What You’re Not Hearing from the Liberal Media About Immigration Reform
A popular narrative about immigration reform has emerged in the media: that Congress would be discussing comprehensive immigration reform right now if only President Obama could get support from Republicans.
This narrative lets Obama off the hook for a string of broken promises to Latino voters that he would tackle immigration reform — in his first 100 days, or in his first year in office, or before the midterm elections, or after the midterm elections but still in his first term, or in his second term. Meanwhile, it also helps discourage Latino voters from bolting from the Democratic Party and voting Republican by painting the GOP as flat-out hostile to immigration reform.
The narrative was also the subtext of a recent interview, on National Public Radio, of Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Land recently spoke to a gathering of Hispanic Baptists where he assured his audience that he and the members of his denomination support a pathway to U.S. citizenship for illegal immigrants. Land appeared on Tell Me More with Michel Martin.
(Disclosure: I’m a paid contributor to the show.)
The problem isn’t what Land said. He was right on the money. As when he said:
The government has not been doing its job, for at least the last 24 years under both Republican and Democratic presidents, when it comes to immigration law, in terms of securing the border or in terms of enforcing its law. And, as a result, the government shares some culpability.
Or when he noted bluntly:
We’ve got 12 to 17 million people who are here illegally, and, I think it’s important to note, they broke the law so they could come here and work. Whereas our homegrown criminals tend to break the law so they don’t have to work.
Or when he insisted:
It’s not realistic that we’re going to round them all up and send them home. And it’s also not how we should treat people. We need an earned pathway to legal status or citizenship, whichever they prefer.
The problem is that the interview was framed as something extraordinary. This was “man bites dog.” The message was that Land was an aberration among conservatives, something that Land himself seemed to resist. He pointed out that it was a conservative, George W. Bush, who put immigration reform on the national agenda in 2001.
Land could have gone further and argued that, actually, when you really think about it, liberal Democrats are just as conflicted about reforming the immigration system.
They were conflicted in 1986, when Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming, a Republican, wrote a bill that gave amnesty to nearly 3 million people — a bill that was eventually signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, another Republican.
And they are just as conflicted now. In fact, some of them range from being ambivalent to the prospect of legalizing the undocumented to being outright hostile to it. Some are worried about being portrayed by Republican opponents as soft on illegal immigration, just as earlier generations of Democrats were painted as weak on national security. Most are beholden to labor unions, which oppose any immigration reform package that includes plans to import additional guest workers, which labor leaders insist represent competition for U.S. workers. And finally, many liberal Democrats are naturally sympathetic to blue collar constituents who feel most vulnerable to being displaced amid increased levels of immigration.
So it makes sense that a freshman senator would, in early 2006, have worked with Democratic leader Harry Reid to derail a promising comprehensive immigration reform bill proposed by Sen. John McCain and Sen. Edward Kennedy. The plan was to propose “poison pill” amendments that Democrats knew Republicans — who were then in the majority — wouldn’t support. The poison came at the behest of organized labor in an attempt to thwart any plan that included guest workers.
Just as it makes sense that this freshman senator, upon becoming president, would drag his feet on immigration reform, maintain the controversial policy of raiding workplaces, dedicate just 37 words to immigration in his first State of the Union address, oversee an administration that deported more illegal immigrants than that of his predecessor during its final year, and sabotage immigration reform in the Senate by telling reporters aboard Air Force One that there was no “appetite” on Capitol Hill for tackling immigration reform — all before once again blaming Republicans for the fact that Congress and the White House have not been able to move on this issue.
If President Obama wants to know why immigration reform seems dead in the water, at least until Spring 2011, he doesn’t have to look far. He only has to look in the mirror.
You’re not hearing that from the liberal media. But you should be.
“It’s not realistic that we’re going to round them all up and send them home.”
100% success isn’t required, just an honest effort at it.
“And it’s also not how we should treat people.”
Yes it is. People who are here illegally should be made to leave and start over at the end of the line. Careless employers should be fined, Criminal ones should do time and be fined. Illegal employees should be deported with alacrity.
