RSS Feed
Loading ...
AJStrata and Michelle Malkin are two bloggers that I have a great deal of respect for. I don’t always agree with everything either one says, but I do listen to them, and in this case, both are making valid points:
WRAL reports on a new statistical breakdown of illegal alien drunk drivers in North Carolina. It’s a blood-pressure-raising look at the deadly revolving door, catch-and-release, the deportation abyss, and the danger of sanctuary policies embraced by those sworn to defend and protect the public
And the deportation abyss is because the laws did not get passed and there will be no new laws for years to come. This is as much Michelle’s fault as those she lambasts - she just won’t admit her efforts to stop the legislation kept the status quo in place. I want to remind people why I call Michelle and Tancredo and their ilk Amnesty Hypochondriacs….
As people know I will not debate on false pretenses and lies. As the comprehensive immigration reform got closer to reality some panicked and started to believe exaggerated and extreme theories. They became invested in myths just as the left has invested in myths that Iraq is a defeat.
I have no choice but to remind people that actions have results, and you better take responsibility for all the results of your actions, not just the ones you wanted but all those you did not think through. That is the essence of law and order, ignorance is not an excuse. You cannot say I had not realized that would happen and get a pass on vehicular manslaughter. You can only get the lowered punishment for negligence verses premeditation.
Michelle and the Amnesty Hypochondriacs traded endless drunk drivers for the opportunity to try one more time to deport the illegals, either directly or through coercion from lost wages, etc. There never was going to be the removal of 10-20 million people who have lived here for years, but they were not thinking straight, they had to stop the bill which would not have provided the punishments they wanted. They did not care the vast majority in this democracy did not agree with them, and therefore they should have accepted the fact they did not have the numbers and let as much reform get passed as was possible.
The fact is we had two choices and they gave us the worst of the two. Choice one was (a) comprehensive reform passes with its imperfections, (b) the long term illegals get a process to prove they should, and then pay, to stay, and (c) we get to deport the violent criminals without minimal resistance from the judicial branch (there would be some test challenges, always are.
The second choice is where we are: (a) no immigration reform, (b) long term illegals get to stay and (c) we still cannot deport violent criminals. The lie back then was we could fix our problems with current law. I have many posts on why that was a lie and is a lie. So when Michelle holds up these examples of what she and others wrought last year when they killed immigration reform I can only shake my head and ask “what were you thinking?” Remember Michelle, all those dead children might have been alive if the Immigration Reform package had passed and these criminals would have been deported instead of given a second chance. You all own this issue now, since you left us with this mess.
I really would like your reactions to this. I’m still absorbing AJ’s words so I will respond in the comments section.
April 19, 2008 - 09:35 AM on April 19th, 2008
Pam,
Thanks for posting the debate and I look forward to seeing the comments. I do not mean to imply evil intentions, but many people make tragic mistakes in judgement with the best of intentions at heart. That does not mean we cannot and should not learn from the mistake.
We had a chance to make a lot of progress - perfection is a dream. And we should never have traded that progress over irritation that those who broke a misdemeanor law would only get a misdemeanor punishment (fines and back taxes). The criminal background check was a huge step forward - one strike and your out. And it represented a fundamental change in our legal system where past criminal behavior applied to current legal standing.
It was an opportunity of a generation - and we squandered it over nothing.
Cheers, AJStrata
April 19, 2008 - 09:41 AM on April 19th, 2008
From the AJStrata blog:
“The illegal immigragtion issue is shifting out from the far right. The idea of creating a guest worker program, along with a process of steps and fines for those here for a long time making a living and keeping their noses cleam to gain legal status (recall, it is not a felony to be hear without a visa, etc.) will be coming back in vogue. Actually, they never were out of vogue. A vocal minority on the right bluffed their way into making people believe a lot of mythsabout immigration while they denied their key issue was letting people stay and work who have been here for a while working without legal entry. They hide behind a lot of common sense, common ideas (english only, no violent criminals, etc) to distract or ignore they fact they will not address the existing population with anything less than removing them from the countrty (by force orginally, now by coersion, starvation (lack of work) you name it).
When they are honest they lose support. But you cannot maintain illusions for long, reality comes crashing through. And the truth is the immigration horror stories were not the full story. The full story is this vocal minority waged a campaign against a very large element of our society (yes, they are inside our society and exist). And the fantasies of being able to remove these people without consequences are now crashing down. First we see many localities reversing their programs to coerce or push the immigrants out - mainly because these programs worked and when the immigrants left the local economies tanked (duh!):”
What is AJstrata smoking? This argument sounds like another apologist for illegals to me. Perhaps AJ needs to experience firsthand some of the negative consequences of these illegals AJ feels are so necessary. AJ writes like someone who has limited real experience.
What a buffoon, imo…
April 19, 2008 - 09:47 AM on April 19th, 2008
I will absolutely further disagree with AJStarta on the premise that Michelle Malkin and others who promoted the House Republican efforts to stop illegals was hypocrisy. Further, he misrepresents the arguments of the other side with the “two choices” argument; then reaches his conclusoon.
No, AJ, it isn’t that simple and you apparently deliberately misrepresent the other side. You misrepresent choice 1 by not calling it Amnesty, which it was, and misrepresent choice 2 by not recognizing it as “turning off the magnet” which would have been a better description.
