December 31, 2007
Thus 1938 saw the award go to Hitler, followed by Stalin in 1939 and again in 1942. Another Soviet dictator, Nikita Krushchev, got the nod in 1957, while China's Chairman Den Xiaoping won in 1978 (and again in 1985) and Ayatollah Khomeni in 1979.
I'd have to argue that a similar argument can therefore be made about the selection made by the Dallas Morning News as Texan of the Year -- the law-breaking, border-jumping immigration criminal (although they called him "The Illegal Immigrant").
He breaks the law by his very presence. He hustles to do hard work many Americans won't, at least not at the low wages he accepts. The American consumer economy depends on him. America as we have known it for generations may not survive him.We can't seem to live with him and his family, and if we can live without him, nobody's figured out how.
He's the Illegal Immigrant, and he's the 2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year – for better or for worse. Given the public mood, there seems to be little middle ground in debate over illegal immigrants. Spectacular fights over their presence broke out across Texas this year, adding to the national pressure cooker as only Texas can.
And as with any such criminal, he is clearly detrimental to those of us who he victimizes by his presence.
Nationally, a Congressional Budget Office report released this month said illegal immigrants cost more in tax dollars than they provide, especially in the areas of education, law enforcement and health. Indeed, 70 percent of babies born in Dallas' Parkland Hospital in the first three months of 2006 were to illegal immigrant mothers. Taxpayers spend tens of millions of dollars annually subsidizing births in that one hospital.
Yes, boys and girls, that's right -- you and I are the victims of these folks, as they reach their hands right into our wallets to take from us money to provide them with benefits to which they have no legal or moral entitlement. The notion of some soft-heated, soft-minded judges that these folks are entitled to anything other than a bus ticket home and a computer entry denying them the privilege of ever crossing the border into the US again is the main thing preventing crackdowns on such benefits and the presence of such folks in our communities. Well that and the desire of Democrat politicians to get these folks legalized and voting Democrat, and businessmen who would rather hire cheap illegal worker than American citizens at American wages (and yes, that does include you, Bob Perry).
I don't care about most of the cultural issues -- I have no problem with new pieces added to the mosaic of American life. I speak Spanish (with a serious gringo accent, according to some of my students), like Mexican food, and love certain of the customs that these people bring with them. But I do believe that a measure of assimilation is a necessity, and to that end believe that learning English is a necessity rather than setting up the parallel cultural institutions we have seen develop.
Do I believe that we need to fight illegal immigration? You bet I do -- every bit as much as we needed to fight the twin menaces of Nazism and Communism, and as we need to fight Islamism today. Yet at the same time, I welcome legally immigrating foreigners from every country, provided they are willing to embrace America's history and values even as they share elements of their own with us. The choice is not between having immigration and having none. Rather, it is between having an orderly system with enforced immigration control, or the pell-mell invasion of our country by those who take more than they give.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Stop the ACLU, Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Big Dog's Weblog, Nuke's, third world county, DragonLady's World, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Gulf Coast Hurricane Tracker, Stageleft, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
01:50 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 729 words, total size 6 kb.
D, December 14, 2007
After a year of stepped-up enforcement against illegal immigration and polarized debate on the issue, about half of the Hispanics in the United States now fear that they or a relative or close friend could be deported, a report released Thursday by the Pew Hispanic Center found.About two-thirds of Hispanics said their lives had been made more difficult by the political fight over immigration and the failure of Congress to address the situation of illegal immigrants, the Pew survey found. Roughly half the Hispanics in the poll said the heightened attention to immigration had had a directly negative impact on them, in some cases making it harder for them to find jobs or housing.
Some 41 percent of Hispanics said they or someone close to them had had a personal experience of discrimination in the past five years, an increase of 10 percent since 2002 of HispanicsÂ’ reporting such experiences, the survey found.
Now I have a very sincere concern about these numbers. Take the first one. Roughly half of Hispanics “fear that they or a relative or close friend could be deported.” What does that number tell us? Well, the Hispanic population of this country is roughly 47 million people. Estimates of the illegal immigrant population range from 12-20 million (Pew skews those numbers lower). The latter are, of course, subject to deportation. And since that population is 25-40% of the total Hispanic population, I’m rather shocked that the percentage of those who “fear that they or a relative or close friend could be deported” isn’t significantly higher than 50%. Indeed, if the US government were really doing its job on border enforcement and immigration control the number ought to be closer to 75% when you throw in the “or a relative or close friend” aspect of the question. I suspect that is why the numbers saying that “their lives had been made more difficult” and “a direct negative impact on them” were as high as they were.