“We need an earned pathway to legal status or citizenship, whichever they prefer.”
As long as they leave and start over at the end of the line, yes.
You admit these things, and you might deceive someone into thinking you are a reasonable person.
The Obama Administrations response to illegal immigration is toput of signs warning Americans that parts of America are too dangerous to enter… and to sue Americans who actually try to uphold the Constitution and out laws.
I do not believe that it’s hyperbole or extreme to say that Obama is hostile toward the American people and our nation. To say he is not is arguing against the evidence.
So the overriding concern of Latino voters is to facilitate the Reconquista through the legalization of twenty million illegal aliens, something that would inevitably encourage a further flood? Even after Americans near the border have been murdered by the Mexican scofflaws, and even as the most dangerous terrorist organization in the world, Hezbollah, collaborates with Mexican drug cartels? All this, when no serious attempt to control the border has been made in something like half a century?
The election of Barack Hussein Obama was an instance of aliens voting the United States of America out of existence. Obama, with his Muslim family connections and his New Left ideological indoctrination, is deeply hostile to the very nation he has been elected to lead. His presidency is akin to having a Catholic pope who is a Bolshevik. For Western civilization, it is an unmitigated disaster.
The US is no longer the country that it has been from 1776 to 1965, when the execrable Immigration and Nationality Act was enacted. The law ended discrimination in immigration in favor of kindred European nations. The old USA of the history books, the savior of the West in the two World Wars–is gone. You cannot have the same country with different people. Must this transformation, this merging of our nation with Mexico against the popular will, go on?
Still defending the law breakers I see, keep up the destruction of our republic Ruben.
The aims of SEUI is to gain the memberhip of all in the hotel/hospitality industry, many of who are Hispanic and a large percentage working illegally. However, audits of the finacial strength of SEUI is seriously weak. They have no funds set aside for their retireing members, they instead rely on pay-back from the party Democrat to fund their members retirement on the backs of the rest of the country. With the push-back underway from Arizonas’ “first shot across the bow” many states are following her lead. Unemployment unabated, the deficit so out of control, even Democrats are balking at additional stimulus or extention of unemployment payments, as always they try shifting blame to the other-side of the aisle, yet the reality is the Democrats have all the members they need to pass anything they want but cannot brow-beat enough of their own party to vote for passage.
On the other hand, it’s nice to see that even the hopelessly naive are turning on Obama.
I’m a Canadian now living LEGALLY in the US with a green card. Many times since the 1970′s, I crossed the border as a tourist, declaring my “intent” at the border (that’s an immigration law term) was granted entry, and when my trip was over, I headed back north over the Niagara River. When I came here as an immigrant I showed my visa (that’s like a ticket to the fairground), declared my “intent” (as required by law) was granted entry and filed appropriate papers subsequently approved by DHS to acquire a “status” (another law term) and was issued a green card. In time, I intend to file for naturalization.
I resent that people who start out life here by breaking the law should be given any deal at all. At any time on my trips, I could have overstayed. Perhaps I would have been granted amnesty in 1986.
If any change is necessary it is this. Legislate a process to grant green card status for JUVENILES who were brought here under 18 years of age. Under existing laws, they can SPONSOR their law breaking, irresponsible parents.
Good luck! The waiting list for family reunification for Mexicans is over 10 years. (see USCIS website). That’s nothing compared with other worthy folks — say, Chinese, Indians etc.
Yes, we do need comprehensive immigration reform- as in completely replacing Teddy K’s obscene 1965 Immigration Act with a sane policy: one which clearly gives preference to those with education and/or job skills, and is *not* open to unskilled Third World laborers (of which we have far, far too many for the economy to employ. (Any person who dares quote Emma Lazarus in this context will be flogged).
We also need “reform” in the sense of a Constitutional amendment- I’m afraid there is no other way- to snuff out the “anchor baby” scam, the excuse under which, if mamacita manages to pop out a bambino on the north bank of the Rio Grande, the entire damn extended family somehow acquires the “right” to stay.
