Immigration Reform

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
harris447 wrote:
Seriously…no one else sees this as the “gay marriage” of 2006?

A non-problem that exists mainly to scare white men into voting Republican and forgetting about the war/plamegate/Katrina/Homeland Insecurity/price of oil/defecit/etc.?

The timing is just suspicious, that’s all.

Harris
You are almost on the North /East Coast and wonder why you can not see the problems of the South West???
[/quote]

Perhaps it is a problem. (Studies show it is and isn’t.)

The timing does not pass the laugh test.

Literally every single conservative talk radio host on the dial is talking about nothing but the “Mexicans that are invading.”

While Iraq burns and Republicans get arrested and the defecit spirals out of control.

I call shenanigans.

42

[quote]harris447 wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
harris447 wrote:
Seriously…no one else sees this as the “gay marriage” of 2006?

A non-problem that exists mainly to scare white men into voting Republican and forgetting about the war/plamegate/Katrina/Homeland Insecurity/price of oil/defecit/etc.?

The timing is just suspicious, that’s all.

Harris
You are almost on the North /East Coast and wonder why you can not see the problems of the South West???

Perhaps it is a problem. (Studies show it is and isn’t.)

The timing does not pass the laugh test.

Literally every single conservative talk radio host on the dial is talking about nothing but the “Mexicans that are invading.”

While Iraq burns and Republicans get arrested and the defecit spirals out of control.

I call shenanigans.
[/quote]

I do not remember the exact number in the Phoenix march, but it was around 20.000 people marching. Not all but a lot of people carrying Mexican Flags .Los Angeles is supposed to be a lot worse. It sure looks like an invasion. There are large parts of Phoenix where there are no sign in English, Spanish only. An invasion may not be right on but it is not far off either.

43

Back to a point I’ve made for years – if a third party grabs hold of this issue and actually goes with popular opinion on immigration, you could see a massive shift, with the end of one major party (I think the U.S. will always have a two-major-party system…):

Border-centric third-party beats GOP.
By Mickey Kaus
Updated Thursday, April 27, 2006, at 6:39 PM ET

Things You Won’t Read in The Note: A Rasmussen robo-poll reports that a third party candidate who ( http://www.rasmussenreports.com/2006/April%20Dailies/Election%202008.htm )

promised to build a barrier along the Mexican border and make enforcement of immigration law his top priority

beats the generic “Republican” nominee by 9 points-- 30 to 21–and runs practically even with the generic “Democratic” nominee (who gets 31%). The border-centric third-party candidacy actually takes more votes from the Democratic side than the Republican side!. But it draws heavily from both parties, and as heavily from “moderates” as from “conservatives.”

[i]the immigration issue candidate as an option, 36% of conservative voters opt for the Republican candidate while 35% take the third party option. Among political moderates, 34% pick the Democrat while 32% prefer the third party option.[/i]

Yes, this is a robo-poll (though voters may feel more comfortable telling a robot what they really think). … Yes, as Rasmussen notes, “This result probably reflects unhappiness with both parties on the immigration issue rather than a true opportunity for a third party.”… And yes, candidates with appealing specifics often beat undefined, generic party choices. … Still, it raises suspicions about the hothouse, semi-confected Beltway CW that a tough, non-“comprehensive,” enforcement-first approach is a political loser in the short term, no? ( http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/104dybwn.asp )…

Update: Rasmussen blogs himself on RCP ( The RCP Blog ), with statesmanlike modulation. … 3:20 P.M.

“Bring Our Troops Home and Put Them on the Mexican Border!” The Anti-Defamation League cites that bumpersticker as an example of “hateful and racist rhetoric.” ( http://www.adl.org/main_Extremism/immigration_extremists.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_1 )The group selling the sticker might be hateful and racist, but what’s hateful and racist about the message itself? It’s a long border! One way to police it would be troops. I don’t endorse that solution, but non-insane, non-racist–and pro-immigrant–people have suggested it. (E.g. Bloggingheads.tv )… P.S.: Is it that people who want to “bring our troops home” are hateful and racist? The ADL needs to keep itself in business, but taking on the entire left wing of the Democratic party seems a bit much. [Via Drudge] 1:02 P.M.

44

The sheer hypocrisy of the Mexican government is astounding.

First, the affront of supporting their citizens breaking our laws is bad enough ( http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/04/28/mex.immig.ap/index.html ).

But for a country that treats its own illegal immigrants – mostly Central Americans – much more poorly than we treat ours ( http://www.azstarnet.com/allheadlines/125360 ), it’s out and out infuriating for them to take a high-horse position.

45

some people really have a “mexican phobia”. people act like the mexican people haven’t been in the south-west united states before. like san antonio is a german name, and los angles is a english name.

46

[quote]harris447 wrote:
I disagree with you about health care. It sank because of those horrible, lie-filled commercials featuring “Ted and Alice” or whatevert their names were bitching about it and that “chart” showing how complicated it was. As if any government beurocracy doesn’t look complicated on a Kinko’s chart.[/quote]

Maybe I’m wrong, but wasn’t hillary’s panel of “experts”, the panel that was supposed to facillitate the implementation of her program, bereft of any physicians?