Let’s consider a different number – the 41% of Hispanics who said they or someone close to them had had a personal experience of discrimination.” I’m curious how that number really breaks down in terms of the nature of that “personal experience of discrimination.” To what degree are we talking about employment or housing discrimination, discrimination in public accommodations or some other form of illegal discrimination? To what degree are we talking about so-called “hate crimes”? And last, but not least, how much of that “discrimination” took the form of perceived social slights or failures in cross-cultural communication? For that matter, how much of the “discrimination” was the result of someone facing the consequences of being in this country illegally and either not being able to get a job, losing a job, or being deported because of immigration status? Again, the number raises more questions than it answers.
And I make that last point because of one final number reported upon here.
Despite their concerns about the current atmosphere, about 71 percent of Hispanics surveyed described the overall quality of their lives as good or excellent. More than three-quarters said they were confident that their children would grow up to have better-paying jobs than theirs.
Oh, really? For all the gripes and concerns, it sounds like Hispanics in this country still feel that life is pretty good here, and the future is pretty rosy. That certainly stands in sharp contrast to the horrendous picture painted by the first 17 paragraphs of this 19 paragraph article. Somehow, though, that is not particularly newsworthy, and got buried at the end of the story.
Oh, and since I took a look at the actual Pew Hispanic Center release on the poll, there is another detail that did not get reported at all.
In addition to this wide variance in views between Hispanics and non-Hispanics, the survey finds less pronounced--but still significant--gaps within the Hispanic community on a range of matters, from perceptions about discrimination to attitudes about illegal immigration to support for tougher enforcement measures. For example, on questions about enforcement policies, native-born Hispanics take positions that are closer to those of the rest of the U.S. population than do foreign-born Hispanics. Also, the native born are less likely than the foreign born to report a negative personal impact from the heightened attention to immigration issues.Likewise, Hispanics who are not citizens feel much more vulnerable in the current environment than do Hispanics who are citizens. They are about twice as likely as Hispanic citizens to worry about deportation and to feel a specific negative personal impact from the heightened attention to illegal immigration. (Non-citizens account for 44% of the total adult Hispanic population. Of these non-citizen Latino adults, an estimated 55% are undocumented immigrants and the other 45% are legal aliens).
In other words, there is not a giant “Hispanic” monolith. Attitudes vary depending on place of birth, citizenship, immigration status and (one would presume) ancestry. And while there are commonalities, you discover that those with the biggest problems are, as one would guess, those who are in this country illegally, unable to speak the language. Imagine that!
Personally, I welcome any legal immigrant -- especially those who wish to come to this country and become a part of it. Such individuals our lives and our culture. But those who can't follow our laws are another matter -- and my concern for their sense of being picked upon is minimal.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Stop the ACLU, The Virtuous Republic, Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Adam's Blog, Shadowscope, Leaning Straight Up, Big Dog's Weblog, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Chuck Adkins, nuke's, Wake Up America, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Church and State, The Yankee Sailor, and OTB Sports, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
11:51 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 996 words, total size 8 kb.
December 13, 2007
Advocates for immigrants contend that, at a minimum, hundreds of people unauthorized to work have left the state or been fired. Some school districts have at least partly attributed enrollment drops to the law. Though the housing slump and seasonal economic factors make it difficult to pin down how much is attributable to the new law, illegal workers say employers are checking papers and are less inclined to hire them.“They started asking everybody for papers one day, and those like me that didn’t have them were fired,” said Luis Baltazar, a Mexican immigrant who worked for a paving company until a few weeks ago and was soliciting work at a day labor hiring hall here.
Another immigrant, Jose Segovia, said work had plummeted in the past few weeks, more so than in the four previous Decembers he spent in Phoenix. “Some of my friends went back to Mexico,” Mr. Segovia said, “and I am thinking of going, too, if it doesn’t get better here.”
That is, of course, exactly what is supposed to happen. You know, when the rule of law is reasserted in the sphere, the outlaws are faced with a less hospitable climate. For such folks to complain that they lost their illegally-obtained and held jobs because employers were required to begin following the law is rather appalling. What next -- demands from burglars that laws permitting alarms and security systems be repealed because they interfere with the ability of an honest felon to make by stealing?
Posted by: Greg at
11:26 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 279 words, total size 2 kb.
December 09, 2007
Most of the seven candidates took a softer tone on Sunday, even as many spoke of working to eradicate illegal immigration. Some spoke of trying to send some of the 12 million people who are estimated to be in the United States illegally back to their native countries.They sandwiched their remarks between gauzy paeans to legal immigration and the values of immigrants.
It seems that someone doesn't get the point. The GOP is, almost universally, in favor of legal immigration. What most of us have a problem with is the fact that our laws are going unenforced, and the lawbreakers are going unpunished (and, in fact, rewarded with access to government social services). We welcome law-abiding immigrants -- but not those whose very act of crossing the border was a violation of the law. The same can be said of the GOP candidates.