Citizenship by right of birth should be confined to
a)children of two citizen parents, wherever born
b)children born on US soil to one citizen parent over the age of 18, or
c)children born on US soil to two noncitizen parents both of whom are legally resident here.
Short of constitutional amendment, a bloody difficult thing to do, we should alter the law to read that no person can claim a right of residency based on an anchor baby. Mamacita has a choice- take the little “citizen” back home with her, or give it up for adoption: but either way, she’s getting on the bus.
If a soldier is stationed overseas, and marries a foreign national, any children born to them are not citizens?
Same situation but instead of a soldier it’s a businessman who has been transfered to an overseas office for a few years?
Are you saying that a child born to a US citizen who’s say, 16, who isn’t married, won’t be a US citizen?
Much simpler, the one and only qualification, if one or both parents are US citizens, then child is a US citizen, regardless of where the child is born.
This was intended for this spot and not as # 16. [stupid keyboard]
==========
a) and b) are fine, but not c). That condition does not make a baby a US citizen.
I have a serious question: If a government has a law on the books but signals to the population that they have no intention of enforcing that law, is breaking that law a crime? On one hand, yes, the law is the law, but at the same time the people who broke the law are not going to see themselves as criminals.
The problem we have with our immigration policy is we now have literally millions of people in this country who broke the law to get here, broke the law in acquiring fake documentation/ social security cards, etc., and break the law every day they show up to work without a lawful right to do so but feel absolutely justified in doing so. And — and this important — THEY HAVE A POINT. For far too long we have not treated our border as a national border and we have not treated illegal immigrants like illegal immigrants.
As a result we have an absolute mess on our hands with no good solution. The best we can do (that is to say, the least bad alternative) is to grant amnesty but only after first securing the border. That means we first build the fence, give the border patrol greater leeway to crack down on coyotes and smugglers, re-claim territory that has been effectively ceeded to drug cartels, deport illegal aliens in our prisons (after their sentences are complete) and crack down on companies that hire illegal aliens. Then, having re-established that the US takes its immigration law seriously, we grant amnesty to those who’ve stayed out of trouble in the meantime. We’re not deporting 12 million people. No nation has ever succeeded in doing so without causing humanitarian catastrophe. But simply granting amnesty now will only encourage further lawbreaking and make the mess we currently have even worse.
We are creating a nation of scof-laws, even worse than what happened with the Double-Nickel.
The unenforcement of basic immigration law spills over into other aspects of life, and you find the “recipients” of this favor, and their immediate circles, thinking that very few of the laws of the U.S. apply to them, so why observe them?
No Ruben, Obama has broken his promises to Latinos because it will be political suicide if he passes the kind of “immigration reform” that you and a minority of other Latinos want. He will get run out of Washington if he doesn’t secure our borders soon. It is only because of his promises to useful idiots like you that he hasn’t done that already. It is because of his promises to you and other useful idiots that he is actually going to challenge a law that hasn’t even been implemented in Federal court. It is all about votes, Ruben. It always has been about votes for Democraps. As soon as the President’s handlers decide that the votes lost will not be greater than the votes gained for Democrats by “immigration reform” we will have this nonsense jammed down our throats. This is the same decision that Democrats made when they decided to give 18 year old morons the right to vote. It is the same decision that Democrats made when they pushed for Washington DC residents to vote in all federal elections and to give those morons in DC three electoral votes as if Washington DC were a state. Whenever it becomes a political advantage for the Democraps to pass “immigration reform” you can bet your Latino ass that they will, and not before then. I hope the Democraps never do it. By the way, the ONLY reason that stupid, stupid, stupid, George Bush wanted to pass “immigration reform” is because he was so unbelievably stupid enough to think that Republicans would ever get credit(votes)for doing it from the Latino community. Thank goodness smarter people than Bush and McCain prevailed on that.
No, Bush did it so that Jeb’s son George P. Bush could be elected President someday in the future; the Bush name has so much damage that only a 99.9 hispanic vote could carry one of the scions over the top. That would have made a great MAD magazine folding back cover joke.