47

[quote]BigMike wrote:

I do not remember the exact number in the Phoenix march, but it was around 20.000 people marching. Not all but a lot of people carrying Mexican Flags .Los Angeles is supposed to be a lot worse. It sure looks like an invasion. There are large parts of Phoenix where there are no sign in English, Spanish only. An invasion may not be right on but it is not far off either.

some people really have a “mexican phobia”. people act like the mexican people haven’t been in the south-west united states before. like san antonio is a german name, and los angles is a english name. [/quote]

It’s not so much a “Mexican” problem as it is an “influx of illegal and undocumented aliens accross an unsecured border” problem.

Most people don’t have a problem with the mexican part, it’s the disregard for our nations borders and immigration laws part.

48

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
harris447 wrote:
I disagree with you about health care. It sank because of those horrible, lie-filled commercials featuring “Ted and Alice” or whatevert their names were bitching about it and that “chart” showing how complicated it was. As if any government beurocracy doesn’t look complicated on a Kinko’s chart.

Maybe I’m wrong, but wasn’t hillary’s panel of “experts”, the panel that was supposed to facillitate the implementation of her program, bereft of any physicians?

[/quote]

I have no idea. All I know is that the Republicans heard that their friends in the insurance industry might make a bit less money and lost their shit.

49

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Back to a point I’ve made for years – if a third party grabs hold of this issue and actually goes with popular opinion on immigration, you could see a massive shift, with the end of one major party (I think the U.S. will always have a two-major-party system…):[/quote]

I nominate you BB, to head up the new Bull-Moose Party.

Waddaya say :slight_smile:

50

[quote]harris447 wrote:
bigflamer wrote:
harris447 wrote:
I disagree with you about health care. It sank because of those horrible, lie-filled commercials featuring “Ted and Alice” or whatevert their names were bitching about it and that “chart” showing how complicated it was. As if any government beurocracy doesn’t look complicated on a Kinko’s chart.

Maybe I’m wrong, but wasn’t hillary’s panel of “experts”, the panel that was supposed to facillitate the implementation of her program, bereft of any physicians?

I have no idea. All I know is that the Republicans heard that their friends in the insurance industry might make a bit less money and lost their shit.
[/quote]

It failed because it was a complete and utter disaster.

She has such a poor understanding that she actually thought that in order to reduce medical expense we should reduce the amount of specialists.

Not understanding that a greater supply of specialists would lower prices at a given level of demand is crazy, yet that is what she did.

We need reform in our system. Hillarycare was not the way to go. To blame the evil Republicans for torpedoing it is silly.

51

A few points…

  1. It’s not easy to get into Canada via illegal immigration. By this, I mean that we don’t have a huge border that can be crossed that easily… unless you want to count the border with the US. So, we have a large advantage in controlling immigration because we aren’t so swamped that we can’t expend the resources to take action if we wish.

  2. I think your educational system is what will (should) convert the mexican immigrants into good patriotic Americans. However, to do this, the schools have to NOT cater to illegal immigrants with respect to language and content desires. This is part of what schools do, install a common history and patriotism in the populace. This is also why you WANT to spend money putting the children of illegal immigrants through school.

  3. Because of the number of people streaming into your country, the actions that you can reasonably take to combat the problem are limited. I do think you should secure the border. Whether that means a wall or military patrols or whatever, if you can’t control the border, then you will remain with a situation outside of your control. Sovereign countries are not supposed to let themselves get into these situations.

  4. It might also be wise to force people into the real economy so that they can be taxed and bear their share of the burden their needed services represent. However, to do that, you’d have to crack down on businesses and you’d have to perhaps forbid the use of tax filing information to be used by the INS to find and expel illegals. Seriously, get their money, force business to hire those with valid tax numbers, and then continue to not work too hard to take action on the untold millions already living in the US.

If the border is secured, getting people into the tax paying economy and the educational systems will fix the problems over the course of a generation or two. Seriously, trying to solve the problem faster than that is going to create huge cost, strife and upheaval within your country… and I don’t think anyone would benefit from that.

Summary, step 1, control the border. Step 2, force immigrants into the tax paying world. Step 3, educate and indoctrinate immigrants, legal or otherwise, into your culture.

52

The indoctrination part is a problem.

The vast majority of the Hispanics arond here were born in America, have never left America, and will die in America. Yet they will refer to themselves as “Mexican”. They will have Mexican flags on their cars. They will watch shitty novelas on Telemundo. The listen to crappy Norteno music. They cheer for the Mexican soccer team when it plays the U.S.