Posted by: Greg at
11:08 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 204 words, total size 1 kb.
December 07, 2007
President Felipe Calderon accused U.S. presidential candidates yesterday of anti-Mexican posturing and warned the U.S. Congress not to impose conditions on an anti-drug aid package.“The only theme in the (U.S.) electoral campaign is to compete to see who can be the most swaggering, macho and anti-Mexican,” Calderon told a local radio station, Enfoque. He did not name any candidate or party.
“I find the greatest sensitivity in the U.S. government, some in Congress,” Calderon said, but added that there was “a total lack of understanding and aggravation, hostility toward Mexico” among Americans in general.
Calderon also appeared to reject any conditions on a proposed $1.4 billion U.S. anti-drug aid package that had been negotiated with American officials, saying, “I cannot accept any submission or subordination.”
The proposal by the Bush administration, called the Merida Initiative, is to give Mexico aid, training and equipment to fight drug trafficking, which U.S. officials see as a national-security problem.
It awaits approval in Congress, and some U.S. legislators have suggested that the program may need safeguards to prevent corruption or human-rights abuses by Mexican authorities.
“I need that technology,” Calderon said. “Give it to me. And give it to me without conditions.”
Of all the incredible gall! His pathetic nation cannot support its people or appropriately deal with its own law enforcement needs without American money, and yet he wants to dictate to the United States the conditions under which it is appropriated and disbursed by the American government? Who the f*ck does this guy think he is?
Forget Iran – the time has come to roll the tanks south and throw out la basura -- the coyotes, the drug lords, and the corrupt government. Maybe in 20-30 years, Mexico will, for the first time in its history, be ready for self-government – or for gradual admission of new states to the union, given the number of Mexicans who want to be in the United States. After all, would it not be infinitely more logical and humane to move the US border south rather than require these people to face the dangers of migrating north illegally?
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Stop the ACLU, Rosemary's Thoughts, 123beta, Adam's Blog, Right Truth, , Leaning Straight Up, Big Dog's Weblog, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Phastidio.net, Chuck Adkins, , Adeline and Hazel, Pursuing Holiness, The Uncooperative Radio Show! Special Weekend!, Nuke's, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, , third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, High Desert Wanderer, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
01:22 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 6 kb.
December 06, 2007
During a radio debate Tuesday in Iowa, Democratic candidates were even asked whether individual Americans should turn in people they know to be in the country illegally.Thankfully, the answers were mostly no. Hillary Clinton said turning "every American into a suspicious vigilante" would do grave harm to the fabric of the nation. And in last week's debate, even Romney seemed to agree, asking Giuliani heatedly if he was suggesting that Romney should demand to see immigration papers whenever a person speaks with a "funny accent."
Give these candidates credit for rejecting what would be a civic nightmare. Encouraging individuals to act like border-control vigilantes would create a chaotic flow of true and false charges that could overwhelm immigration officials. The country would end up detaining and deporting thousands of service workers, upending the economy, and creating humanitarian crises for workers' children.
Of course, similar arguments could be made about other crimes. Imagine the disruption of educational and child care services if every child molester were reported, arrested and imprisoned? There would be a crisis! A similar argument could be made about crooked cops and accountants. Even if the person making the report was 100% certain about the facts, the impact upon America would be astounding. Better to let law enforcement find the perpetrators without the amateur vigilantes dropping a dime on lawbreakers – that way it won’t overtax the system. Besides, imagine the humanitarian crisis that would be created for the children of all these lawbreakers if their crimes were properly punished.
Oh, and about that “funny accent” comment. I do believe that recent reporting by the Boston Globe implies that Romney is supposed to do precisely that – demand the immigration papers of any individual who doesn’t speak English perfectly. After all, that is what they did – having spent more time at Romney’s home than Romney has over the last few weeks. And it appears that the Globe has not bothered to reveal the answers to my questions from the other day:
1) Are all three employees actually here illegally?
2) Did they present fraudulent documents or engage in identity theft to get these jobs?
3) Did the employer know that these workers were illegal?
Until we get those answers, we really don’t know if Romney did anything wrong – and we don’t know if Ricardo Saenz was a victim of the illegal workers providing fraudulent documents, or if he knowingly and willfully continued to hire illegal workers after being caught before.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, The Random Yak, Adam's Blog, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, The Pet Haven Blog, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Celebrity Smack, Cao's Blog, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Chuck Adkins, CommonSenseAmerica, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
Posted by: Greg at
10:21 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 539 words, total size 5 kb.
