    I don’t advocate a “closed border” policy at all. I advocate control of who enters our country..

    In fact, every country should have the right to control who enters, wouldn’t you agree?

  135. 135
    ppGaz says:

    the ever so tolerant left

    We’re supposed to be tolerant of stupid, loudmouthed people like you who spam us with bullcrap and have no idea what they are talking about?

    Two days and you still haven’t answered a factual question on this topic yet, have you?

  136. 136
    ppGaz says:

    I advocate control of who enters our country..

    Really? Implemented how? Paid for by whom? With what goals and objectives in mind? How will your proposed implementation achieve those goals? In what time frame?

    What is the target aggregate immigration rate? What is that rate now? What was it 10, 25, 50 years ago? How do you know?

    Are you one of those righty jabberjockies who always says the left “has no plan?” What’s your plan? Lay it out. Facts, Darrell. Facts.

    Darrell: Never met a fact he didn’t lack.

  137. 137
    jg says:

    Speaking of which, see how they treated a visiting group of evangelical youth recently

    Ah yes, the ever so tolerant left

    Some idiot assemblyman makes a stupid remark and apologizes the next day. Where’s the intolerance? Are only christians allowed to voice opinions? Saying that you feel the group is holding the rally to denounce the citizens of SF (which they didn’t actually do) is intolerance?

    Why isn’t a group that formed in order to get people to stop being ‘decadent’ considered intolerant?

  138. 138
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    Border policies are not replaced by free trade policies as you have suggested. They are independent of one another. For example, it is possible for a country to have free trade and closed borders.

    What exactly is your point?

    Well, the point is that until labor is not performed by people, or unless the border policies are pliable and open enough to facilitate a clear demand for labor from outside of the borders, “free trade” and restricted movement of laborers are not, in point of fact,independent of one another. Nor are they compatible.

  139. 139
    TLB says:

    John Cole: Even if you don’t care about immigration, please don’t use the canards supporters of massive illegal immigration use when expressing your apathy. To wit: the false choice between mass deportations and amnesty.

    Here are three of the main reasons to care about immigration:

    1. It encourages political corruption in the U.S. and is undermining our entire political system.

    2. There are plans to create “North America”, i.e., an EU-style superstate. That’s supported by the CFR and John Cornyn even has a bill that could lead to “integrating” our banking systems. And, Bush is meeting with Harper and Fox to discuss what is a likely precursor to this scheme.

    3. If #2 doesn’t come to pass and we don’t get a handle on this issue very soon, within a generation or two the U.S. southwest will be a de facto Mexican state.

    So, yeah, there are definitely some solid reasons to be concerned about this issue.

    See my site for hundreds of posts offering background information.

  140. 140
    jg says:

    Sam, they have talking points to battle your understanding of economics and labor. You can’t win. The talking points come from trusted sources who helped them lump all republican opposition under the term ‘liberal’, who taught them that liberals suck and then gave them talking points that are shown through Frank Luntz polling to score higher in the heartland than actual facts score.

  141. 141
    Brian says:

    Didn’t your mother teach you what a dismissive tone means?

    I see. I’m dismissive. So sorry, ppGaz. Really. These, I’m sure, are meant to be compliments from you?

    Are you one of those righty jabberjockies

    We’re supposed to be tolerant of stupid, loudmouthed people like you who spam us with bullcrap and have no idea what they are talking about

    And listen, asshole

    you don’t know anything

    STFU…..you don’t even have enough sense to talk

    What’s incredible is you and your big, stupid mouth.

    Thank you for showing us the way, and demosntrating the art of civil discourse.

  142. 142
    Darrell says:

    Sam, they have talking points to battle your understanding of economics and labor

    This, from the jackass you posted that I advocate “closed borders” because you’re unable to argue with facts or logic. Dishonest as hell, and everyone can see it

  143. 143
    ppGaz says:

    see. I’m dismissive

    No, you idiot. I am. That’s a signal that I have no interest in talking to you. Clearly you know nothing about the subject, so why would I want to discuss it with you.

    You really are pretending to be a little slow here, for some reason. Where’s the snappy Brian we used to know?

  144. 144
    ppGaz says:

    Oh, and BTW, Brian, you can always try proving me wrong. I’ve posted a couple dozen factual questions about immigration in the last couple days, including ones aimed directly at you.

    Can you actually answer any of them? Maybe if you pull your index finger out of your dog’s ass ….. and try Google?

    Just a suggestion.

    What’s the aggregate immigration rate as a percentage of population again? Lately? Recently? Over the last 25, 50, 75 years? Anything? Quickly now, don’t go trying to find it on the Web. Do you actually know?

  145. 145
    Darrell says:

    ppgaz has been really polluting the threads lately. Doubt me? Then go through his posts and count how many have been anything but pure personal attacks devoid of any substance.. almost all of them

  146. 146
    ppGaz says:

    Then go through his posts and

    Yes go through them and count the two dozen or so factual questions I’ve sent your way in the last two days on this topic, and show me your answers to them, you stupid lying piece of crap.

  147. 147
    Darrell says:

    What’s the aggregate immigration rate as a percentage of population again? Lately?

    What in the hell does that have to do with illegal immigration and control of who enters the country? You never say, you just keep repeating yourself without explanation

    These are your ‘deep thinking’ contributions? you need better meds

  148. 148
    DougJ says:

    Darrell and Brian: which one of you is GOP4Me?

  149. 149
    ppGaz says:

    What in the hell does that have to do with illegal immigration and control of who enters the country?

    Uh, everything?

    Do you know the immigration rates for any demographic, any period of time? Legal versus illegal? Do you know the economics of that immigration? Can you point to facts about how you are being injured, or not, or helped … by this immigration, legal or illegal? Has there been a change in the rate lately? Why or why not? If there hasn’t been, and the rate is relatively steady over the last 50-100 years, why the sudden concern? If there has been, why has there been?

    What exactly do you KNOW about this topic, Darrell?

    Can you say anything that is not just your usual “all lefties are poopyheads” bullshit here?

  150. 150
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    In fact, every country should have the right to control who enters, wouldn’t you agree?

    Every country has a right to set their own immigration and emigration policies. That’s part of soveriegnty. Emigration (exit of country) is also influenced by human rights concerns especially for countries that have signed onto the United Nations Charter. (Refusal to allow people to leave your country, essentially holding them internally against their will, violates the Universal Human Rights agreement.) But that’s all peripheral to the discussion at hand.

    Immigration laws are the purvey of national governments. They can be set as those governments see fit. This brings us away from the question of “can the US define a closed door (or really difficult to open door)” policy. The answer is clearly yes. (If the US does this, they need to amend NAFTA and GATT to reflect this isolationism, but still…)

    The next question is obviously _should_ the US establish the rigid types of border policies Darrell prefers. I say no. Such rigidity would make sense for nations founded on strong nationalism (think European nations.) The US has always sold itself as a “nation of ideals.” As such, it is incongruous, assuming that we believe the “nation of ideals” rhetoric, to refuse entry to immigrants who clearly buy into the ideals in question. I suggest that the vast majority of Mexican immigrants, both documented and undocumented, fall into that category.

  151. 151
    Darrell says:

    Has there been a change in the rate lately? Why or why not? If there hasn’t been, and the rate is relatively steady over the last 50-100 years, why the sudden concern?

    thank you for at least attempting to explain. I don’t know if there has been a change in the rate of illegal immigration. Can you cite? As for the ‘sudden’ concern, I don’t think it’s sudden.. I think most people would agree it’s been a big concern for quite a number of years. 9/11 added the heightened concern for security… If you can’t secure the borders, then by definition, it is then porous to criminals and terrorists. Also, as our society bestows more and more social benefits on citizens in the form of increased education spending, increased spending on health care, and other benefits.. that means the costs associated with illegal immigration rises as they use these (costly) services which are supposed to be for Americans

    I watch Univision and Telemundo from time to time to improve my colloquial spanish, and last Friday both networks reported a story of a Honduran woman illegal immigrant caught in New York who was a wanted murderer.. she has murdered several 8/9 month pregnant women in C. American in order to steal their babies.. I mean fetuses. If you can’t control your borders, any dangerous criminal or terrorist can enter just as that Honduran murderer did. I don’t think that is such a difficult concept to understand

  152. 152
    Darrell says:

    The next question is obviously should the US establish the rigid types of border policies Darrell prefers

    You misrepresent my position. I am for increased immigration…legal immigration. Furthermore, I think it’s wrong to reward those who intentionally break our laws, jumping the line over those trying to enter legally. It sends a clear message to those trying to obey our laws and follow the rules – why bother?

    Furthermore, because we have no control of our borders.. we have so many Mexican and central american immigrants coming here illegally, that means less legal immigration from other countries who want to come from Brazil, Taiwan, or Khazikstan for example. Your position is wrong on many levels

  153. 153
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    You misrepresent my position. I am for increased immigration…legal immigration.

    I was under the impression we were discussing Mexican immigrants. As such, there is no such thing as “legal immigration.” Mexico has had 500,000 legal immigrants enter the country for the last five years running. As such, it is on the list of nations that currently can’t send anyone into the US legally. So what you have is a huge population willing to come in (supply), a huge market of potential employers (demand), and no “legal” means to bring the two pieces together. If there were an ocean standing between the labor and the demand, you’d have a different solution, but as there is a easily pliable land bridge and a service market set up to guide people through, the supply is going to go “illegal” to fill the demand, and no amount of isolationist policies in DC will change that fact. A wall won’t stop that. Maybe the trolled notion of a wall with gun turrets would deter some of it, but not all of it.

    So I come back to the question, to be considered in the same light by which we as a nation have arrived at market globalisation (NAFTA, GATT) and free trade, the same light by which we claim an international interventionist right with regard to foriegn nations we deem dangerous, etc, et. al, why should our border policy be so reactionary and isolationist?

  154. 154
    Darrell says:

    I suggest that the vast majority of Mexican immigrants, both documented and undocumented, fall into that category.