The vast, vast majority of Americans want illegal immigration stopped and NO amnesty.
April 19, 2008 - 10:01 AM on April 19th, 2008
[...] Pam over at Right Voices is hosting a neutral debate corner - I suggest folks also comment there as well as here and at [...]
April 19, 2008 - 10:20 AM on April 19th, 2008
Thank-you AJ
April 19, 2008 - 10:48 AM on April 19th, 2008
Robert,
This is my take on the situation.
A. Did local economies tank when the illegals were pushed out? Some did, yes. That doesn’t mean that the local economies can not rebound, it just means that there will be an adjustment period and balance sheets will reflect a lesser ‘bottom line’. That lesser figure will be the figure for which the locality plans their budget. How much is being saved by pushing them out? That is where we need to take the discussion.
B. I may be reading too much into AJ’s words, but I think that the Republicans missed their opportunity to enact new laws and strengthen existing laws. We blew our chance in 2006. We are in a position to stop bad legislation, but are in no position to bring forth new legislation. We gave our elected leaders an ultimatum and they gave us the one fingered salute. AJ is correct in stating that we were never going to deport all the illegals, but we could have made it easier to deport them. States are enacting tougher laws, and that seems to be making a difference.
C. The jobs Americans won’t do…I brought up having kids work at the hotels or resturants to earn their way through college..SF Liberal laughed at me..My sil works for Michigan State and told me that paying for college is alot different then when I went. I went to college with kids that depended on GSL’s and if they didn’t come through, my friends didn’t come back. They depended on jobs on campus or just off campus. Today, kids finance their entire education plus spending money..Businesses can’t get them to work for $9.00/hr, hence you have illegals. I’m not suggesting we force the kids to take the work, but I am saying that my generation has created a generation of kids that can’t function without their parent’s and they have no idea what hard work is..we helped to create this mess!
If we could turn back time, how do you think that the situation could have been handled where we actually made a difference?
April 19, 2008 - 12:34 PM on April 19th, 2008
After Hillary or McCain or Obama become the next rule/President we will need no political debate but most non hispanic Americans will need a new home and if you think that is nuts go to any third world country and tell me how many kinds of people live with others? it really is all about race and ideals of how a nation works against or for people.
April 19, 2008 - 12:35 PM on April 19th, 2008
I also have to point out that Malkin’s position does not even seem to be able to win a majority in some Republican primaries. Take the year 2006 - Tom Tancredo’s PAC launched an all-out assault to defeat Chris Cannon in one of the most Republican districts in the country because Congressman Cannon supported the approach favored by President Bush.
Cannon won - by about a 56-44 margin. In the 8th district, Randy Graf had an even lower percentage of the Republican primary vote, but won because two other candidates split the vote.
Even this past presidential primary - who won? John McCain, whose name was on the immigration bill that Malkin so vehemently opposed. So is there support for her position on immigration? I submit that whatever support there is is insufficient to win Republican primary elections.
I’ll even go further - what support she has comes because she has mischaracterized President Bush’s proposal as an amnesty. There is punishment for breaking the law in his proposal - it just wasn’t as severe as she wanted (and in one interview, she is quoted as saying that she wants every single illegal immigrant deported). Her characterization of his proposal as amnesty reminds me of how Bill Clinton accused the Republicans of Medicare cuts when all they did was to reduce the rate that spending would increase.
The battle lines have hardened. With McCain as the nominee, Republicans who support comprehensive immigration reform can rightly claim that their view is shared by a significant portion of the GOP - one that can win contested primaries. Then there are those like Malkin who seem to be determined to fight this to the bitter end, no matter the consequences - it’s a mess.
April 19, 2008 - 02:25 PM on April 19th, 2008
“I submit that whatever support there is is insufficient to win Republican primary elections.”
I agree. There are some serious economic reasons for wanting to keep those workers here. The main reason is that we don’t have 12 million unemployed to take their place. If we were to deport all of the illegals, we would not have enough labor to take those jobs. Mechanization can replace some of those jobs but not nearly all of them. The result would be crops in fields to rot for lack of enough help and slowdowns in housing and commercial construction. Remember that the latest national unemployment rate was only 5.1%. When I was taking college economics, we were taught that 5% was “optimum”. We don’t have a problem with them taking away jobs from people.
Here is the problem I have with the far right. Their argument seems to be all about the people themselves. It seems to be about getting them out and keeping them from coming in. Deport them and build a wall. It isn’t at all about any economic reason, it seems to be about “purifying” the country or something.
Sure, a country needs to control its borders. So make for a very easy way for those people to get a work permit. I have a feeling that just won’t do. The point seems to be about getting them out and keeping them out. Any solution that does not involve that seems to be shot down.
We need a system where they can come “above board” and pay their taxes and be a full part of our economy. Then the argument that they take services but don’t pay their share of taxes goes away. But no. That would be “shamnesty” or something. It all seems so juvenile and bigoted to me. They seem to grasp at any problem they can find to justify kicking people out and ridicule any way of mitigating those problems that does not involve kicking them out. It sounds just like the rhetoric used against the Irish and Italian immigrants of generations past.
The fastest growing illegal population are people coming here from India. Where do we put that fence?