December 04, 2007
Kevin Madden, Mitt Romney’s national press secretary, just sent out an e-mail announcing that the Massachusetts governor had fired Community Lawn Service after “learning that a company caring for the governor’s property was employing individuals who are not permitted to work in the United States.”The Boston Globe reported last year that Romney had used a landscaping company that hired illegal Guatemalan immigrants to tend to his property. The charges have dogged the former Massachusetts governor’s presidential campaign.
Most recently after Mr. Romney accused his Republican rival Rudolph W. Giuliani of running a “sanctuary city” for illegal immigrants when he was mayor of New York, Mr. Giuliani accused Mr. Romney of having a “sanctuary mansion” because he employed illegal immigrants at his home.
The problem is that Romney DID NOT employ these illegals -- the landscaper did. And while the past record of this employer would have led me to discontinue my business contacts, I can understand the decision to get the guy to do right and continue that relationship. Consider what we do know at this point.
After the discovery a year ago of the illegal workers, Mr. Romney said in his statement yesterday that he “gave the company a second chance with very specific conditions. They were instructed to make sure people working for the company were of legal status. We personally met with the company in order to inform them about the importance of this matter. The owner of the company guaranteed us, in very certain terms, that his company would be in total compliance with the law going forward. The company’s failure to comply with the law is disappointing and inexcusable, and I believe it is important I take this action.”The company’s owner, Ricardo Sáenz, a legal Colombian immigrant, met Mr. Romney through the Mormon Church, according to The Globe.
Last Thursday, the day after the debate, The Globe interviewed two of the three workers from the company who were working on Mr. RomneyÂ’s lawn. Both admitted they were illegal immigrants from Guatemala. One of them said the third worker was also in the country illegally.
Now I'd like to know some details here before passing judgment.
1) Are all three employees actually here illegally?
2) Did they present fraudulent documents or engage in identity theft to get these jobs?
3) Did the employer know that these workers were illegal?
The answers to these questions are quite critical. After all, there is a limit to how far an employer can go to question the legal status of an employer who presents documents purporting to show legal work status. It may be that the employer in this case was defrauded by the employees in question. And if that is the case, not only have the Romneys been victimized here, but so has the employer. Interestingly enough, the Boston Globe story does not seem to have pursued that aspect on the story -- merely the "gotcha" angle that obscures the issue rather than illuminates it. As such, this is a case of a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
UPDATE: Michelle Malkin asks some other interesting questions of the Boston Globe and the MSM, too.
Will Geraldo Rivera and his open-borders companions accuse the reporters of Nazi-like tactics for “harassing” the illegal immigrants?Will the Globe reporters be accused of, ahem, “stalking” the poor illegals and invading privacy? Note that they didn’t just drive by the house once. They hung out on the lawn over the last two months.
And when is it permissible to ask an illegal alien his citizenship status?
Now, the answers are loud and clear:
It isn’t “harassment” when liberal MSM journalists spy on illegal aliens…if it will embarrass a Republican presidential candidate.
It isn’t “stalking” when liberal MSM journalists snap photos of your lawn and conduct two-month-long recoinnasance missions…if it will embarrass a Republican presidential candidate.
And while itÂ’s bad for police to ask suspected criminal aliens their citizenship status, itÂ’s fine and dandy for journalists to ask lawn workers whether theyÂ’re here illegallyÂ…if it will embarrass a Republican presidential candidate.
All perfectly appropriate rhetorical questions -- and spot-on answers. But I still would like to have my questions answered.
More At Hugh Hewitt, Patrick Ruffini, Andrew Sullivan
Posted by: Greg at
03:34 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 725 words, total size 5 kb.
Under pressure from advocates for stricter immigration laws, the mayor of Phoenix said on Monday that he no longer backed a Police Department order barring officers from routinely asking the immigration status of people it arrested and announced a panel to study a policy change.A spokesman for Mayor Phil Gordon, Scott Phelps, said the policy was “written for another time” on the belief that the federal government “would fulfill all of its immigration responsibilities, and clearly that has changed.”
But Mr. Gordon, a Democrat, announced the change at a time when sentiment against illegal immigrants has intensified in Phoenix after the shooting death two months ago of a police officer, Nick Erfle, by an illegal immigrant. There have also been weekly protests at a furniture store whose owners have pressed the authorities to arrest day laborers who congregate there and who are believed to be in the country illegally.
These policies effectively aid and abet illegal immigration. And the preferred change is simply to determine the immigration status of those arrested on other charges, not to start broad sweeps through immigrant communities, looking for illegals. And in the end, the result will be the removal of the least desirable illegal immigrants -- the ones who are criminals -- and the creation of a safer community for everyone else, regardless of race, ethnicity, or immigration status.
Posted by: Greg at
12:15 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 251 words, total size 2 kb.
59 queries taking 0.2035 seconds, 175 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