“It’s not realistic that we’re going to round them all up and send them home.”
Sure it is. We’ve done it before…3 times. Hoover did it, Truman did it and Eisenhower did it. Mass deportation of illegals back to Mexico. And for the same reasons we see today = jobs of Americans, national security, destruction of schools and hospitals, huge bloated welfare systems.
I say warm up the buses, boys !
Shut off the job spigot, and they’ll self-deport; we’ve seen that already in limited cases, such as AZ’s crackdown on businesses who hire illegals.
Just require that all businesses clear their existing hires, and any future hires, through e-Verify, and crackdown on the discrepancies between the SocSec and IRS lists.
Finally, a balanced analysis from Ruben, although I fail to see why “raiding work places” is controversial? Is raiding work places by OSHA for unsafe working conditions controversial? Are mandatory traffic safety check points by the police for bagging drunk drivers controversial? I suspect if it was as easy to bag a fortune fiver hundred CEO for hiring illegals as it is for a cop to bag Jose for beating his wife, there would be no need for comprehensive immigration reform. I mean with 20 percent unemployment it’s not like we don’t have the personnel to pick grapes in Napa. Maybe we should bring back Georgia style chain gangs: make little rocks out of big rocks or die.
Folks;
Stop heaping all the invective on the illegal border crossers and move most of the blame where it belongs – the lawbreaking American employer.
No demand, no supply.
If you want to find the ultimate cause to blame, blame the American consumer who keep pushing companies to produce the same goods at ever cheaper prices.
Yup, the American consumer bill of rights, a cheap gardner to do the lawns in Beverly Hills and a maid to bang in the bedrooms: it’s all the consumers fault. If it were not for all the pricks in the world, Gloria Steinem couldn’t piss and moan about marriage being whoring on the installment plan.
The Mexicans are bringing a lot more than lettuce picking skills across that border. Maybe we should start blaming all the lawbreaking moronic American recreational drug users.
No demand, no supply, as they say.
markthegreat: let’s start with you. stop eating strawberries, cherries or any other fruits and veggies that come out of CA
As usual miriam, you presume too much.
Did I say that wanting cheap goods was a bad thing?
Cracking down on employers is a part of the answer, but far from enough to solve it. The financial benefits are too great. After factoring in SSI, workman’s comp., unemployment taxes, etc… the per hour labor cost of illegal aliens is about half of that of native born Americans.
I’ve had a small construction company for much of the last decade. I refused to hire illegals, and my business suffered for it. I was consistently underbid, often by a lot, and my clientele was limited to those who cared about right and wrong more than dollars and cents. I eventually solved the problem by going solo and only taking on smaller jobs.
To stop the hiring of illegal aliens would require the feds to raid every construction company every month… literally. The unethical owners will not stop exploiting the labor differential until they’ve been permanently driven from the business; and the other owners are often forced to follow their competitor’s immoral practices just to stay afloat.
It’s a variation of the Prisoner’s Dilemma… those who “break” and use cheap labor first get the rewards. Everyone else is forced to follow.
In short, mass deportation will still be necessary. As long as there is a ready supply of cheap labor someone will find a way to exploit it, to the great disadvantage of those who don’t.
This cartoon at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/consistently-unacceptable/ sum up Obama’s terrible responses to both Arizona and the Gulf oil spill.
America is being systematically destroyed by a covert demonic network/movement.
BLOGGING FOR THE TRUTH MOVEMENT
myspace/erikthered9
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=393931985&blogID=536446200
We need an earned pathway to legal status or citizenship, whichever they prefer.
There already is an orderly, generous and perfectly serviceable pathway to legal status or citizenship: Existing law.
How many more general amnesties need to be declared and immigration “reforms” enacted before you’ll stop wringing your hands about the lack of “an earned pathway to citizenship” for illegal aliens, and start to understand that there is no such lack? At what point do you start to insist that members of our society enforce and obey society’s laws?