April 19, 2008 - 02:45 PM on April 19th, 2008
The thing that frustrates me is the fact that the hard-line anti-immigration supporters are obscuring the real issue: the trafficking of illegal narcotics. The only time the subject is even mentioned is when an “illegal” either on drugs or trafficking drugs commits a crime that results in the death of an innocent legal (and I stress the word legal) American. They talk a good game about “securing” the border from terror, but fail to realize the very real terror is not from Islamic factions but from the spill-over of the narco-wars going on along the border.
Because of the extreme rhetoric and the illusion of millions of voters switching votes, etc. the resources we need to control the border, to prevent the fighting from oozing into the US, are busy rounding up illegal migrants who are just trying to survive. Demands for more Border Patrol agents are being answered by a degradation of training and a curtailment of extensive background checks. The standards for choosing BP agents are being lowered. We already have what I believe is an extensive problem of bribery and corruption within the ranks of the Border Patrol. This is only going to make things worse. I see a time when so many critical BP agents are on the payroll of the drug cartels that the problems we have today with “migrants” will seem like a joyous walk in the park on a Sunday afternoon.
I’ve been writing about this for weeks. My sources tell me (and some of this you see in the news) that the fighting is spreading from Brownsville, Laredo, and Juarez into El Paso. There is an entire series of back roads from El Paso to Arizona through New Mexico that are now no longer considered safe to travel alone and unarmed. (You aren’t hearing this in the news). The drug cartels, squeezed out of other areas by those blasted “walls” are moving into the territory where I live. We see a lot ‘action’ out of Cochise County via the anti-immigration organizations. This action is allegedly all about the movement of migrants across the border.
The problem is the fact that these alleged anti-immigration organizations and minutemen, etc. are little more than an illusion in Cochise County. They talk a good game, but have very little presence and even less interaction with “normal” people who live there. Consequently, because of the “presence” of these organizations and their dominions of supporters, resources are once again diverted from the real problem.
The problem is narco-trafficking.
The problem is the movement of Central American criminal gangs into the US. By lambasting and turning the illegal Mexican migrant into the demon monsters they now are, and by diverting ICE and the BP into tracking these people who have been pushed farther and farther into the wastelands of the vast deserts along the border, once again the wrong people are allowed to slip through, unmolested.
The problem is the fact that the anti-immigration hard-liners know little or nothing about the culture and geography of our border with Mexico. Some idiot who comments over at the Pink Flamingo lambasted me the other day for yet another of my exposes on Sheriff Joe Arpaio. This person evidently did not realize that Arpaio is in Maricopa County and that Maricopa County is not along the border with Mexico. They don’t understand the parks and ranches are now being “trashed” because traditional migratory routes, that have been traveled since humans have lived in the southwest, are being blocked.
The problem is the fact that the narco-traffickers are using loop-holes in our gun laws to purchase (legally) massive numbers of guns here in the US. In Mexico a person may legally own nothing more than a .38 and it must be purchased from the Police. The guns are loaded into stolen late model pick-up tricks and SUV’s and easily moved back across the border. They then feed the war.
Anti-immigration hard-liners like Malkin are just positive these weapons are going to Islamic terrorists. She and her associates have any number of conspiracy theories to prove their point, but none of them hold up under scrutiny and reality. The movement of these weapons is going to the drug cartels.
You can talk about all the reform you wish. You can discuss the political ramifications of hard-line immigration reform. We can discuss the very real ramifications this will have on the GOP with the Hispanic vote. None of it matters in the end. The very real problem is while we are playing chicken little and allowing the sky to fall on people like Malkin, Tancredo, Dobbs, Tanton and the like, we are allowing a well armed and well-funded criminal element to creep across the border and begin to overwhelm local populations and law enforcement.
Yes, I am angry. My beloved southwest is endangered by the movements of drug cartels across the border. Before long, it will no longer be safe to go into Cochise County. In fact, the back roads along the border, heading into the county from the east are no longer safe to travel. Ten years ago I could roam them, alone, unafraid. Today they are moving closer to ground zero in drug war no one is noticing.
Doesn’t it make you wonder why no one is mentioning the drug war on the border?
SJR
The Pink Flamingo
April 19, 2008 - 04:40 PM on April 19th, 2008
I am not an open borders type and I live in an area nationally known for a severe illegal immigrant problem. Our local schools and services are suffering under the deluge.
But what I showed in the two choices was reality, not fantasy. We either made some major progress or we were left with the same mess. Malkin and others crowed about how they had one by keeping the current mess.
Now they need to see what that really entailed. It entailed the continuation of the deadly and sad mess Malkin posted about. Their ‘victory’ was the essence of a pyrrhic victory - were they won a small battle and lost the larger war.
I am simply noting the results.
April 19, 2008 - 07:03 PM on April 19th, 2008
I’m from Phoenix. There is nothing in any law that says we can’t deport illegal alien criminals, so the comment saying that we needed the shamnesty bill that was McCain/Kennedy is an outright LIE. IF any of the US attornies would do the damn job that they are appointed to do, as in enforce the LAW, we wouldn’t have the illegal alien issues that we have. It is a FELONY to reenter this country once deported. Since when do US attornies have the legal authority to decide that they aren’t going to prosecute a FELON until they’ve been caught SIX TIMES!!!!!?????? One US attorney openly admitted that his office isn’t going to prosecute ANYONE until they’ve been caught AND DEPORTED on at least 5 previous occasions. Does that mean if I go into bank robbing, or committing fraud (which is what illegal aliens working in this country are doing), I’ll be given a slap on the wrist, a ride home, and the ability to keep the money until I’ve been CAUGHT 6 times? I doubt it.