Illegal children are not currently excluded from public schools here. I taught about a dozen illegals this year (they’re really good at Math). Not only are they given an education, the Federal government pays for teachers that travel around the country with them as they follow the crops.

http://www.utexas.edu/features/archive/2004/migrant.html

http://www.doe.state.in.us/lmmp/migrant.html

53

Doogie,

I think the wide open border is the reason for that as well… as you are not able to control the influx of culture or disperse it so that it undergoes the famous melting pot process.

54

[quote]harris447 wrote:
Literally every single conservative talk radio host on the dial is talking about nothing but the “Mexicans that are invading.”
[/quote]
I respect your tenacity harris, but I gotta throw the bullshit flag on this point.

You see, I listen to nearly every single conservative talk radio host and none of them are talking about “Mexicans invading the US”. They are however talking about the huge problem w/r/t illegal immigration, pourus unsecured borders, etc.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_050206/content/america_s_anchorman.member.html
http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/

http://www.lauraingraham.com/agnosticchart?charttype=minichart&chartID=23&formatID=1&useMiniChartID=true&destinationpage=/pg/jsp/general/readarchive.jsp

[i]“I think this country is about laws and the rule of law and I think you’ve got to come into this country and do it the way my grandparents did it, which is legal.”

-Sean Hannity[/i]

55

If we do, we need a new name – T.R. lost when he ran under the Bull Moose flag… =-)

56

[quote]vroom wrote:

Summary, step 1, control the border. Step 2, force immigrants into the tax paying world. Step 3, educate and indoctrinate immigrants, legal or otherwise, into your culture.[/quote]

Because it’s a relatively rare occurance, I just want to point out that I agree with vroom 100% on his summary. I would add that we need to retool our immigration policy to incentivize the immigration of the best and brightest as legal citizens (especially when we are using our infrastructure to educate them).

57

If they keep up these protests, either the current parties will be forced to respond or there really will be a third party:

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/006896.php

EXCERPT:

The May Day protests by activists for illegal immigrants have resulted in an utterly predictable backlash, according to the Washington Post ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/02/AR2006050201789.html?nav=rss_politics ). Voters have sent bricks to their Congressional representatives as donations for a border barrier, and even those who considered themselves liberals want the government to start rounding up illegals and send them packing...

The real irony of this situation is that prior to the series of protests, with their demands and rejection of American sovereignty, the [anti-] immigration hardliners did not have the momentum to get their program passed. President Bush had enough juice left to get a moderate reform program passed, one which granted earned citizenship and only superficially addressed border security. Now that the protestors have rammed their strident demands down the throats of Americans, the hardliners have won new support from a broadening group of voters. When they remained "in the shadows", they had a cachet of victimhood that lent sympathy to their plight. With them teaming up with the last and largest group of communist apologists and demanding that America stop enforcing its borders altogether, they no longer have the patina of waifs but as ungrateful and separatist activists.
58

[quote]vroom wrote:
Summary, step 1, control the border. Step 2, force immigrants into the tax paying world. Step 3, educate and indoctrinate immigrants, legal or otherwise, into your culture.[/quote]

The only problem I have with amnesty for clean record illegal aliens is that without a secure border, we encourage more illegal immigration. Thus compounding the problem.

59

Interesting observation by Virginia Postrel:

"Why (Legal or Illegal) Immigrants Are Better for Texas than California

“It’s the political economy, stupid. (Nasty phrase, that.) Texas has no income tax, which means public services are funded by sales and property taxes. Everyone, regardless of income or legal status, pays sales and property taxes, either directly or indirectly through rent. California, by contrast, relies heavily on a very progressive income tax that doesn’t fall on people who are paid off the books or who don’t earn much money in the first place. Liberals who support immigration should rethink their love of progressive income taxes.”

Now, nationally, is our system more like that of CA or TX? It’s not a hard question…

60

[quote]bigflamer wrote:
harris447 wrote:
Literally every single conservative talk radio host on the dial is talking about nothing but the “Mexicans that are invading.”

I respect your tenacity harris, but I gotta throw the bullshit flag on this point.

You see, I listen to nearly every single conservative talk radio host and none of them are talking about “Mexicans invading the US”. They are however talking about the huge problem w/r/t illegal immigration, pourus unsecured borders, etc.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_050206/content/america_s_anchorman.member.html
http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/

http://www.lauraingraham.com/agnosticchart?charttype=minichart&chartID=23&formatID=1&useMiniChartID=true&destinationpage=/pg/jsp/general/readarchive.jsp

[i]“I think this country is about laws and the rule of law and I think you’ve got to come into this country and do it the way my grandparents did it, which is legal.”

-Sean Hannity[/i]

[/quote]

I was talking about the underlying tone of quiet racism, first of all…whcih despite Hannity’s bullshit is obvious in his blather.

But, really, I was talking about the fact that with all the problems going on, is it not a bit suspicious that this has come up right now?

You cannot tell me that illegal immigration is SO much worse than one year ago that it must be the number one story of the day, every single day.

Who benefits from Sensenbrenner’s bill and the (totally predictable) uproar it caused?

Might it be the administration and GOP, coming into an election cycle they have nothing good to talk about in?