How many more ignored and flouted re-vamps of federal law will it take, Ruben?
Two?
Ten?
Thirty?
How many?
They were conflicted in 1986, when Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming, a Republican, wrote a bill that gave amnesty to nearly 3 million people — a bill that was eventually signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, another Republican.
How many of NPR’s “affluent,” “liberal,” “well-educated,” “knowledgeable” and “engaged” listeners even know this fact? If you were to pick one of them at random and state this fact to him, you’d be more likely to get a mocking sneer or angry denial in response, rather than knowledgeable open-minded discussion of the topic.
I did.
a) and b) are fine, but not c). That condition does not make a baby a US citizen.
You don’t have to look any further than Maywood, California to understand why the Democrats are hesitant about immigration reform. Maywood is a santuary city and it can no longer afford its public services. All public employees have been fired and all services are being out sourced to private enterprises. I’m sure the SEIU is having a fit but that’s what happens when the tax base cannot support the population.
It doesn’t have anything to do with the tax-base, but the fact that the City cannot get liability insurance due to the many judgements against its’ Police Department for violating the rights of those they come into contact with.
Mr. Navarette, I recognize your obvious sympathy toward illegal migrants, and while I do not condone it, I understand very well that deporting the millions already here illegally is not viable. I don’t support their automatic path to citizenship, believing that to be inherently unfair to all who have “jumped the hoops”, so to speak, nor do I support giving them the same benefits that citizens and legal residents have earned. We cannot be the Country Who Gives Everything To Everybody. It’s just not possible.
That said, their children who are born here will be citizens, with all the rights — and duties— that are implied. Hispanic culture (to name only one of many cultures) may very well be precious to you, but if it cannot adapt itself to the overall culture of the United States, then it has no place here. We are the United States of America. That is an ever-evolving culture, with one generally accepted language to keep us all together, and one generally accepted system of government to ensure fairness to all. Language and system of government were bequeathed to us from a little island off the continent of Europe, and continues to abide by that original impetus, and while you may chafe at that, it’s a fact that has held us together for more than 200 years, and made us, until now, a dominant world power. Ask yourself if rule by the people would have survived under any other system, and be honest about it.
I don’t wish harm on the desperate, poor and huddled masses. But I don’t wish to see my country collapse under their suffocating numbers, either.
Obama has done enough reforming over the past year. I cannot see immigration up for any entertainment in this cycle. This President has done enough and with the party of “no” still refusing to enter the sandbox, at least until the mid-terms are over I just cannot see any movement. Law enforcement and employers are begging for some relief so they can do business but they will have to wait at the least, another year. And in the fall? Well, the Dems will blame the Pubs for being anti-ethnic and anti-hispanic while the Pubs wil blame the Dems for lettin the foreigners take all the jobs and money. And the loons will walk the streets, armed to the teeth, screaming that everyone is trying to take their guns. … just another routine election….again…. glad I bought a new BBQ.
Why do liberals believe that by trotting out the same lies that this time they are going to fool someone.
Out here in the real world, it’s possible for somebody who opposes your solution, to have one of their own.
There’s no requirement that unless you are willing to help the Democrats pass their plan du-jour, then you have no plan.
The Republicans have offered alternative plans to all of these problems you mention. The Democrats refused to negotiate. They wouldn’t even permit the Republican plans to be brought up in committee, they often even refused to permit ammendments so that only the leaderships plan, as written by the leadership could be debated.
If you wonder why nobody respects you, its this habit of yours of repeating already disproven lies.
Poor Citizen,
I am armed to the teeth, but only when my gun safe is open. I promise I won’t be a loon and walk the streets screaming about anything, especially not about another of your diatribes. I will also stay away from the sandbox for as long as I can. On the BBQ, I’m all in for that. What time will the brisket be ready?
They were conflicted in 1986, when Sen. Alan Simpson of Wyoming, a Republican, wrote a bill that gave amnesty to nearly 3 million people — a bill that was eventually signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, another Republican.