The comment that the vast majority of US voters favor giving amnesty to millions of illegals is also a lie when considering the number of referendums denying benefits to illegal aliens in Arizona have passed by 3 to 1 margins. The only people in this country who support allowing the illegals to stay are either people profiting from their criminal activity or those too uninformed to know what damage these invaders are doing to this country. I’ll take advice from someone who isn’t collecting welfare or remittance checks or living in an area with gated communities and hospitals without a 15 hour wait in the ER (IF IT’S STILL OPEN, THE ONE NEAR MY HOUSE ISN’T) because of the Illegal aliens using it as a free clinic on the taxpayer dime.
A federal judge has ordered Arizona to spend tens (possibly hundreds) of millions of dollars for special programs for children who don’t speak English. Guess what, the vast majority of them aren’t needing help in Swahili. They’re the kids of Mexican and other central Americans who have crossed the border, predominantly illegally, and haven’t bothered to learn to speak English themselves.
I was in a car accident with someone who ran a red light, didn’t speak English, may or may not have had a license, and may or may not have had insurance. The police failed to write his driver’s license OR insurance information on the traffic accident contact form. My information was on it, the driver of the third car in the accident was on it, but the driver’s license and insurance information for the non English speaking moron who caused the accident was conveniently left blank. The word on the street in Phoenix is that if you have a car accident with someone who you believe could be an illegal alien and have to call a police agency, call the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. They’ll not only investigate the accident they’ll determine if the other party is in the country illegally or not.
You don’t have to tell me about what effect the illegal alien issue has on the economy, I’m fully aware of it. I’ve had to drive through construction sites where the only language being spoken was Spanish. I’ve had to deal with repeatedly getting flat tires from the boxes of nails that they leave strewn across the road without regard to anyone having to drive by. Yes, I’ve seen 5 lb boxes of nails kicked in such a manner as to leave nails strewn a full car’s width into the street. I’ve seen how these wonderful below market workers depress wages by millions of dollars, steal millions more from the local economy by shipping it south of the border, and commit crime repeatedly. I’ve seen how they commit social security and tax fraud. I’ve seen how they use this country as their private little crime pit and then skip across the border to Mexico to avoid prosecution. Yes, I’ve seen how wonderful these people are.
I won’t deny that illegal drug runners are an ever increasing problem. Were we to stop the flow of EVERYONE across the border illegally, no matter how draconian the measures necessary, the drug smuggling cartels would be stopped as well.
There’s a way to solve the problem that doesn’t require a lot of tax payer dollars to implement and amnesty for millions of lawbreakers isn’t it. Secure the border. Impose draconian measures on ANY employer caught NOT verifying employees. Why is it that the Social Security Administration, and the IRS won’t share information with DHS about all the people who are working under false or stolen SSNs? Once employers realize that they are not going to get away with hiring illegal aliens at below market wages, they will be forced to fire all of the illegal aliens and replace them with legal workers at fair market value. OOOOH but they’re doing jobs American’s won’t do. BS. They’re doing jobs Americans won’t do FOR THOSE WAGES. Why is there always a long line at IN and OUT burger while McDonald’s and Burger King have short one? Could it be the fact that the food tastes better because it’s prepared fresh and to order at IN and OUT? Could it be that ALL of the employees speak ENGLISH FLUENTLY so your order isn’t screwed up horribly? Could it be that the reason why all of the employees speak ENGLISH is because it is a requirement of working there AND IN and OUT pays $9.00+ an hour to start. So don’t tell me that a fast food restaurant can’t find Americans to work in it, they just have to pay a fair market wage to get them. As long as they’re able to hire Illegal Aliens to fill the positions that were filled by teenagers 20 years ago for below market wages, they’re going to continue doing it. And you’re order will be wrong over 50% of the time because the person on the other end of the drive through speaks English so poorly that they can’t take an order properly.
Here’s the solution for how to solve the problem. AFTER securing the border and forcing the illegals to leave by not allowing them to work here. (it’s called self deportation and it’s working in Arizona) Companies will have to raise wages to attract workers. If a grower has to pay someone $20 an hour and provide benefits to retain someone to pick lettuce, so be it. Lettuce may go up to $1.50 a head. If that’s what the lettuce costs to produce, so be it. It’s called the free market and the liberals should love it because it does two things they seem to love, cut into corporate profits and raise wages among the poor. Once all of the positions are filled that can be, AT FAIR MARKET VALUE WAGES, allow employers to get as many foreign workers as they need, BUT THEY MUST PAY THEM A FAIR MARKET WAGE. By requiring that the employers pay the foreign workers a FAIR MARKET wage, there will be a lot less incentive to go out and hire aliens in lieu of American citizens. Tie the continuance of any temporary work permit with obeyance of every other law, and make permits revokable AND non reassignable. i.e. any foreign worker caught committing a crime would be deported, his permit revoked, and the employer not permitted to replace him. In that manner, employers will be held responsible for the acts of their foreign guest workers. Don’t keep your employees in line, lose the employee and NOT be permitted to replace him with another alien. It will also encourage employers to background check their foreign employees BEFORE bringing them into the country.