    That’s an opinion, not a fact. I would disagree that Mexican immigrants fall into that category more than immigrants from other countries. My evidence? Mexicans, far more than japaneses, vietnamese, russian and other immigrants, don’t put forth the effort to learn English. I live in Houston which has a huge ethnic population of Mexicans, vietnamese and chinese. You never see chinese immigrants protesting the schools to teach their children in Mandarin for example. Yet it is not uncommon to run into Mexican immigrants (and immigrants from Central america) who have been here 10+ years and haven’t bothered to learn barely a word of english. They are not trying to embrace our culture and ideals as you suggest. Some are, many are not

    Again, why should Mexican illegal immigrants be given preferred status treatment over other immigrants from other countries who are trying to come here legally? That’s bullshit and you know it

  155. 155
    ppGaz says:

    As for the ‘sudden’ concern, I don’t think it’s sudden.. I think most people would agree it’s been a big concern for quite a number of years.

    Well, that is a fair point. There is recent concern, might have been a better description.

    But to my knowledge, the basic aggregate immigration rate expressed as a percentage of total US population has been pretty steady (at aroun 0.6% the last time I looked it up) for a long, long time.

    I saw two relatively recent changes of interest. One, the Hispanic rate has gone sharply up while the non-hispanic rates went down. Two, since 2000, the illegal rate has gone sharply up. Not enough to cause any clearly quantifiable damage to you and me, at this point, but up nonetheless. And it’s controversial whether this rate is up because of better surveillance and detection, or whether the actual cross-over rate is sharply up. Even more controversial is why the rate might be up. According to the Center for Immigration Sudies, the biggest driver is the out-migration forces at work in the source country (Mexico in particular).

    It’s an interesting topic and it’s rich in detail and contradictions. What drives me up the wall is the people who talk about it incessantly and don’t know the first damned thing about it.

    Plus, Darrell … your buy, GWB, is advocating a pretty liberal policy … and he’s right. Here’s a chance to support your boy and get a few props around here.

    LBNL, security is not incompatible with a border open to legitimate traffic. Don’t let the fearmongers tell you otherwise.

    You’re alright, Darrell. You can take a licking and keep on ticking better than almost anybody around here.

  156. 156
    Perry Como says:

    Yes, we should really do something about people who intentionally break our laws. Even moreso when that person vows to keep breaking the law.

    Hmmm.

  157. 157
    Darrell says:

    I was under the impression we were discussing Mexican immigrants.

    Why would you think that? It’s certainly not the topic of the thread if you read John’s post. And Mexico is not the only country with a free trade agreement with the US

    and no amount of isolationist policies in DC will change that fact.

    well, your dishonest characterization of immigration control as “isolationist” aside, we haven’t made much of an attempt at it, have we? Doubt what I’m saying? then explain why we don’t have fingerprint data on SS cards. We have not even tried. Crackdown on employers + more border enforcement most definitely would have success.

  158. 158
    GOP4Me says:

    Speaking of which, see how they treated a visiting group of evangelical youth recently. Mark Leno reminds me of certain commenters here on Buffoon Juice.

    Thanks, Brian, that’s a great link. The moral bankruptcy of the loony left is more and more evident every time they open their mouths- on this blog, on the streets of Scum Franciso, or wherever else their ilk rears its misbegotten head.

    1. It encourages political corruption in the U.S. and is undermining our entire political system.

    2. There are plans to create “North America”, i.e., an EU-style superstate. That’s supported by the CFR and John Cornyn even has a bill that could lead to “integrating” our banking systems. And, Bush is meeting with Harper and Fox to discuss what is a likely precursor to this scheme.

    3. If #2 doesn’t come to pass and we don’t get a handle on this issue very soon, within a generation or two the U.S. southwest will be a de facto Mexican state.

    And this is the brain child of the loony left. (But why, of all people, is Cornyn signing aboard? Why the treason?) I can’t think of any plan more frightening, except for John Kerry’s plan to ignore the terrorist “nuisance” until we all worshipped the Taliban god and followed the Taliban laws.

    Darrell and Brian: which one of you is GOP4Me?

    F-ck you, DougJ, I speak for myself. Unlike SOME people around here (hint, hint).

  159. 159
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    That’s an opinion, not a fact. I would disagree that Mexican immigrants fall into that category more than immigrants from other countries. My evidence? Mexicans, far more than japaneses, vietnamese, russian and other immigrants, don’t put forth the effort to learn English. I live in Houston which has a huge ethnic population of Mexicans, vietnamese and chinese. You never see chinese immigrants protesting the schools to teach their children in Mandarin for example. Yet it is not uncommon to run into Mexican immigrants (and immigrants from Central america) who have been here 10+ years and haven’t bothered to learn barely a word of english. They are not trying to embrace our culture and ideals as you suggest. Some are, many are not.

    No offense, but your “fact” is anecdotal at best and hardly constitutes binding evidence in this debate. In lieu of anecdote, let’s take a look at the actual data.

    http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?I.....009011#III

    A couple of interesting facts are presented in this study.

    “MORE RECENT IMMIGRANTS Compared to the rising trend in immigration to the United States in the 1980s, an extremely large number of immigrants has only recently arrived. In 1990, 44 percent of the foreign-born had come in the previous 10 years. In 1970, the share of immigrants who had arrived in the previous decade was only 29 percent. The recent entry of so many immigrants tends to make foreigners more visible and distorts perceptions of how well immigrants generally are adapting to the United States. In fact, both English language ability and incomes tend to increase with time spent in the country.”

    Also, interestingly enough, Mexico only accounts for about 1/3 of the 3.2 undocumented (illegal) immigrants in the US. Roughly another 1/3 come from Central America and the Carribean. The rest come from Europe, Asia and Canada.

    More interestingly and more to the point of the “build the wall” isolationism that’s so prominent on the right these days:

    “Only 4 out of 10 undocumented aliens cross the border illegally or enter without inspection. Six out of ten undocumented immigrants enter legally—as visitors, students, or temporary employees—and become illegal by failing to leave when their visas expire. These people entered the country legally, have documents, and have been in contact with INS.”

    Again, why should Mexican illegal immigrants be given preferred status treatment over other immigrants from other countries who are trying to come here legally? That’s bullshit and you know it.

    It is bullshit. It is also nothing close to what I or anyone else is proposing. Can you find a citation of me making an argument for preferential treatment of one class of immigrant over another?

  160. 160
    Darrell says:

    No offense, but your “fact”

    I never said it was a fact, but thanks for the strawman. I was disputing your opinion and backing it up with examples.

    Also, interestingly enough, Mexico only accounts for about 1/3 of the 3.2 undocumented (illegal) immigrants in the US.

    That in itself discredits the document you present. There was a NY Times article cited yesterday which said there are 12 million illegal aliens here. I’ve never seen a source, except for the one you present here, which claims the number of illegal aliens are only 3.2 million or anywhere close to that.

  161. 161
    ppGaz says:

    Darrell, GWB speaking moments ago:

    “The United States is a nation of immigrants.”

    Also, are you sure you guys aren’t talking about 3.2 percent, and not 3.2 million?

    Because fairly recently, a decent estimate of illegal alien population here would have fallen at about 3.2 percent of the total population. Within the last 5 years or so … I’d have to look at a fine-grained graph to give you a specific date.

  162. 162
    scs says:

    Okay, to DougJ and clones, as much as you scoffed, I brought up my ‘Wal Mart’ example to show why illegal immigration is suddenly becoming a hot topic across the nation. Because in the last few years, it has spread out of the border states into most areas of the coutries, even small towns. While there may not be that many statistics and exact numbers on illegal immigration, considering this immigration is , um, illegal, it has become very noticable to all who observe their surroundings. I’m not really sure why this trend has grown so much recently – perhaps the poverty rate in Mexico continues to grow, the Mexican population growth, the housing boom here, probably many factors. I’m not saying this whether this trend is good or bad, I’m just saying it’s a trend. I still stick to the idea that there has to be some order to this immigration, or it will overwhelm the resouces of many towns. If not, why don’t we just declare an open border with Mexico and be done with it. Let’s make a choice either way.

  163. 163
    SeesThroughIt says:

    Some idiot assemblyman makes a stupid remark and apologizes the next day. Where’s the intolerance? Are only christians allowed to voice opinions? Saying that you feel the group is holding the rally to denounce the citizens of SF (which they didn’t actually do) is intolerance?

    Why isn’t a group that formed in order to get people to stop being ‘decadent’ considered intolerant?

    Thank you, jg. Claiming protesting is “intolerance” is such a stupid tactic (of course, stupid works with a not-inconsequential percentage of the population, so…). Nobody threw this Christian group out, nobody denied them anything. People simply voiced their views. And isn’t that what the Christian group came to do? Voice its views? Supposedly, one protester had a sign that read “We came here to get away from people like you,” which pretty much says it all.

  164. 164
    Darrell says:

    Also, are you sure you guys aren’t talking about 3.2 percent, and not 3.2 million?

    I looked through Sam’s citation, and the 3.2 million number he cites was 1992 data. Which would indicate a 400% increase in illegal aliens if the NY Times and his urban.org document are both correct.. Also, I didn’t see any data on rates of learning english between Mexican immigrants and other immigrants, but I don’t think many people have seen any protests over bi-lingual education demanded for Vietnamese, Chinese, or Japanese immigrants. They seem to want to make the effort more than Mexican immigrants, although it’s far easier to go from Spanish to English, than from Vietnamese or Chinese to English

  165. 165
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    There was a NY Times article cited yesterday which said there are 12 million illegal aliens here. I’ve never seen a source, except for the one you present here, which claims the number of illegal aliens are only 3.2 million or anywhere close to that.