Ruben, and yet here we are in exactly the same situation as 1986. Remember the assurances that we would just make these folks legal and then enforce the border, employer sanctions, etc? Does doing the same thing and expecting different results seem a bit, well, insane to you?
We need to try something different from 1986. Enforcement of employer sanctions is a good start. Insisting local law enforcement assist the feds in identifying illegals is also warranted. Followed by a way for Mexicans to enter legally for work-without a path to citizenship. They should be held to following the existing paths. Our biggest concern should be figuring out who everyone is to ensure that we are not perpetuating a situation terrorists can exploit due to our sanctuary cities and ludicrous avoidance of enforcing our immigration laws. I don’t have a problem with all the Baja Mexico plates in San Diego, I figure we know who those folks are.
Part of what illegal advocates do is distort the picture of what their clients do in this country and to it. Of course, if you tell the truth about illegals they stop being the earnest, hard-working, decent, law-abiding exemplars that we should be begging to stay here forever. Instead, they become transformed into what they are: diffident, resentful, inclined to break the law given the opportunity. And, by the way, they are not the great workers they are portrayed to be; few have any conception of or capability to do quality work.
History has shown that nothing good accrues to the native population of a country that has been overrun by people who are different from them and actually resent and dislike them. What the advocates are really saying is “trust me this invasion will be different.”
Dear Dr. Bones,
“Accentuate the positive!,” that’s the maxim, sir: just look what we ARE hearing — and hearing from a pajama-certified Kiddie Selfservative! [0]
The whight-wing playmates of Don Rubenito de Navarette seem to be able to calculate its number, though. To quote the horse’s anatomy, they “recognize [its] obvious sympathy toward illegal migrants, and … do NOT condone.”
That unwonted flash of neocomradely insight does not mean the ’wingers are any brighter or better than we have accounted them all along, it only means that the War Against the Wetbacks is A REALLY BIG DEAL at Rio Limbaugh and Port Ste. Lucie.
I’d guess that Don Rubenito grossly underestimates what it is goin’ up against.
To expect Wally Wombschool and Cindy from Wasilla to worry about the fiend Barák Husáyn O’Bama breaking promises made to persons who voted all wrong and mostly don’t even think in Greater Texan, as all decent WASP God Folk must do [1], is so detached from reality as to be worthy of Foxcuckooland — were it not detached in entirely the wrong direction.
Well, ’tis the Silly Season, after all, and perhaps the next thrillin’ episode will star their Neocomrade Herr Prof Dr. Th. von Sowell over at the University of Hooverville. Imagine that neoceleb rehashin’ all his Party-line apologetics for the AEIdeology, only mysteriously tackin’ on a plea for “maybe some slavery reparations, please?” at the end of it.
I jest. As Freedame Noncondoner (peanut-gallery peanut #19) says, “[T]hat is not viable … We cannot be the Country Who Gives Everything To Everybody. It’s just not possible.” Freelord and Kiddiemaster von Sowell is very strong on that particular sort of “just not possible,” which beautifully befits a theoretician of Chicagonomics for Dummies. Besides, havin’ been educated well before the wombschool system got up to speed, Neocomrade Th. X. Sowell is no doubt intellectually competent to grasp the fine print about the exact Terms and Conditions on which the unwasply may gain admission to the Big Tent Party.
Roughly speakin’, and very briefly, it goes like this: the Lesser Breeds Without can be Kiddielike to almost any extent, but when it comes to bein’ Selfservative, they ought to clearly understood that it is not any individual Kiddie’s own Neoself that is to be serviced, but rather an abstract or highest-common-factor public construct. Persons like Don Rubenito and Prof. Dr. von Sowell, good neofolks who fail to “look like America” in a sense unmistakable even to colourblind Rulalaw zealots, must not attempt to service any Self that is not strictly monochrome. What’s good for ‘everybody’ is bound to be good for them, ¿no es verdad?