On the topic of the illegal aliens brought here as children or anchor babies born here, I really do feel sorry for them. There is a path that should be opened to them to EARN the right of citizenship and be allowed to stay here. Any illegal alien brought here as a child, or anchor baby born here of illegal alien parents, should be allowed to earn the right to become a US citizen by enlisting and serving this country for 6 years, provided they meet the enlistment requirements for the service they wish to enter. Provided they serve honorably for 6 years, they, their parents and their minor siblings should be allowed to stay in this country until such time as the siblings reach 18 and are given the option of enlisting or returning to their country of citizenship as well. This plan provides all of the children who are currently in this country illegally with the opportunity to receive an education, job training, college benefits, and the ability to earn the right to become a US citizen. They should NOT receive in state college tuition until and unless they become US citizens. US soldiers serving outside the state which is listed as their home of record do not receive in state tuition, why should illegal aliens living outside their COUNTRY of origin?
April 19, 2008 - 10:25 PM on April 19th, 2008
“AJ is correct in stating that we were never going to deport all the illegals”
I’ve been saying this to you guys for years. (!)
————-
“…brought up having kids work at the hotels or resturants to earn their way through college..SF Liberal laughed at me”
What?!? I would never laugh at you, or anyone else, for having a strong work ethic.
April 20, 2008 - 01:51 AM on April 20th, 2008
First, one thing needs to be made clear - S J Reidhead is a blatant liar. I’m the “idiot” she refers to. I’ve told her SEVERAL TIMES over the past year or so that I live along the Arizona border, and I certainly know who Sheriff Joe is.
“The problem is the fact that the anti-immigration hard-liners know little or nothing about the culture and geography of our border with Mexico. Some idiot who comments over at the Pink Flamingo lambasted me the other day for yet another of my exposes on Sheriff Joe Arpaio. This person evidently did not realize that Arpaio is in Maricopa County and that Maricopa County is not along the border with Mexico. They don’t understand the parks and ranches are now being “trashed” because traditional migratory routes, that have been traveled since humans have lived in the southwest, are being blocked.”
A) She lied about me (and has lied about others) - for this and other reasons, her credibility should be considered zero.
B) She lives in New Mexico, but does NOT live along the border. I DO. I live with the mess EVERY DAY. She sits in a condo far away. Based on some of her other misinformed postings about things Southwest, it’s clear to me that I and others have a far better understanding of the culture than she has.
C) The traditional migratory routes she speaks of, were used by a couple of INDIAN TRIBES, not the Mexicans, not the Guatamalans, not the Brazilians, not the Chinese. Nevertheless, from her post above it seems clear that she’s fine with THOSE being trashed instead!
D) As far as the geography - I know my area better than ANY area she knows. She claims to know Cochise County. HA! Some of it is low land, but with 9,000 ft mountains, it is NOT a vast wasteland - neither is Santa Cruz County - it is beautiful rolling grasslands and mountains. BTW - what’s with calling it “a vast wasteland” and later calling it “my beloved Southwest”? She needs to get her story straight.
E) How do I know that she doesn’t know much about the situation in SE Arizona? Because she only views it from an auto while driving by. And that’s done only a couple of times a year. She doesn’t get out and actually HIKE the areas. How do I know this? Because she has posted that she doesn’t like to leave her condo, due to her weight. She’s no hiker.
F) I asked her to come to the AZ border, I have her trash bags waiting. She could be part of the solution, instead of part of the problem. Her response was that she didn’t pick up trash - she hires others to do that. I suspect she enjoys the cheap labor illegals bring - and that may be her true motivation for championing illegal immigration.
G) She obviously has not been to my area along the So Arizona border that has been trashed, so she doesn’t know what she’s talking about… not that she feels a lack of actual knowledge should deter her from her regular rants on her blog against any and all who disagree with her. Of course there’s always the possibility that she’s done a drive by - and thus erroneously thinks she “knows” the area.
H) She doesn’t recognize that the same cartels are moving both drugs and people. That shows a basic lack of understanding of the situation.
I) It is ALREADY not safe to enter certain areas in Cochise County - I have been stopped more than once and warned about the danger. The govt has virtually ceded certain areas to the cartels, and warning signs are posted. There have been dangerous areas here for quite a while.
J) BTW, S J Reidhead has in the past posted AGAINST any real security for the border, so she’s talking out of both sides of her mouth when she now claims she’s for it. She’s also devoted posts to bad-mouthing BP agents. These men and women literally risk their lives, often heading out ALONE where the smuggling cartels operate.
I’ve lived along the border for a long time - the people crossing now are FAR different from those of 20 or 30 years ago. People used to leave out food and blankets for those who came and LEFT like clockwork. Now the locals bolt their doors - because those coming now think nothing of threatening them. Those crossing now, STAY - they don’t go back; it’s now a one-way migration.
And no, the majority are not really poor. Poor people can’t afford airline tickets. Poor people can’t afford expensive jewelery. Poor people can’t afford cell phones. Poor people can’t afford high dollar Team Logo sports jackets, or expensive sneakers. They sure can’t afford to leave those things behind in the layup areas along the border.