    The study I linked to was published in 1994. I suspect that immigration levels have increased in the last 12 years, but I doubt the basic percentages have changed dramatically. As to your cryptic NYT citation, is there even the slightest chance we can see the studies they’re using? The study I linked to has this to say following their estimation of undocumented population, concerning larger estimated numbers:

    “These numbers are lower than estimates appearing in the popular press and substantially below the most widely publicized estimates used in determining the “costs” of illegal aliens. The perception of larger illegal flows and populations is driven by several “data” items, in particular the press accounts that quote INS figures on annual apprehensions along the the Mexico-U.S. border of more than 1 million people. Virtually all the INS apprehensions are temporary labor migrants who are caught more than once by the INS and who do not intend to live in the United States in any case. Many of these, were they not caught, would only stay in the United States for a day or two. A large reverse flow into Mexico goes virtually unnoticed and unreported.”

  166. 166
    scs says:

    One reason I think that illegal immigration has spread throughout America so much recently is that I read somewhere once, maybe NYT, that recruiting has gotten much more advanced. It is pretty much a cottage industry now, with professionals from all over small town America dispatched to recruiting areas in Mexico to bring people back to their factories and businesses all over the US. They offer them signing bonuses, places to live, all kinds of advice on how to get across the border etc. These recruiters are obviously good at their jobs.

  167. 167
    scs says:

    “These numbers are lower than estimates appearing in the popular press.

    I doubt it.

  168. 168
    Darrell says:

    It seems the NY Times and other media got their 12 million illegal immigrants in US number from a Pew Research Study.

  169. 169
    SeesThroughIt says:

    As usual, The Onion is way ahead of the curve:

    WWE: Illegal Mexican Wrestlers Taking Smackdowns American Wrestlers Don’t Want

  170. 170
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    I’m looking for the actual Pew Study, but I found this quote interesting from the boston.com article:

    ”The security has done more to keep people from going back to Mexico than it has to keep them from coming in,” said Jeffrey Passel, a senior research associate.

    If undocs are not outflowing due to fear of getting caught coming back in next growing season, that would certainly explain an exponential growth in permanent undoc populations. Such is the law of unintended consequences.

  171. 171
    ppGaz says:

    It seems the NY Times and other media got their 12 million illegal immigrants in US number from a Pew Research Study.

    That sounds right. There has been, as you suggested earlier, a big recent rise in the illegal population. Mostly since 2000 I think, and it has been a while since I read it, I think Center for Immigration Studies pointed to conditions in the source country, Mexico, as a driver.

    This meshes with information we have been getting here (in Arizona) about the apparent policy of the Mexican government to solve its employment problems by letting its people come over here for jobs.

    Personally, I have no beef with the immigrants, who are mostly just looking to support their families, or with the Bush administration, which seems to have a pretty immigration-friendly attitude. My main beef is with the Mexican government, which seems to not give much of a fig about anything except itself.

  172. 172
    ppGaz says:

    ’The security has done more to keep people from going back to Mexico than it has to keep them from coming in,” said Jeffrey Passel, a senior research associate.

    If undocs are not outflowing due to fear of getting caught coming back in next growing season, that would certainly explain an exponential growth in permanent undoc populations. Such is the law of unintended consequences.

    Another very interesting piece of information.

    A couple years ago, near San Diego, stories were about that “better” border control was causing more brazen entry strategies … such as vehicles full of illegals running at night, with no lights, on the wrong side of Interstate 10 east of San Diego. Once in a while this tactic results in a horrific head-on crash out there. Personally, I would never drive that road at night any more, anywhere between San Diego and El Paso. Too dangerous.

  173. 173
    Pb says:

    Darrell, Sam Hutcheson, etc:

    Check it out — apparently there’s a Pew Hispanic Center too. Have I ever mentioned how much I love Pew? They come up with all sorts of cool wonkishness.

  174. 174
    Perry Como says:

    One issue that is constantly overlooked in the immigration debate is the spread of New Mexicans throughout the US. Every day New Mexicans are moving into various states and taking jobs away from hard working Americans. I think any sensible immigration bill should address the spread of New Mexicans.

  175. 175
    Brian says:

    If we accept the current volume of immigration, both legal and illegal, we should expect assimilation into American society. The Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, Thai, even the Muslims, have more interest in assimilation than Latinos do. Never have I seen the above groups of immigrants agitating to take over the land, or waving the flag of their home country.

    The immigrants from Mexico are hard working and often very loyal to this country, but they can’t hold a candle to the other groups in terms of assimilation and a dedication to serious education and and citizenship. The dropouts from our high schools are primarily Hispanic. I kow this may sound impolitic, but when the U.S. accepts so many poor and uneducated people from Mexico, an aristocratic country that is happy to ship them off, is it any surprise that they and their offspring remain at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder in the area where they reside?

  176. 176
    ppGaz says:

    The immigrants from Mexico are hard working and often very loyal to this country, but they can’t hold a candle to the other groups in terms of assimilation and a dedication to serious education and and citizenship. The dropouts from our high schools are primarily Hispanic. I kow this may sound impolitic, but when the U.S. accepts so many poor and uneducated people from Mexico, an aristocratic country that is happy to ship them off, is it any surprise that they and their offspring remain at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder in the area where they reside?

    I’ll concede for the sake of argument that you may be sincere and well intentioned with this position, but don’t you think that that’s a little condescending and patronizing? Seriously. What is the Hispanic population of LA county? Is it realistic to generalize to this degree? Also, is it realistic to talk about rungs on a ladder with first and second generation people who are largely uneducated and unskilled? In other words, what are we worried about … that Hispanics without skills will displace Americans without skills?

  177. 177
    Steve says:

    Darrell Says:

    Mexicans, far more than japaneses, vietnamese, russian and other immigrants, don’t put forth the effort to learn English. I live in Houston which has a huge ethnic population of Mexicans, vietnamese and chinese. You never see chinese immigrants protesting the schools to teach their children in Mandarin for example. Yet it is not uncommon to run into Mexican immigrants (and immigrants from Central america) who have been here 10+ years and haven’t bothered to learn barely a word of english.

    Among second-generation Hispanics, 92 percent speak English well or very well.

    The fact that first-generation immigrants often don’t learn English is unremarkable, and has pretty much been true throughout history. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the commentors here have grandparents who barely speak English, or at least have friends whose grandparents fall into that category.

    Wanting classes to be taught in Spanish has nothing to do with not wanting your kids to ever learn English. If you don’t speak English, and you’ve raised your kids speaking Spanish, naturally you’d prefer they be able to learn in Spanish so they don’t fall behind their English-speaking peers. That doesn’t mean you don’t want them to learn English in their own right.

    By the third generation, approximately 99% of Hispanic immigrants are fluent in English, and the overwhelming majority of them speak only English.

  178. 178
    Brian says:

    L.A. County’s makeup is rouchly 50% Hispanic, 10% Asian, 10% Black, and the rest multi-race or white. It’s not a worry about Hispanics taking jobs, but if they’re making up the majority (no longer a minority by any measure, except for political reasons) and they’re carrying on a legacy, in fact prefering a legacy, of poor intellect and advancement, that’s not good for this country.

  179. 179
    Perry Como says:

    Steve, enough with all the “facts” and “numbers”. We need to know what’s truthy. What does our gut tell us? What do we feel that the answer is?

    I know, deep down in my gut, that Mexicans refuse to assimilate in the US.

  180. 180
    Al Maviva says:

    Can you find a citation of me making an argument for preferential treatment of one class of immigrant over another?

    Yup.

    “The fact that all persons, aliens and citizens alike, are protected by the Due Process Clause does not lead to the further conclusion that all aliens are entitled to enjoy all the advantages of citizenship or, indeed, to the conclusion that all aliens must be placed in a single homogeneous legal classification. For a host of constitutional and statutory provisions rest on the premise that a legitimate distinction between citizens and aliens may justify attributes and benefits for one class not accorded to the other; and the class of aliens is itself a heterogeneous multitude of persons with a wide-ranging variety of ties to this country.” Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67, 78-79 (1976).

  181. 181
    Sam Hutcheson says:

    Learn to read, Al.

  182. 182
    scs says:

    Wanting classes to be taught in Spanish has nothing to do with not wanting your kids to ever learn English.

    I’ll let you in on one of the unspoken reasons behind ESL classes. I had a roommate years back who taught classes in Spanish in a low income junior high school close to Newark. She told me that many children there pretended not to speak English and purposefully flunked their English exams because they preferred the comfort and close atmosphere of their ESL classes, where the students shared a culture, and did not want to be put into the general population of mostly black students, who they thought had a completely different attitude than they were used to. They often came to her and expressed fear about that and begged her not to transfer them. Parents also came to her asking her not to transfer her students. The teaching and teachers in ESL classes were generally of higher quality and the paretns also appreciated the individual attention they received. So it’s the quality of the teaching, as much as learning English, that keeps students in these classes.

  183. 183
    Brian says:

    The influx of Asians into SoCal put the lie to bilingual ed. They had no such benefit, and did fine, assimilating to a greater degree than Hispanics. Bilingualism is just a nod to political pressure, not any benefit to the local community or the country

  184. 184
    Al Maviva says:

    Oh, sorry. Hitting the crack pipe again.

  185. 185
    scs says:

    What I still don’t understand is why is Mexico so poor still. 40% poverty rate I think, large unemployemnt. They have oil, they have the US on their border to trade with. You’d think they’d be a doing a little better than the rest of South America. What is going on down there?

  186. 186
    scs says:

    And another thing, I heard Canada is looking for low wage workers and is a basically underpopulated country. Why doesn’t Canada arrange to take some migrant workers? Could kill two birds with one stone.

  187. 187
    Brian says:

    An interesting contrast of our countries (US and Mexico) is Florida and Baja. Both relatively the same latitudes on the globe, and not drastically different in terms of geography. Yes, FL is flatter, but they have the Everglades and take more direct hits from hurricanes. Baja has a richer geography, yet it’s largely undeveloped and very poor. Cabo is the only nice area, but the rest of the area is a wasteland compared to FL. It’s a good highlight of the differences between our countries. At least we can do something with our land using ingenuity.

  188. 188
    Darrell says:

    What is going on down there?