If they cannot be satisfied with that, well, America’s Otherparty will be better off if they turn jackass as soon as possible. Tammany Hall and Cook County have always been in the business of servicing what one might call “Collective Selves,” nicht wahr? Not simply what’s good for Everybody, but specific goodies for specific groups, like Rum and Romanism and Rebellion and Reparations and Amnesty … even rights for Union thugs!
The Daughters of Virtue and Sons of Wisdom LLC will never condone any such vile political rotgut!
So that’s settled. Only let some kind D. of V. or S. of W. clue poor Don Rubenito de Navarette in about How The Party Works, please. Then we can all get back to smashin’ Social Security, and gettin’ Commissar Salazar’s jackboot off Bee Pee’s throat, and other really important neobusiness.[2]
Happy days.
___
[0] “Who ordered that?” Has Neocomrade R. L. Simon, Freelord and Kiddiemaster Padjaama (and worshipful yalodramatist!) taken leave of his senses?
[1] I’d like to indicate some chapters and verses for you to make a memorandumb of, Dr. Bones, but unfortunately the señorito does not emit its heretical infidelities to the Party of Grant and Hoover in an easily quotable way.
If you study the scribble as a whole, though, please notice the way the señorito deploys Neocomrade R. D. Land, “president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission,” as a sort of stalkin’ horse. Unsurprisingly, this distinguished religionator not only looks like America , he is the spittin’ image of America’s Otherparty, jowls and all.
Nevertheless, Don Rubenito is, I think, makin’ a mistake to lug the guts of Dr. Land into the discussion. Miss Cindy and Master Wally have, in a certain sense, been wombschooled to entertain the highest respect for organised religionism. But this is rather a tricky and Pickwickian respect, I fear; it certainly does not mean that Kiddie Selfservatives will drop their own baloney instantly and pick up somebody else’s merely because the other guy has a pulpit to bully from. Far more likely, they will enshrine the religionistical baloney as so sublime a Truth that it is quite unfit for everyday use, carefully reservin’ it for sabbaths and neosabbaths and Commencement Days and suchlike special occasions.
Or, to put the same thing another way, I betcha the Kiddies have a tolerably accurate idea “what Jesus would do” about crimmigrants and criminaliens, but are not especially eager to think about so unpleasant a topic. Let alone be badgered about it by the likes of Don Rubenito.
[2] It occurs to me that this P&I señorito — or, more likely, a clever one — might conceivably slip a little contraband “collective rights” past the Thought Police of Party an’ Ideology if he could disguise his collectivist filth as Corporation Rights.
“La Raza, Inc.,” if you will.
But Mammon knows best.
Now that you have righteously explained what all of us neocomradely kiddies think about illegal immigration, could you please explain, in terms the suchlike selfservative religionators among us can understand, what you believe in regards to immigration law? At least Don Rubenito writes his own opinions.
The argument that “we will never round up all of the illegal aliens” is an inconsequential logical fallacy.
Quoting:
“We’ve got 12 to 17 million people who are here illegally, and, I think it’s important to note, they broke the law so they could come here and work. Whereas our homegrown criminals tend to break the law so they don’t have to work.”
The fact is that illegal aliens are 100 times more likely to commit crimes than the average American citizen: 1 in 25 illegals are felons, 1 in 12 commit sexual assault after arriving in the US, the average illegal has 8 misdemeanors (none of which are immigration violations).
There is no justification to the importation of a criminal subculture, and further condoning a slave caste system
The unions, until recently, did not support the presence of illegals because they have steadily reduced labor wages – now, they earn their support because they will become the future voting block of the DNC and proud union members that will increase the unions’ political clout
The Democrats have a majority, Obama says he has a plan that would work for immigration, but it’s those nasty Republicans that will not let him implement it…remember…the Democrats have the majority…
Marital law is creeping along our way…coming to a border town near you…
…marital law…
And now the Dems are going to be in my bedroom?
It was bad enough having the SoCons there.
Humorous cartoon comparing Obama’s failed response to Immigration and the Oil Spill at http://drawfortruth.wordpress.com/2010/06/28/consistently-unacceptable/
I could fix our illegal problem right now and it wouldn’t cost tax payers a cent in fact it would save us millions.