April 20, 2008 - 02:25 AM on April 20th, 2008
We don’t have to deport them. Simply deprive them of the means to support themselves and their families and they’ll return to their country of origin voluntarily. It’s easy. it’s cheap and (based on the last six months of experience in Arizona) it works. Force employers to hire legal residents or put them out of business and they’ll obey the laws that have been on the books since 1986. How much easier can that be? Instead of going after 10,000,000+ illegal aliens, go after the 1 - 2 million employers who are hiring them illegally. Make it illegal to congregate on corners for the purpose of soliciting work. Make it illegal to hire someone off a street corner. A couple of the streets that I occasionally have to drive on are so clogged with day laborers seeking work that it’s all you can do to avoid hitting one of them without crossing the dividing line and going into oncoming traffic. Amazingly there isn’t a single white or black American citizen in the crowd. They’re a public hazard. It took Sheriff Joe running sweeps through the neighborhood to get the mob of them out of the parking lot of a local furniture store. They were so thick that they were scaring away the customers. Then when the furniture store complained about the tresspassers and loitering, the “day laborers” started picketing in the driveway to the store costing the store millions of dollars in business. A couple of the illegal alien advocates are even threatening violence if Sheriff Joe doesn’t stop enforcing the laws and arresting illegal aliens. Maybe a legal resident advocate should look the POS’s in the eye and tell them that there could be a back lash by the LEGAL community against them should such a thing happen.
April 20, 2008 - 05:29 AM on April 20th, 2008
13- You did when we got into the fact that I brought up college towms and hotels etc..you said those kids wouldn’t work in them etc., ..you never said anything about a strong work ethic though as I kind of figured you were raised with one. I brought up the work ethic because if you take a look around at the youngins..money goes and applies for their job, deals with their boss etc..
My point is, we keep expanding the category “jobs Americans won’t do”
April 20, 2008 - 05:50 AM on April 20th, 2008
crosspatch- Just a few observations on your post
A. Are you assuming that all 10-12 million illegals are employed?
B. Crops are one thing, but what about the citizens that lose jobs in manufacturing or construction?
C. Are the illegals from India overstaying their visas?
April 20, 2008 - 07:12 AM on April 20th, 2008
For those who naively think current laws can be used to deport illegal aliens I turn your attention to one Michelle Malkin who admits the opposite is true (my post on it):
it is obvious that we cannot use current laws to deport illegals, even ones who commit crimes. This used to be openly admitted by the Amnesty Hypochondriacs when they were pushing for mass deportations - this was the barrier to their dreams. They needed stronger laws to be able to deport the immigrants.
But when the Comprehensive Bill was going to pass all of a sudden the laws they said needed fixing for years were just fine and we could do what we needed under current law. Sort of a strange shift in views since nothing new was passed in the interim.
April 20, 2008 - 08:45 AM on April 20th, 2008
That is a great point AJ. I’ll admit, I thought it was the ’sanctuary’ policies that were standing in our way. The “Sanctuary Cities” are a part of the arguement, but I’ll put that aside for now.
FAO brought up the fact that his state of AZ has been hit hard by the negative impact of illegal immigration; schools, hospitals, neighborhoods, etc..He is saying that the laws that his state, and not the federal government, enacted, has brought relief to the citizens. Employers are being fined. The jobs are drying up. The downside to that is that the illegals are leaving AZ for other parts of the country that don’t have or don’t enforce their state laws.
Based on your knowledge of the situation, couldn’t we solve many of the problems at a state level? I think we can.
BTW, I appreciate that a high profile blogger such as yourself would take a public stand against Michelle. I did not read your words to be inflammatory, but a call to action, a call to actually discuss the topic. We need that and people should be able to discuss it without being called a troll or a RINO or any other name that gets tossed out there. So thank-you AJ for getting this discussion started.
April 20, 2008 - 09:04 AM on April 20th, 2008
#15 “We don’t have to deport them. Simply deprive them of the means to support themselves and their families and they’ll return to their country of origin voluntarily. It’s easy. it’s cheap and (based on the last six months of experience in Arizona) it works.”..
Exactly right! We here have been saying this for a year; why does the debate still include the notion that all the illegals have to be tracked down and arrested, then conclude that can’t be done so he have to keep them? We don’t.
Last year there were two plans, the House Republican plan and the Senate (Kennedy) plan. The Senate plan was aka “Shamnesty”, the House plan was a very tough plan. The Democrites and illegal supporters on both sides shot down the House plan. The Good Republicans shot down the Shamnesty plan.
As I recall Michelle Malkin was on the side of the House plan, which was far closer to what most Americans want. It was good the Shamnesty plan went down. We tried Amnesty in 1986, has that lesson of history been forgotten?
No, it’s tiem to tackle the illegal immigration plan a new way, one which I have outlined here more than once:
1. TURN OFF the magnet (many will leave on their own).
2. Close and Control the border (whatever it takes).
3. Increase the penalties for hiring (Draconian).
4. End the anchor baby and chain immigration policy.
5. End motor voter and enforce election laws to cut down fraud.
There you go. That’s the formula for success. It really is that simple.