    I love Mexico and Mexican culture, but Mexico, like most of the rest of Latin America is rife with corruption… and as a result, many of the people there suffer. Mexico doesn’t help by not permitting foreign investment in real estate without a mexican partner, and it takes tons of red tape to do business there.

  189. 189
    scs says:

    Mexico doesn’t help by not permitting foreign investment in real estate

    Yeah I just read that 50% of Mexicans live on under $2.00 per day. Of course, if you watch Spanish TV (which my dad does – he loves to practice the Spanish he learned years ago), everyone looks like they are European and living wealthy lifestyles. Maybe Bush should start another prememptive war, and launch an invasion of Mexico. After all, if they are going to use us to take care of their poverty problem, we might as well get something out of it. It’d be a win/win situation. I know you’d all agree with this idea, right?

  190. 190
    Brian says:

    One of the best books on Mexico and immigration is “Mexifornia”, by Victor Davis Hanson. It’s a quick read, only about 200 pages, but it shows you how illigal immigrants live, and explains the issues in Mexico that lead to the problem. And he speaks from experience; his family going back many generations in Fresno, California, we farmers. VDH still farms there, and, as I’m sure you know, he is a professor at UC Fresno as well as a Senior Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institute.

    I highly recommend reading this book.

  191. 191
    Laura says:

    The influx of Asians into SoCal put the lie to bilingual ed. They had no such benefit, and did fine, assimilating to a greater degree than Hispanics. Bilingualism is just a nod to political pressure, not any benefit to the local community or the country

    My brother has about a dozen languages every year in his class of 20 2nd graders. Most are South East Asian dialects, along with some Russian, Ukranian and this year, he has a girl from Argentina. The school district has about 70 languages. Even if non-Spanish speaking immigrant parents wanted their kids to have a bilingual education, it’s not possible. Unlike the Spanish language, there aren’t the teachers available to teach the dozens of dialects. My brother was lucky to have a Hmong teacher’s aide last year. Having her there made assimilation easier for his Hmong students. But that’s a luxury he’ll probably never have again.

    I don’t know why people are so offended by bilingual education. I would love to have had that option. In Sacramento, we have a magnate school that offers bilingual education. The Spanish speakers have to be proficient in English to attend. But English-only speakers don’t have to already speak some Spanish. If you choose to send your child there, they ask that you commit to all K-6 grade years. Not surprisingly, the parents of these children tend to be educated and better off. Parents without the means have a harder time taking their children to a school not in their neighborhood. I think that’s too bad. My brother is seriously considering it because he and his wife want their children to grow up bilingual. My nephew, for whom Spanish is his first language, tends to speak more English now after just a few months in pre-school. And as you can imagine, it’s frustrating for my sister-in-law that she can’t always understand her own son. She takes classes weekly, but learning English as an adult is very, very difficult. Imagine if she and my brother only spoke Spanish how hard it would be to have a child who spoke primarily English. I don’t know why people aren’t more sensitive to that. They may choose to put my niece and nephew in a regular school and just work harder to make sure they don’t lose their Spanish. But if they choose to go with a bilingual education, it wouldn’t have a damn thing to do with politics or not wanting to assimilate. That’s laughable. And my niece and nephew are already as All American as any children of two American-born, English-only speaking parents. A bilingual education would merely be a way to help them keep their Latino heritage, and it would make learning other languages much easier as they got older.

    Instead of getting all uptight about Spanish speaking children getting a bilingual education (if that’s what they’re parents prefer), I think we should offer more bilingual education and get more English speaking children to participate. I guarantee that plenty of American parents would jump at that opportunity.

  192. 192
    Laura says:

    they’re parents = their parents

  193. 193
    Brian says:

    I don’t know why people are so offended by bilingual education.

    Personally, I’m not, but what’s the motivation for bilingual ed only for Spanish speakers? It’s political, and there are many arguments against bilingual ed as it’s offered. It’s an expense that would better serve the population if it offered other languages as well. Maybe start it in elementary grades, and have students study a new language every two or three years. Now THAT would be true language diversity, not the political sop to the Reconquista movement.

  194. 194
    Darrell says:

    Laura, I think most people are for whatever works best for the kids and the community. But bilingual education has a poor overall track record in educating kids, and it isolates the kids from the larger group, making assimilation more difficult

  195. 195
    Brian says:

    keep their Latino heritage

    Laura, this is a good argument against bilingual ed. Why is it the American school’s job to nurture their Mexican heritage? Is that what the school’s job is? Not in my mind, and I have two kids in LA schools who are taking Spanish, voluntarily. They’re learning the language, not the “heritage”. That’s supposed to be taught in the immigrants homes. That is where cultural heritage should be handed down. If we do it for one, we should do it for all immigrants, should we not? If you keep out Christian symbols because you don’t want to offend other religions at Christmas, why on earth should a certain “heritage” be nurtured, using taxpayer resources, at the expense of others?

  196. 196

    The Immigration Issue

    With the exception of posting Paul Krugman’s editorial I haven’t talked about the current immigration brouhaha. The reason is simple; I can’t really get to excited about it in spite of…

  197. 197
    Darrell says:

    Here in Houston, they were going to name our new soccer team the 1836-ers, as that was the year Houston was founded. I thought it was a stupid name, but they didn’t change the name because it was stupid, they changed the name because local hispanics raised hell, because 1836 was also the year Texas won independence from Mexico, and many of our hispanic residents took great offense over it. Now when Mexican americans and mexican immigrants take offense over that shit, it’s entirely fair to ask how well Mexicans want to assimilate in our society versus other immigrant groups. Here is the cached article

    The nixing of 1836 was expected after the name was deemed offensive by some in the Hispanic community shortly after its unveiling Jan. 25.

    The Dynamo and MLS have maintained that 1836 was meant to honor the year Houston was founded. However, 1836 was also the year Texas fought for and gained independence from Mexico, prompting some Hispanics to object.

    Unbelievable arrogance on the part of the Mexican americans and mexican immigrants here.. but that’s how so many of them think, and it speaks volumes as to their attitudes on assimilation

  198. 198
    jg says:

    So much anger. Its actually funny.

    It seems clear that the conservative answer to the immigration problem is to make this country a less attractive place to come to. The land of opportunity replaced by the land of paranoid suspicion and discrimination.

    Cue Asshat saying this is what passes for deep thought on the left. As though some clown from Phoenix who isn’t a lefty represents the left. But like I wrote earlier:

    trusted sources who helped them lump all republican opposition under the term ‘liberal’

    thats all they’ve got. Too simple minded to really engage the opposition so its dumbed down for them, a neatly packaged outlet for their angst. Liberals are the cause of immigration (not the owners of the companies that employ them and donate to republican candidates who keep the laws static). The real issue is too complex and full of nuance so its simplified to immigrants are taking our jobs and ruining our country and uts the lefts fault.

    Deep Thougts
    by JG

  199. 199
    jg says:

    Immigrants wil never ‘assimilate’. Its a pipe dream. There are no non-whites anywhere on this planet who will ever be white (Bill Cosby is the exception that proves the rule) and thats what assimilation means. Its another code word. If they could just act white and not be noticed there’d be no problem. But they have to go and speak their native language which we don’t speak so we can’t understand them ruining trust, they have to go and set up little food stands and play their meximusic. Its their fault we don’t like them, we’re tolerant they just don’t put out the effort.

    And yes I dialed that down a lot from what we really mean. :)

  200. 200
    Darrell says:

    Immigrants wil never ‘assimilate’. Its a pipe dream. There are no non-whites anywhere on this planet who will ever be white (Bill Cosby is the exception that proves the rule) and thats what assimilation means

    Lefties, for all the crap you dish out to GOP4me, your side is far, far more extreme.. jg is case in point

  201. 201
    ppGaz says:

    L.A. County’s makeup is rouchly 50% Hispanic

    Right, I was going to say that I saw the high 40’s when I last looked at a census. Say almost 50% of … about ten million people? So, five million hispanics?

    So my point was, how can we generalize about those 5 million people?

    And then we have this:

    Both relatively the same latitudes on the globe, and not drastically different in terms of geography

    Different? One is a wooded swamp, and the other is a desert … a very dry desert. Sixty inches of rain a year versus …. two to five inches in most areas.

    Baja is unpopulated mostly because until recently it was laregly uninhabitable.

  202. 202
    Tulkinghorn says:

    Laura, this is a good argument against bilingual ed. Why is it the American school’s job to nurture their Mexican heritage? Is that what the school’s job is?

    Obviously, it is not. My kids are Greek-Americans, and go to greek school on the weekends as an important supplement to their cultural and religious education. If we spoke no English at home there is no way I would want them to waste time in bilingual education at school.

    Aside from the wasted time, they would get a secular Greek education and not an Orthodox Christian Greek education.

  203. 203
    ppGaz says:

    Darrell, Jg is a spoof and a troll.

  204. 204
    Tulkinghorn says:

    Why is it we never see DougJ and GOP4me in the same room together?

  205. 205
    Darrell says:

    Darrell, Jg is a spoof and a troll.

    jg, is that true? Did you sucker me into believing you were actually serious? I feel so used

  206. 206
    Brian says:

    Baja is unpopulated mostly because until recently it was laregly uninhabitable.

    Well, I respectfully disagree. There are plenty of areas of the US that might be similarly considered as uninhabitable, yet we have cities thriving there, whether they be desert or mountain. Many areas of Baja are ripe for civilization, yet they remain populated by only a few locals. The peninsula is beautiful, and rich geographically.

  207. 207
    jg says:

    I’m a spoof and a troll? Wow, you throw labels around like a right winger.

    Just speaking the truth. Sorry you aren’t comfortable with it. Odd since I’m on your side here.

  208. 208
    jg says:

    Lefties, for all the crap you dish out to GOP4me, your side is far, far more extreme.. jg is case in point

    No matter how many times you say it it still ain’t true. I’m not a lefty. I ain’t with you but I ain’t on the left either. And I’m just saying flat out what you’re saying in code.