1. No anchor babies
2. No services for illegals (welfare, medicaid, free education)
3. No money transfers, money orders or cahiers cks without proof of visa, green card or citizenship.
Done – they would self deport in no time.
Elle;
How’s about a 20% tax on all remittances sent to Old Mexico, or how’s about we demand a free barrel of oil each month for each illegal worker in the USA? PEMEX has lots of oil. Let’s see,,, 17 million illegals = 17 free barrels of oil each month,,, that sounds fair to me.
“17 million illegals = 17 free barrels of oil each month,,, that sounds fair to me.”
That should read; = 17 free million barrels. Sorry, there’s no “edit” box here.
#4. If self-deportation doesn’t happen within 90 days, all property, personal & real, is confiscated and sold to the highest bidder, proceeds go to reduce the national debt.
We really should consider conquering Mexico. They’re becoming a complete pain in the fundament. It would really be gratifying to watch the 101st stomp the drug lords into the ground, and wipe out everyone associated with them. We have plenty of ongoing acts of war to justify the action.
It’s time for meaningful immigration reform: Federal troops on our borders, mass deportation of all illegals, a moratorium on legal immigration and then when the dust settles no more criminals, freeloaders, or people from bizarre alien cultures who are hostile to our culture and want to destroy from within. They must possess skills and not be allowed to steal from the American public. No more anchor babies. The English language should be the official language and made into law with penalties for violations.
And you Mr. Navarrette posses an astonishing ability to pretend that the facts don’t exist and a pathological need to continue on a blinkered course of fantasy to the point where you are making a fool of yourself. People are noticing.
Senator Kyl claims that O said that he would not secure the borders because it would disincentivize the republicans from passing his comprehensive immigration reform bill. Would relaxing EPA restrictions and suspending the Jones Act disincentivize the republicans from passing O’s comprehensive energy bill?
You know, if you are using the word “reform”, you are part of the problem. That is a propaganda meme, and if you don’t know it, you aren’t doing your job. There is no need for reform. There is a need to act as if the laws that govern this nation already–that were passed and signed by the elected representatives of the people–matter.
The simple fact is that Mexicans who catch Guatamalans or Hondurans in their country throw the book at them. They are deported or go to jail for up to two years. They don’t let them line up for services, or have debates about their public usefulness. We are looking at naked, self serving, hypocritical prevarication and misdirection by the Mexican government, the political left, illegal aliens, and the media.
I will add that basic economics tells you that as the supply of anything grows, its price drops. We see over and over that Mexicans work for wages no American would take. This is true. It is also true those wages would NECESSARILY be higher if there were not illegal competition for those jobs. This point cannot be disputed.
Could we please stop with the misnomer GWB is a conservative?
Seems to me that in this computer age, employers should have a method of (nearly) instantaneous confirmation of a job applicants social security number status.
Questionable SS#s could be investigated further, while the applicant awaits confirmation. Legitimate SS#s could be approved by the all knowing Fedzilla, thereby eliminating any employers culpability for hiring an illegal alien.
We do, it’s called e-Verify!
Reform? Who Needs Reform?
Magnanimity in North Miami Beach
In a gesture of boundless magnanimity, of selfless generosity, the mayor of North Miami Beach has extended America’s–or, at least, North Miami Beach’s–hand to the unfortunate, impoverished people of Haiti.
Mayor Mayor Andre Pierre, a Haitian immigrant, says 55,000 Haitians waiting for visas to the United States are welcome to settle in his city of 60,000 souls.
It’s gratifying to see an immigrant offering something to his adoptive community as payback for allowing him to enter our country and become a mayor.
As of the 2000 census, 38.97% of the population of North Miami Beach were African American so the influx of those 55,000 Haitians should appreciably change the demographic makeup. Other plusses for North Miami Beachians would include learning the skill of balancing water buckets and baskets on their heads and the fine art of voodoo.
As Van Helsing of Moonbattery.com points out, “Similarly, . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1775)