April 20, 2008 - 09:06 AM on April 20th, 2008
Pam,
Thanks for being a place to debate - gets too heated at my site. The problem is states cannot produce a coherent national policy. The comprehensive bill was a huge step forward now twice junked in Congress by some in the GOP.
The truth is there will be no legislation for years - another result the far right did not appreciate when it pulled out all the stops to stop the legislation.
The dems are slaves to their far left base who want true open borders and immediate citizenship for illegals. Until the centrists can take sufficient control of the government there will be no common sense solution. Give it a couple of Congressional election cycles to dilute the hyper-partisans (as opposed to the normal partisan) before action is taken. Until then people like Michelle will continue to show case their handy work and blame it on others.
Classy, eh?
April 20, 2008 - 09:45 AM on April 20th, 2008
Pam:
In response to your questions to crosspatch:
1. I think that to characterize all of the 10-12 million illegal immigrants as criminals and welfare sponges is way off base. I think that the majority of them, like the majority of Americans, are decent people.
2. I would flip that question around - have we been over-valuing construction and manufacturing jobs? If someone is willing to do construction for $12 an hour, then why should someone have to pay $19 an hour?
3. I would say, yes, those from places outside Mexico are generally overstaying visas.
I would like to re-iterate a question I had earlier:
1. Is the position espoused by Michelle Malkin and Tom Tancredo TRULY that of a majority of Americans? If so, then why has it not been reflected in recent election results, both in primaries (including the 2008 Republican nomination contest) and general elections?
Based on the election results in Republican primaries, I would submit that Malkin is the loudest voice in an extremely passionate minority, while a silent majority of the Republican coalition, to include a fair number of conservatives, seem to back the approach favored by President Bush and Senator McCain.
Furthermore, the question now needs to be asked: If a majority of Republicans are NOT bothered by the approach of Senator McCain and President Bush, and that this is even true in themost Republican districts in the country (like Utah’s third congressional district), then shouldn’t their views be treated with respect?
April 20, 2008 - 10:30 AM on April 20th, 2008
Harold,
I asked about the employment status because the way crosspatch stated it. All the illegals are not employed, which would throw his/her argement off a bit. That was my reasoning for asking.
I would agree that the majority probably are decent people, but they are illegal.
Have we been over-valuing construction and manufacturing jobs? Yes, most definitely we have. But don’t stop there. Charlie Gibson talked about tech support one night during I believe a 2004 debate? His point was, why should a company hire an American at $50.00/hr when we can get the same if not a better support team from somewhere else for quite a bit less..Less than a month ago, the president of AT&T spoke about the fact that they want to hire Americans but they are not as qualified as what can be found over-seas.
And what is the solution to this problem according to the blog author?
I used to work in the manufacturing sector. The jobs that are out there are not as labor intensive as they were 30 years ago. Go into any automotive assembly plant and everything is automated. Millions get spent on equipment so that the employee doesn’t have to do much yet with each quartly report, labor costs go up! Insane!
It is my belief that the majority want the situation fixed. By fixed, I mean stop the out of control flow of illegals into this country. We can not afford to keep absorbing a welfare class of immigrants, heck, we can’t afford our own home grown welfare class
I will say though that Michelle does not represent the majority. I think that the majority wants a fair and equitable solution to a problem that does need to be taken care of.
April 20, 2008 - 12:43 PM on April 20th, 2008
The thing is, the same also applies to the construction and manufacturing jobs as well. If a Mexican can do the same job for $15 an hour that an AFL-CIO worker charges $25 an hour to do… then the law of supply and demand is going to kick in. To an extent, I think that part of illegal immigration has been the free market trying to correct the over-valuing of manufacturing and construction jobs in America.
To an extent, the guest-worker program would have addressed that, but it was fought tooth and nail by Malkin and the others.
I agree, most people want the flow stopped. The problem is, it seems that the battle lines have hardened. A fair bit of it is due to the heated rhetoric that has gone both ways for a while. Malkin has been quick to call people who back the approach favored by President Bush and Senator McCain “open-borders sellouts” - and other conservative forums have even considered terms like “Quisling” and “traitor” to be acceptable labels. Eventually, there was going to be a fair bit of push-back, and now stuff flies the other way.
Neither side seems willing to back down in this internecine debate. Quite frankly, after some of the stuff aimed at me, seeking common ground is very difficult, to put it mildly. Unfortunately, right now, I fear that the extremes are dominating the debate, and until the silent majority is willing to speak up, we’re doomed to the heated debate for a while.
April 20, 2008 - 12:56 PM on April 20th, 2008
If I may add something else - I think comments like those from Fred Dawes earlier in the thread, and those that Congressman Tancredo made with regards to Pope Benedict XVI or calling Miami a “Third World city” also lead people to believe that there is more to objections to illegal immigration than just the law.
Yet Malkin makes no effort to try to police her own side of the debate - instead she and others complain when people like Linda Chavez point those comments out, and ask very legitimate questions about what they seem to indicate about the mindset of Tancredo and others.
April 20, 2008 - 01:01 PM on April 20th, 2008
Harold, I can understand and appreciate what you have been going through. That is why I want to open up the dialogue so that we can have a reasoned conversation and maybe, just maybe, we can come up with some solutions that can be implemented.