  209. 209
    Laura says:

    Personally, I’m not, but what’s the motivation for bilingual ed only for Spanish speakers?

    Because it’s the most practical. If most of the immigrant children in California spoke Russian, then Russian would more practical. In Sacramento, that might be possible in a generation, as the current group of kids grow up. But right now, it would be impossible. Even though Asians are a significant immigrant group, there are so many different dialects, even from people from the same regions, it would be more difficult, at least here.

    It’s political

    And the anti-bilingual people aren’t?

    There are pros and cons of both English immersion and bilingual education. My brother teaches non-English speaking children in English. He’s not opposed to that at all. But there are some problems with it. For example, his students can’t do a story problem until they’re proficient in English, so learning math is a struggle. As an educator in a multi-language school, and as a parent of biligual children, he understands the challenges and benefits of both ways better most. He’s going to put a lot of thought into it before my nephew starts kindergarden. And politics will never cross his mind. It’s about the best education for his kids.

    Maybe start it in elementary grades, and have students study a new language every two or three years.

    They’re not just studying language, Brian. They’re studying math in Spanish, and reading and writing in Spanish and history in Spanish. They’re also learning all these things in English. The bilingual programs are so children can learn everything that english proficient children learn without getting behind academically. If they were forced to change languages every three years, they might learn more languages, but their math, history, and everything they’re trying to learn in that new language would suffer. However, if they are fluent in two languages as younger children, when they’re in higher grades, learning new languages will be much easier.

  210. 210
    scs says:

    Okay, I’m hearing a Mexican commentator commenting on how hard working Mexican illegal immigrants are. My question is, are they that hard working in Mexico? And if they are, why do 50% of the citizens live in poverty there? Okay, I know you’ll think this is offensive, but why don’t they use those hard working skills to improve their own country, like settlers did here 150 years ago, so they don’t have to come over here?

  211. 211
    jg says:

    Okay, I’m hearing a Mexican commentator commenting on how hard working Mexican illegal immigrants are. My question is, are they that hard working in Mexico? And if they are, why do 50% of the citizens live in poverty there? Okay, I know you’ll think this is offensive, but why don’t they use those hard working skills to improve their own country, like settlers did here 150 years ago, so they don’t have to come over here?

    Because you don’t understand economics? :shrug:

  212. 212
    scs says:

    Because you don’t understand economics? :shrug

    Really – please enlighten me.

  213. 213
    Brian says:

    They’re studying math in Spanish, and reading and writing in Spanish and history in Spanish.

    Hence, the problem. It matters little that they are a significant group. If they are, why then not do all business and education in Spanish, and do away with Enlish altogether? Why, again, should taxpayers support Spanish language “heritage” nurturing? Why not the political agitators work to set up privately funded schools for parents to send thier kids to and learn all subjects in Spanish? Your brother is likely a strong defender of bilingual ed because he gets his paycheck from it. What’s he going to do, come out against it? Speaking of bilingual educators, some have come out against it ehre in L.A., when they joined with some parents who also didn’t believe in it (Mexican parents). They were met with hostility, and never got the English-only education they wanted for their children.

    Politics.

  214. 214
    jg says:

    Because you don’t understand economics? :shrug

    Really – please enlighten me.

    Not a chance. I’ve seen what happens to people who try to talk to you. I’ll just say this: the fact that you don’t understand economics is why you asked such a simple minded question, its why you’re approaching the subject from a common sense perspective. You need more education on the subject.

  215. 215
    ppGaz says:

    Odd since I’m on your side here.

    Prove it.

  216. 216
    scs says:

    I’ll just say this: the fact that you don’t understand economics is why you asked such a simple minded question, its why you’re approaching the subject from a common sense perspective.

    Well, spoof, my minor was economics. I’m sure I understand more than you do on the subject. You better change the standard, “you don’t understand” reply on your computer for your clones. It’s getting old. Especially when you have nothing to back it up. Cut out the spoofing and let people who are actually here for the issue debate.

  217. 217
    ppGaz says:

    The peninsula is beautiful

    Has nothing to do with being habitable.

    The desert became generally habitable only after the advent of manmade water systems, and electricity.

    It was beautiful for a million years, but it has been practically habitable for only about the last 100.

    By humans, I mean. Of course, if you’re a Gila Monster ….

  218. 218
    jg says:

    Odd since I’m on your side here.

    Prove it.

    Are you high? Since when have I been on the side of Darrel or scs?

    Well, spoof, my minor was economics. I’m sure I understand more than you do on the subject.

    Your minor was economics yet you think the fact that mexico is an impoverished nation has something to do with hard work? What was your major and at what college did you study?

  219. 219
    scs says:

    Okay, I am going to say what everyone is afraid to say. As a country, we want to engage in a brain drain from the rest of the world, and import the most educated, highly skilled workers from all over the world that we can, not the reverse. If we are importing mass quantities of low-skilled, low-educated laborers, chances are they are not contributing to the brain drain we seek. Although they may provide a temporary benefit, there are only so many low-skilled job available in this country, and probably less so in the future. Once we max out on those jobs, what are we going to do with the people who came here for those unskilled jobs, and those jobs no longer exist. That is why illegal immigration has to be regulated, to prevent the chaos that could happen later.

  220. 220
    jg says:

    It was beautiful for a million years, but it has been practically habitable for only about the last 100.

    Or a couple of thousand years if you count native americans as inhabitants.

  221. 221
    scs says:

    Your minor was economics yet you think the fact that mexico is an impoverished nation has something to do with hard work?

    Yes, actually there has been long standing studies linking factors such as a nation’s average IQ and work ethic and lack of corruption as very strong predictors of a nation’s wealth. In fact, just a few weeks ago, there was more research on this subject in the papers.

  222. 222
    jg says:

    Although they may provide a temporary benefit, there are only so many low-skilled job available in this country, and probably less so in the future.

    Name a high skilled job that can go overseas that hasn’t? Only low skilled labor will be required here in the future unless we invent a new industry. Check the docks at any port in the US, we export nothing because we manufacture nothing. Automobiles is our only manufactured export. Everything else is commodities that third world countries export.

  223. 223
    jg says:

    Yes, actually there has been long standing studies linking factors such as a nation’s average IQ and work ethic and lack of corruption as very strong predictors of a nation’s wealth.

    I bet hard work, the one you stressed, is the least important of the three factors. You’re heading in the right direction with education and corruption being factors. Both have a lot to do with the government not the people.

  224. 224
    scs says:

    Both have a lot to do with the government not the people

    There are studoies questioning that. Economics is more art than science anyway, studies on both sides.

  225. 225
    scs says:

    Only low skilled labor will be required here in the future unless we invent a new industry

    Yes, but those jobs should stay constant. And tech could eliminate many of those, as well as exporting.

  226. 226
    Darrell says:

    Check the docks at any port in the US, we export nothing because we manufacture nothing.

    You’re showing your ignorance. First, we export more than any country in the world and our ports are booming. Second, we dominate the highly profitable software and technology industries, which depending on the they product, doesn’t usually go through docks. Are you really that stupid? Or are you really a spoof?

  227. 227
    Laura says:

    Laura, this is a good argument against bilingual ed.

    The only argument for or against bilingual education or for or against English immersion should be which educates the children best. That varies for different kids and different families. Anybody who thinks it’s just one or the other is full of crap.

    Why is it the American school’s job to nurture their Mexican heritage?

    Not all brown people are Mexican Brian. Your assumption is telling. The chances of having their Panamanian culture nutured at school is pretty slim. However, it will be helpful in that nurturing at home if they remain fluent in Spanish. That’s just common sense, not an argument for or against bilingual education.

    Is that what the school’s job is?

    This may offend your senses, but my brother actually does nuture his students’ various cultures. He’s not the expert in Chinese New Year, for example, but he lets his students teach other students. It’s great. It makes learning more interesting and the parents become more involved. That is the school’s job. Oh, by the way, he also celebrates Christmas with his students. They even sing Christmas carols. And not just the ones about Santa. Don’t believe everything Bill O’Reilly tells you.

  228. 228
    Laura says:

    Your brother is likely a strong defender of bilingual ed because he gets his paycheck from it.

    What the hell? Do you read? He has a dozen languages in his class. While he is bilingual, he’s not a bilingual teacher. He teaches in English and only English. Hence, he has he never gotten a paycheck from bilingual ed. He’s not even a “strong defender” of bilingual ed. He sees some problems with it, as he does with English immersion. There are also benefits to both. He has to decide before next August where to send his son, and far from being political, he’s being very thoughtful about it.

  229. 229
    ppGaz says:

    Are you high?

    Compared to whom?

  230. 230
    ppGaz says:

    If we are importing mass quantities

    Simmer down, now. That’s from the Coneheads.

  231. 231
    Brian says:

    Don’t believe everything Bill O’Reilly tells you.

    Talk about assumptions being telling. First, I was a bad example of a man, husband, and father back during the abortion discussion. Now, I’m a fawning Republican sycophant who takes his cues from O’Reilly.

    Several years ago, I ran a TV studio in L.A. where Bill would do his show when visiting town. His producers are great people, but Bill is as much of an asshole when off the air as when he’s on it. I didn’t watch his show before then, and I don’t watch it now. That said, I don’t know where your brother works, but the movement against celebrating Xmas in public school districts is real, has been going on for some time, and has many activists working in the mold of the ACLU. Here in L.A., it’s very much the case.

    Parental involvement in schooling is one very good reason to favor bilingual ed, but after 30 years or so of Spanish/English bilingual ed, it is clear to me that it cannot be called a success. If anything, it is used to celebrate Mexican heritage (sorry, there are not any Panamanian flags out there being flown….they’re all the flag of Mexico), maintain the native language and teach the native culture. It has expanded far beyond its original intent of ensuring that immigrant students learn English. It’s become a sort of industry.

    English immersion is favored as much, if not more, by Mexican immigrant parents. Parents have literally boycotted here to get this to happen. Biligual ed tends to segregate immigrant kids from their English-speaking counterparts, and does nothing to help their self-esteem. English-immersed kids show no more stress from the effort than bilingual students.

    You like the feel-good appearance of bilingual ed, and with your brother’s encouragement, I can see why. But, doing it to make their home situation more culturally friendly does not seem a benefit to the local society that contributes the tax money. Immigrants from many countries have managed just fine without bilingual ed, without giving up their cultural identity.

    To encourage further segregation, which biligual ed does, is to allow the cultural and linguistic isolation that Canada has experienced with its Quebec province. If we are to encourage assimilation here in the U.S., we should also encourage immediate immersion into English-speaking education at the public level.

    Some, maybe even you, seem to view Mexican immigrants as sojourners rather than immigrants leaving their homelands for a new life in America. Joining and assimilating into American culture is anathema to these observers, because the Mexicans ultimately want to return to their home country, only staying here temporarily and not breaking ties with their native land. If that’s the case, then we can build our laws around that framework, and not give them the full citizenship, and benefits of that citizenship, that they clearly do not want but are happy to take regardless.

  232. 232
    ppGaz says:

    Or a couple of thousand years if you count native americans as inhabitants.

    Yeah. How many do you figure lived in Baja?

    You know, in the ancient civilization of the Baja Fresh.

  233. 233
    ppGaz says:

    Several years ago, I ran a TV studio in L.A. where Bill would do his show when visiting town.

    Now Brian, there’s a story for the grandkids!

  234. 234
    Brian says:

    Now Brian, there’s a story for the grandkids!

    True. After the show and after he left the studio, I’d gather the crew around and we’d goof on him. He’s an insufferable prick.

  235. 235
    Laura says:

    Darrell Says:

    Laura, I think most people are for whatever works best for the kids and the community. But bilingual education has a poor overall track record in educating kids, and it isolates the kids from the larger group, making assimilation more difficult

    As I said earlier, I think there are pros and cons to it. But I also don’t think you can lump all bilingual education together. For example, the Sacramento school district primarily offers English immersion for grade school kids. However, they have one bilingual grade school. It’s different from some programs, because it has children from English speaking homes and Spanish speaking homes. The Spanish speakers have to have a certain level of English proficiency (I’m not sure how much, my brother told me, but I forgot). The English speakers don’t have to know Spanish. They start out in kindergarden speaking more English than Spanish. Every year, they speak a higher percentage of Spanish, and by the time they reach 6th grade, they speak almost all Spanish in class, and the kids, no matter their native language are proficient in both English and Spanish. I’m jealous we didn’t have that kind of school when I was a kid. Brian seems to be opposed to bilingual education for political reasons, especially when one half of the “bi” is Spanish. But if most people would step away from their assumptions of what bilingual education is, and try to see what it can be, I think it would be beneficial for some kids. Maybe even for a lot of kids. I really love the idea of having English speakers participate in the program. It’s a great opportunity and helps with assimilation for the immigrant kids. Spanish is the most practical language to offer in California, but when these kids go off to junior high or high school, learning a third language is going to be so much easier for them.

  236. 236
    Laura says:

    You like the feel-good appearance of bilingual ed, and with your brother’s encouragement, I can see why.

    My brother’s encouragement? You still haven’t read anything I’ve said. No use saying anything else.

  237. 237
    Brian says:

    Brian seems to be opposed to bilingual education for political reasons, especially when one half of the “bi” is Spanish.

    Laura, you are misreading what I am saying, and trying to paint me as a bigot. I don’t appreciate it.

    I object to bilingual ed because it did not live up to its promises, and because the way it was implemented and used was political. It came out of the Chicano movement here in the Sixties, and remained politicized throughout its practice in major cities. Prop 227 was overwhelmingly passed years ago, and Latino immigrants favored it, despite the political backlash from groups like MEChA, MALDEF, and so forth which had a vested political interest in maintaining bilignaul ed.

  238. 238
    Brian says:

    You still haven’t read anything I’ve said.

    My feelings of you, precisely.

  239. 239
    Laura says:

    It’s a great opportunity and helps with assimilation for the immigrant kids.

    I should add that, obviously, not all Spanish speaking kids are immigrants, my cutie pies being the primary example.

  240. 240
    ppGaz says:

    Brian, dude, let’s just all chill. It’s an emotional issue. My ex-wife, 3rd generation Mexican. My kid, half hispanic. I was jumping all over your shit earlier. But at the end of the day, it’s just a blog. I don’t think anyone here figures you for a bigot.

  241. 241
    Laura says:

    Laura, you are misreading what I am saying, and trying to paint me as a bigot. I don’t appreciate it.

    And I don’t appreciate this:

    It’s not a worry about Hispanics taking jobs, but if they’re making up the majority (no longer a minority by any measure, except for political reasons) and they’re carrying on a legacy, in fact prefering a legacy, of poor intellect and advancement, that’s not good for this country.

    I don’t care what the context is, you have to realize how hurtful this is. When I read these things, I don’t just think of my family, I think of my friends who are Mexican, both first and second generation, and the people I’ve met through them. Your generalizations about them have been so off base and unfair. Even the good generalizations like working hard doesn’t fit one particular husband. To you, Latino immigrants are a group of people, a segment of our population. If you can appreciate that for some of the rest of us, they’re our friends and family, you might consider toning it down.

  242. 242
    ppGaz says:

    A friend sends this from a NYT editorial:

    Everybody says the Republicans are split on immigration. The law-and-order types want to close the border. The free-market types want plentiful labor. But today I want to talk to the social conservatives, because it’s you folks who are really going to swing this debate.

    I’d like to get you to believe what Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas believes: that a balanced immigration bill is consistent with conservative values. I’d like to try to persuade the evangelical leaders in the tall grass to stop hiding on this issue.

    My first argument is that the exclusionists are wrong when they say the current wave of immigration is tearing our social fabric. The facts show that the recent rise in immigration hasn’t been accompanied by social breakdown, but by social repair. As immigration has surged, violent crime has fallen by 57 percent. Teen pregnancies and abortion rates have declined by a third. Teenagers are having fewer sexual partners and losing their virginity later. Teen suicide rates have dropped. The divorce rate for young people is on the way down.

    Over the past decade we’ve seen the beginnings of a moral revival, and some of the most important work has been done by Catholic and evangelical immigrant churches, by faith-based organizations like the Rev. Luis Cortés’s Nueva Esperanza, by Hispanic mothers and fathers monitoring their kids. The anti-immigration crowd says this country is under assault. But if that’s so, we’re under assault by people who love their children.

    My second argument is that the immigrants themselves are like a booster shot of traditional morality injected into the body politic. Immigrants work hard. They build community groups. They have traditional ideas about family structure, and they work heroically to make them a reality.

    This is evident in everything from divorce rates (which are low, given immigrants’ socioeconomic status) to their fertility rates (which are high) and even the way they shop.

    Hispanics and Hispanic immigrants have less money than average Americans, but they spend what they have on their families, usually in wholesome ways. According to Simmons Research, Hispanics are 57 percent more likely than average Americans to have purchased children’s furniture in the past year. Mexican-Americans spend 93 percent more on children’s music.

    According to the government’s Consumer Expenditure Survey, Hispanics spend more on gifts, on average, than other Americans. They’re more likely to support their parents financially. They’re more likely to have big family dinners at home.

    This isn’t alien behavior. It’s admirable behavior, the antidote to the excessive individualism that social conservatives decry. My third argument is that good values lead to success, and that immigrants’ long-term contributions more than compensate for the short-term strains they cause. There’s no use denying the strains immigration imposes on schools, hospitals and wage levels in some markets (but economists are sharply divided on this).

    So over the long haul, today’s immigrants succeed. By the second generation, most immigrant families are middle class and paying taxes that more than make up for the costs of the first generation. By the third generation, 90 percent speak English fluently and 50 percent marry non-Latinos.

    My fourth argument is that government should be at least as virtuous as the immigrants themselves. Right now (as under Bill Frist’s legislation), government pushes immigrants into a chaotic underground world. The Judiciary Committee’s bill, which Senator Brownback supports, would tighten the borders, but it would also reward virtue. Immigrants who worked hard, paid fines, paid their taxes, stayed out of trouble and waited their turn would have a chance to become citizens. This isn’t government enabling vice; it’s government at its best, encouraging middle-class morality.

    Social conservatives, let me ask you to consider one final thing. Women who have recently arrived from Mexico have bigger, healthier babies than more affluent non-Hispanic white natives. That’s because strong family and social networks support these pregnant women, reminding them what to eat and do. But the longer they stay, and the more assimilated they become, the more bad habits they acquire and the more problems their subsequent babies have.

    Please ask yourself this: As we contemplate America’s moral fiber, do the real threats come from immigrants, or are some people merely blaming them for sins that are already here?

  243. 243
    scs says:

    True. After the show and after he left the studio, I’d gather the crew around and we’d goof on him. He’s an insufferable prick.

    C’mon now, tell us the gossip. Enquiring minds want to know. Well, at least we know he’s not a fake, if he’s both a prick on and off the air.

  244. 244
    scs says:

    So over the long haul, today’s immigrants succeed. By the second generation, most immigrant families are middle class and paying taxes that more than make up for the costs of the first generation. By the third generation, 90 percent speak English fluently and 50 percent marry non-Latinos.

    I suppose that is the ultimate question. How well will the children of these illegal immigrants be able to assimilate into the country? Obviously the children of immigrants will not be as happy picking farm produce or working in meat packing plants like their parents were. Can this country accommodate the next generations of this large foreign influx, and how many can come here before the system gets overwhelmed. Obviously some immigration keeps this country vital and is welcome, but there is a limit and a middle ground to everything. We just need to find it.

  245. 245
    Laura says:

    ppGaz Says:

    A friend sends this from a NYT editorial:

    Thank you. Do you know who wrote it?

  246. 246
    Brian says:

    Your generalizations about them have been so off base and unfair.

    With all of the rhetoric and foul-mouthed bloviating on this site, which you have no problem with, you tell me to “tone it down”? C’mon, Laura.