My problem with the guest worker program is that there seems to be too much emphasis on low paying jobs, again, feeding my real fear that we are expanding the welfare class.
I do believe that the States are making a difference. Fining employers in violation of the law is necessary. Many of the businesses getting into trouble are not newly opened..they used to depend on local people to work for them, saw a way to make some quick money, rid themselves of the locals, hired illegals and what a difference it made to their balance sheets! That is wrong
April 20, 2008 - 01:03 PM on April 20th, 2008
We usually ignore everything fred says..
April 20, 2008 - 01:34 PM on April 20th, 2008
Pam:
I think we could do far more for public safety by focusing resources to ensure that every person arrested for a violent crime has their immigration status determined.
And herein lies the problem - the criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists are the most likely to cause harm, not the person putting in the 40-hour week for a living and sending it on down the line. Logically, they need to be the first that we screen and deport.
If that means going without the fines from businesses, so be it. You can always hit them down the road. After the criminal has killed someone is way too late.
Of course, in more cynical and less charitable moods (yes, I will admit I do have those moments), I sometimes have speculated as to whether or not people like Malkin have needed a level of killing so they can keep emotions high on this issue - because invariably, when there is a crime allegedly perpetrated by an illegal immigrant, they are in high dudgeon, yet nobody seems willing to point out that by demanding we spend resources to raid meatpacking plants and construction sites, they pushed the Administration into diverting the very agents who could have screened criminals earlier.
I think the first priorities have to be violent criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists. Once those segments under control, then talk to me about others, but until then, I don’t think you can justify going after people who are working. They’re the least of our problem.
April 20, 2008 - 01:53 PM on April 20th, 2008
“…If so, then why has it not been reflected in recent election results, both in primaries (including the 2008 Republican nomination contest) and general elections?”
Maybe because the Republican leadership has been unwilling to bring immigration control to the forefront as an issue. It is a winner, but they won’t do it, instead enraging millions of Americans by going along with the wishy-washy Bush viewpoint.
If Republicans had the guts to make this issue in the top two (along with the war on terror) they would sweep the Democrites. They don’t because they foolishly want cheap labor, are afraid of being called racist by people who won’t support them anyway, and somehow think the amnesty beneficiaries will vote for them, which they won’t.
April 20, 2008 - 02:02 PM on April 20th, 2008
“To an extent, I think that part of illegal immigration has been the free market trying to correct the over-valuing of manufacturing and construction jobs in America.”
No, it skews the free market and lowers the standard of living for American workers. It corrupts the action of the free market. In Kalifornia, for example, you cannot even buy a low-end home plus pay taxes, and feed your family on most jobs that you’d call over-valued. Then the illegals come in and cut those wages in half. Of course they are living twenty to a subsidized rental house, with the women collecting freebies paid for by the taxes of those whose wages they are undercutting. Racist? No, REALITY.
Whenever I hear such arguments as you present, I shake my head and wonder what real experience, what real firsthand knowledge you have of what is actually going on out there. You can sit their and debate all of these intellectual-sounding opinions and platitudes, but they don’t match up very well with reality from what I’ve seen.
April 20, 2008 - 02:05 PM on April 20th, 2008
“…And herein lies the problem - the criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists are the most likely to cause harm, not the person putting in the 40-hour week for a living and sending it on down the line.”
And on post #30 I have presented an example scenario where those putting in their 40-hr week in fact are harming our society and other working Anmericans indeed.
We don’t even need to go into the subject of the criminals, grifters, cheats, and vermin to make the case the illegals are a net negative for our Society.
April 20, 2008 - 02:06 PM on April 20th, 2008
Robert:
I have seen Republicans runs on immigration in Virginia in the 2005, 2006, and 2007 elections.
The Democrats kept the governor’s mansion, defeated a sitting Republican senator, and took the state senate in each of those three years.
If that’s a winning issue, with all due respect, I have to wonder what planet you come from. If you have proof otherwise, then post it.
April 20, 2008 - 02:21 PM on April 20th, 2008
In solid Blue-State Kalifornia, with both Senators Liberal Democrites, and a State Legislature that has been in the death-grip control of the Left for 40 years, EVERY time an initiative has come on the ballot for a vote by the people to curtail immigration, or to reduce or eliminate freebies to turn off the magnet, or English-only in schools it has passed by a solid majority. Then the illegal supporters go out and shop their inevitable lawsuits to a sympathetic judge and get it thrown out wholesale or gutted.
Sorry, even in Liberal Kalifornia the solid majority wants the magnet turned off, the bad apples thrown out, the border controlled, and an end to the utter insanity. They don’t want the Senate shamnesty bill you supporters think is so “reasonable”, so moderate, so wonderful.
If you think the tepid enforcement measures in that bill are so reasonable and will work, perhaps you could explain why the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli bill was such an utter failure and directly contributed to the much bigger problem we have today that it was supposed to solve? Do you honestly think for one minute the same Gov’t that didn’t enforce the rules then, which has dragged its feet and let the problem mushroom out of control, would now magically be diligent in its enforcement of even the lukewarm rules in the Shamnesty bill? If so that’s some good stuff you’re smoking…have another doobie, man!
April 20, 2008 - 02:23 PM on April 20th, 2008
I come from the planet of Kalifornia, which in some ways has almost become another planet. See post 33.