    Generalities serve a valuable purpose, and I don’t think I’m being far-fetched with my comment. And I don’t understand this:

    Even the good generalizations like working hard doesn’t fit one particular husband.

    That’s why it’s a generality. With a generality, there can be exceptions to it, but it doesn’t invalidate the generality. “Generally speaking, Asians have dark hair, but some have red hair” is a valid generality.

    Now, turning to illegal Mexican immigrants. By and large, they are poor and uneducated. If they were otherwise, they would not necessarily come here. Mexico is happy to get rid of them, even though they tend to, yes, be the hardest working of the population. Here in L.A. (the LA Times did a multi-part story on this a couple months ago) children of Latino immigrants are the most likely to drop out of high school and not get into college. Travel the various communities of L.A., like Boyle Heights, Gardena, Panorama City, MacArthur Park/Alvarado St., Echo Park, Lincoln Heights, these areas have heavy concentrations of illegal immigrants and their children, and they are poor, violent, and resemble poorer sections of Mexico, like Tijuana or Mexicali just over the border. They re-create the surroundings of their hometowns in Mexico, and take on some of the more violent attributes of L.A. gang life (and this is leaving out the whole MS-13 gang problem).

    These populations are only growing, and solutions to the problems are either intractable, like drop outs, or unwanted, as with immigrants who prefer to identify with the culture and aesthetic of their home country and home town.

    Laura, this is what I see and deal with every day here. I love L.A., and am a native. I have no plans to leave, and I deal with the illegals better than most of my fellow citizens do. But, I do see the problems as bigger than just the Mexican community. I prefer to look out for the common good of L.A., rather than a subset of its population, and I see the immigrant situation as being a net loss for the town’s future and economy if things remain constant.

    And, since you’re so supportive of the immigrants, does it seem acceptable to you that Latino kids are skipping school all this week, walking the wrong way on major freeways to protest, with Mexican flags raised high and attacking people who dare carry an American flag? Does it seem logical or sensible to you that the LAUSD has lost approx. $1 million in state funding because of these absences this week? Does that serve their education? Free speech is fine, but they could have done it after school, or sought a permit like everyone else does. Instead, they protest and they give off an air of irrationality, stubborness, disrespect, hate, separation, and entitlement. Does this trouble you one iota? Are these the actions of a terribly intelligent or respectful group? The Asian community, along with other immigrant groups, have a strong work ethic, but it’s combined with a strong emphasis on education that they take very seriously. That cannot be said of the Latinos, in general that is.

    And this also makes me curious: with all that I know of their motivations for leaving Mexico, why wave the flag of the country you departed and try to literally re-create the culture in your host country? It must be because they really care not one bit about America or what it has to offer. They’re desirous of returning home at some point, so then why not at least be honest about it, and accomodate them on that basis, rather than allowing them to pretend that they want citizenship, but without the responsibilities?

    You keep trying to bring your feelings into this, and/or to see me as a raging bigot. I am just a citizen of L.A. who has seen a lot in my 44 years in this town. Enough to be asking these questions, but which no one can seem to answer for me, here or anywhere else. I’m struggling for answers, so if I come off as a jerk, I apologize.

    On the positive side, I cheered the mass demonstration last Saturday. Fucking 500,000 protesters, largely without incident. This town’s NEVER seen that. It’s great, but then in subsequent days it devolved into something very different, and no one on the pro-immigrant side has stepped up to tell the radicals to tone it down. I wish they would. I was proud of the initial marchers, but the other ones are separatists, pure and simple.

  247. 247
    Laura says:

    I don’t have Time Select, but it looks like David Brooks. Good for him.

  248. 248
    jg says:

    me:

    Check the docks at any port in the US, we export nothing because we manufacture nothing.

    Asshat:

    You’re showing your ignorance. First, we export more than any country in the world and our ports are booming. Second, we dominate the highly profitable software and technology industries, which depending on the they product, doesn’t usually go through docks. Are you really that stupid? Or are you really a spoof?

    And you accuse others of ‘dishonest reading’? If you had read on just a bit you’d have noticed I expand on the point a bit. We don’t export products, we export commodities. We don’t build things anymore. Other than cars. And we import a shitload of them too.

    Do you have data to back your statement that we export more than than anyone else? Do you disagree that we are on the short side of a massive trade imbalance? Can you explain our dominance in the software industry? I’m actually in that industry and americans rarely code anymore, its all done overseas. I’m also unsure what you mean by the tech industry. Our bleeding edge tech stuff is military, not something subject to trade so I’m not sure where you’re going here.

    Of course you’ll just find some typo and use it to accuse me of leftist dishonesty and duck the questions but I’m asking anyway.

  249. 249
    Laura says:

    And this also makes me curious: with all that I know of their motivations for leaving Mexico, why wave the flag of the country you departed and try to literally re-create the culture in your host country?

    Their culture is rich and lovely. It’s the government and hardships that suck. I love that immigrants recreate some of their culture here. I’m sorry that I can’t share your concern about it. My family, on both sides, immigrated to North America in the late 1600’s, so I welcome the pride of immigrants for their home country. I think I miss out by not having any connection to my French and Irish heritages. Besides, I know for a fact that my friends’ pride in Mexico doesn’t mean they don’t deeply care about this country. Immigration isn’t easy. But as happens once in a while, I agree with David Brooks today. I very sincerely think the good of immigrants out way the bad. That doesn’t mean we’ve got everything right, but I blame our policies over the people. I have a hard time getting worked up over the people who move here. It’s not like I’m any more special because I was born here.

    You keep trying to bring your feelings into this, and/or to see me as a raging bigot.

    No, you just give the impression that you don’t really know many immigrants personally. And because of that, your opinions come off as disconnected. You think I’m trying to bring my feelings. I’m not trying, I am. You, on the other hand are talking about historical context, with the Chicano movement of the ’60s. You probably think I’m too close, but I don’t think you’re close enough. The Chicano movement couldn’t be further from the realities of my friends’ lives. I have one friend who came here from Mexico when she was about 20. Yes, she was poor. Yes, she couldn’t speak a lick of English. Today, she’s perfectly fluent. She’s a manager of one of Sacramento’s most respected restaurants. One of her daughter starts college in the Fall. Her other will in two years. And she has a beautiful new baby with her husband. Her story isn’t all that unique. I could bore you with stories of every immigrant friend I have. They’re all from Latin America, not all from Mexico. But you’re saved by the fact that I’m going to bed.

  250. 250
    Darrell says:

    I very sincerely think the good of immigrants out way the bad.

    No one, or almost no one disagrees with that statement. But that isn’t the subject at hand, is it? The subject is ILLEGAL immigration – people who come here illegally, jumping the line over those following the rules. And entering our country illegally gives no opportunity to filter out the murderers and rapists among them, as 17 percent of those in federal prisons (illegals make up approx 4% of our total population) are illegal aliens, and even that number may be low, as some criminals are deported without prosecution. The topic at hand is ILLEGAL immigration.. not overall immigration

    Also, why should Mexico be able to send in more immigrants than the rest of the world combined? Because that is the current reality of our illegal immigration situation right now. Are Mexican immigrants more deserving than those in Cambodia, Ecuador, or Croatia? No? More importantly, would the Mexicans who come here now necessarily make better Americans and contribute more than other immigrant groups? Every country has the right to control who enters and leaves the country. Yet many here take the extreme position of arguing against this fundamental aspect of sovereignity.

    your opinions come off as disconnected

    Speaking of being disconnected, do you speak spanish? Since you claim to be so close to their situation, you should learn some spanish and visit the spanish language forums on univision.com and other spanish sites to read what they’re saying. Many, many hispanic posters saying horrible things, making racist generalizations about black americans all being lazy buying their food with food stamps, blaming the US without acknowledging that they are demanding here, what they refuse to protest for in their own countries. Sure, there are some latino posters who disagree, but the overwhelming majority of the illegals posting are bitter and angry at the US.

  251. 251
    Laura says:

    I have one friend who came here from Mexico when she was about 20.

    By the way, she came here legally. Thank God she doesn’t have a horror story of a dangerous border crossing. But her reason for coming here isn’t any different than her country men and women who are here illegally, and her struggles and her contributions are similar. She never worked in the fields, but she cleaned houses, she did whatever she could until her English was proficient. My sister-in-law has washed dishes in a restaurant and bussed tables. She was a bank manager in Panama. When you don’t speak English, ego is tossed aside, and you do whatever you can to support your family. That’s pretty much the story of all immigrants, no matter where they’re from. I really think if you knew some of the people I know, you’d have more than a tinge of discomfort in sharing your negative generalizations of immigrants from Latin America, including Mexico. I wouldn’t say that if I thought you were a bigot. Anyway, I really have to get some work done today. This blog can be far too addictive. It’s a real productivity killer.

  252. 252
    Laura says:

    Brian, I didn’t see your post when I just posted. I do have to work, but real quickly, because of our shared history, I do think our connection to Mexico is unique. Also, my sister-in-law’s father was black. She’s very dark. I don’t need to read a board to know that there are bigots among Latinos. I remember a round table about race with Jim Leher and someone made a comment about American Indians and bigotry, and Sherman Alexie said, of course there are racist Indians. It was a “duh” moment. That’s a given for every culture, every country. As far as a board goes, I think you realize that those of us who post on a board tend to be more strident in our views. I’m not sure what pointing out the ugly side of some people has to do with immigration. We’ve got far too many bigots in this country to take the high road when it comes to anybody else’s prejudices. Anyway, I really have to work. We’ll have to continue this discussion down the line because I gotta go.

  253. 253
    Brian says:

    Laura,

    I appreciate your thoughts. I do know many immigrants, both through work, my social engagements, and a homeless feeding organization I work with. Aththe feedings, I see the families that come through and are unfailingly polite and thankful, as contrasted with the native homeless who are rather picky and complaining.

    Yes, even among these immigrants, there will be bigots. As with every group. However, there are infuential people, like Armando Navarro at UC Riverside, whi publicly agitate for the Reconquista movement. And if there are any pro-immigration groups who differ with the man, I have yet to hear from them in any public way. His teachings seem, if anything, to be encouraged, especially at the public school level, as evidenced by the student walkouts this week. These are not the odd bigot, but a movement. What’s your take, and do your frineds see in people like Navarro a Pied Piper, or a bigot?

    Like you, my family immigrated here. They came from Germany, Ireland, and England. Like the Latinos, they fled their countries for a better life. Maybe this will all shake out fine in the end, but even when Ellis Island was processing its multitude of immigrants, they were being checked for diseases, got assistance to find family members who got lost along the way, and received a friendly welcome to their new home. Illegal immigrants have no such processing.

    So, I go to Darrell’s point above — it’s not about immigration, but a sound policy on illegal immigration, and what are we wiling to accept as certain standards or expectations for our immigrants, and can we at least have some control over their flow and processing at entry? Illegals suffer extraordinarily under the current system, and we can surely all agree that they deserve at least appropriate recognition by their host society, and certain rights under our laws, depending on their interest in being a part of our country.

  254. 254
    Laura says:

    You’re sucking me back in:

    What’s your take, and do your frineds see in people like Navarro a Pied Piper, or a bigot?

    I doubt they pay him any attention. I don’t think they’d think of anybody as their Pied Piper, even if they agreed with some of what he said. Yes, there are political motivations among some Latinos (again, not unique among Latinos), but in all seriousness, when I go to a backyard barbeque, the only people talking politics are we white liberals. Most of my relatives are Republicans. They’re all disgruntled with Bush. But if I depended on views of people on this board or prominent Republicans, I’d have a totally different impression of Republicans. My most conservative uncle was advocating complete withdrawal from Iraq long before Murtha. And he was all gung ho when it started. But I wouldn’t know this if I hadn’t brought up the war. Whether you’re a conservative white Republican in Flint, MI, or a fairly liberal Latin American immigrant in Sacramento, chances are, you don’t spend a lot of time thinking politics. They’re not part of any movement. That doesn’t mean they don’t have opinions. After all, my sister-in-law ran for her life when we invaded Panama and her brother’s girlfriend was “collateral damage.” That would radicalize me, but it’s not uncommon for her to leave the room when my brother and I debate politics (we’re not really debating. We’re just preaching to the choir rather loudly). For her, family is her first, second and third priority. This really rang true to me from David Brooks’ column:

    Hispanics and Hispanic immigrants have less money than average Americans, but they spend what they have on their families, usually in wholesome ways. According to Simmons Research, Hispanics are 57 percent more likely than average Americans to have purchased children’s furniture in the past year. Mexican-Americans spend 93 percent more on children’s music.

    My boss just walked in, so I now I really have to work. All I can tell you is that having these people in my life has made me a better person (that might make you wonder what I was like before!). But their priorities are so perfect, in my mind, and they’ve helped me reorganize mine. As far as illegals, I think their priorities are the same. I really do. I don’t think it will pass, but even threatening to make illegal immigration a felony is so counterproductive. A lot of illegals aren’t opposed to being here legally. But they’re too afraid of the process. They don’t trust that they’ll be treated fairly. The Republican Congress is only adding to that distrust, in my opinion. Thankfully, the Senate appears to be more thoughtful about it. George Will makes some sense today. Look at me, first David Brooks, then George Will. I think there are some big problems with guest worker programs, but I haven’t come up with my own solutions. However, what I really want is for the discussion about immigration to be less damning about the people here and more about policy. I want a nation of immigrants to be more respectful of our newest immigrants, even those here illegally. On this board, debate is fun, and if we get a little hostile, it doesn’t hurt anybody. I wish I could say the same about the asses in Washington. A new poll shows that even legal immigrants feel threatened. They’re afraid. It sucks that we make our own citizens feel that way. OK, I’m closing the browswer…

  255. 255
    Brian says:

    Thanks for the note. You’ve got me to look at this from a different perspective, to step back and examine some of my own thoughts on this topic.

    Have a happy work day.

    P.S. — was that today’s NYT where you saw Brooks’ column?

  256. 256
    Darrell says:

    A lot of illegals aren’t opposed to being here legally. But they’re too afraid of the process. They don’t trust that they’ll be treated fairly

    In other words, illegals who intentionally broke the law, jumping to the front of the line over those trying to follow the rules don’t trust that they will be treated fairly. That’s rich. And let’s talk about fairness, because you know, “fairness” in those cases would be to deport them, as they did break our laws, and they did so intentionally… I mean, how ‘fair’ would it be to those waiting to enter legally, if we rewarded those who broke our laws in coming here. Isn’t that sending a clear message to those immigrants trying to do the right thing – why bother to go to the effort to come legally?

  257. 257
    Laura says:

    Thanks for the note. You’ve got me to look at this from a different perspective, to step back and examine some of my own thoughts on this topic.

    Thanks. I need to step back more. I know we need to fix things, if for no other reason, to stop the abuse of immigrants. As a liberal, fixing immigration is a concern for me too. I just cringe when I hear some things and I get defensive.

    Have a happy work day.

    I don’t know about Southern CA, but we’ve had never ending rain up here. It’s making a real dent in my happiness.

    P.S.—was that today’s NYT where you saw Brooks’ column?

    Yep. He wrote it to social conservatives. An interesting slant, I thought.

    Darrell Says:

    In other words, illegals who intentionally broke the law, jumping to the front of the line over those trying to follow the rules don’t trust that they will be treated fairly. That’s rich. And let’s talk about fairness, because you know, “fairness” in those cases would be to deport them, as they did break our laws, and they did so intentionally… I mean, how ‘fair’ would it be to those waiting to enter legally, if we rewarded those who broke our laws in coming here. Isn’t that sending a clear message to those immigrants trying to do the right thing – why bother to go to the effort to come legally?

    Darrell, are you interested in a pragmatic, realistic solution? Or are you so hell bent on punishing illegals, you’re willing to exasperate our illegal immigrant problem with policies that frighten people into remaining on the fringes, not assimiliating, and not seeking legal residency? I’m actually getting tired of this debate (Brian wore me out), so I’ll leave you with George Will:

    Of the nation’s illegal immigrants — estimated to be at least 11 million, a cohort larger than the combined populations of 12 states — 60 percent have been here at least five years. Most have roots in their communities. Their children born here are U.S. citizens. We are not going to take the draconian police measures necessary to deport 11 million people. They would fill 200,000 buses in a caravan stretching bumper-to-bumper from San Diego to Alaska — where, by the way, 26,000 Latinos live. And there are no plausible incentives to get the 11 million to board the buses.

    Facts, a conservative (John Adams) said, are stubborn things, and regarding immigration, true conservatives take their bearings from facts such as those in the preceding paragraph. Conservatives should want, as the president proposes, a guest worker program to supply what the U.S. economy demands — immigrant labor for entry-level jobs. Conservatives should favor a policy of encouraging unlimited immigration by educated people with math, engineering, technology or science skills that America’s education system is not sufficiently supplying.

    And conservatives should favor reducing illegality by putting illegal immigrants on a path out of society’s crevices and into citizenship by paying fines and back taxes and learning English. Faux conservatives absurdly call this price tag on legal status “amnesty.” Actually, it would prevent the emergence of a sullen, simmering subculture of the permanently marginalized, akin to the Arab ghettos in France. The House-passed bill, making it a felony to be in the country illegally, would make 11 million people permanently ineligible for legal status. To what end?

  258. 258
    Brian says:

    Passing this along from VDH, a person who, while leaning conservative generally, is a voice I respect tremendously on the topic of immigration.

  259. 259
    Darrell says:

    Darrell, are you interested in a pragmatic, realistic solution?

    I take it that anything short of rewarding illegal aliens who intentionally broke our laws with anything short of legitimate working status is outside the boundaries of “pragmatic” solutions, right? You haven’t addressed any of the points I’ve made. What about the message it sends to those waiting to enter legally? It tells them ‘why bother’ to follow the rules.. I’m not saying you don’t have a point, but you never address the problems associated with your position

  260. 260
    Laura says:

    Brian Says:

    Passing this along from VDH, a person who, while leaning conservative generally, is a voice I respect tremendously on the topic of immigration.

    I speed read it. He has some thoughtful, practical ideas. I’m going to read it again later. I’m going to a meeting, which is pretty much the only way to prevent me from posting today apparently. This thread is nearing the bottom of the landing page of Balloon Juice. That’s usually my hint to move on, so I’m gonna do my best. This issue isn’t going away, though, so we’ll have plenty of opportunities.

  261. 261
    Laura says:

    You haven’t addressed any of the points I’ve made.

    I’m not the expert. I don’t pretend to have the solutions but please read what George Will and Victor Davis Hanson said. They don’t have the exact same ideas, but we’ve got to think beyond making illegals felons. I appreciate that you’re concerned about those who are waiting to come here legally. I respect that. However, we need to be realistic about dealing with the 11 million illegals already here. I really have to run. How many times have I said that?

  262. 262
    ppGaz says:

    I take it that anything short of rewarding illegal aliens who intentionally broke our laws

    You sound like the petulant secretary of a homeowner’s association.

    Once you have millions of people who, quite sensibly, “break a law” that isn’t being enforced, it’s too late. Failing to round them up and punish them isn’t “rewarding them,” it’s a sensible and humane admission that you failed to enforce the law when it was enforceable.

  263. 263
    kl says:

    “There’s just ONE Jane Hamsher, she’s the one and only!”

    Which is her strongest argument yet for abortion.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. The Immigration Issue

    With the exception of posting Paul Krugman’s editorial I haven’t talked about the current immigration brouhaha. The reason is simple; I can’t really get to excited about it in spite of…

  2. Around The ‘Sphere March 29, 2006

    Our linkfest taking you to some interesting posts from all over the blogo-you-know-what. Links refect various viewpoints that may not necessarily reflect…

Comments are closed.