The March has diffused the focus of Immigration Reform. You have people talking about how much they contribute to the US and the families they are raising: big deal!

The fact remains that if you are an illegal alien, you need to either leave the US, or pay an entrance fee in the range of $10,000 to $50,000. Why? Because you broke the laws of the US by disrespecting our borders, and without making restitution you are a criminal.

That fee should go toward supporting the US Border Patrol, providing them with more agents and equipment to do their job.

This is just deliberate sabre rattling PR from the GOP to deflect away from their miserable failures.

Big business want cheap labour........ enough said.

Were there any interesting developments at Armitage's talk last week, which kind of got buried in the new leak revelations. Did anyone get to ask Armitage to confirm that he was Woodward's, and/or one of Novak's, source(s)?

Maybe there's hope for Tucker! The more he gets out of the studio, the more potential of expanding his mind. (I won't hold my breath).
Big doses of reality can be dizzying.

poor Tucker Carlson made a fool of himself later on TV by remarking on how many well-behaved quiet young men there were and how nobody was drinking. Maybe that's what he assumes is standard behavior from his usual cohort of upper-class preppies. Most Latinos are not thugs or gang-members! Guess what, Tucker? Hardly anybody in that crowd wore a bow-tie either...

It was good to see Mr. Bowtie out and about with the illegal common rabble. Where was the Queen of the I'm Special Day Spa Arianna Huff 'n' Puff? Not visible, highly or otherwise. Maybe her limo drives grew a modicum of confused over the directions to where the "illegals" hang out.

That should read, "driver" and sorry about that.

Re. Pollard, one question is how reliable any of the sites carrying the story of his possible release are as a general rule. Has any of them ever beat the mainstream media to a scoop? If not, why even bother to call a White House friend about this? Why post about it here? (To put the matter to rest if people have been emailing you about it is one possibility, I guess. But another is that you think it's time to open up a thread of Pollard-bashing. Don't get me wrong: he spied on the US and deserves punishment. But there are legitimate questions re. whether someone who would have spied on the US for any other ally would have received as stiff a sentence.)

the real question is: if the wages are raised will americans take the stoop labor, cleaning jobs & will the american public be willing to pay higher prices.
will bush talk to fox to fix things in mexico. fight corruption, invest in own country.

Anyone who speaks against illegal immigrants (in the case illegal Hispanics in particular) is, unfortunately, considered racist.

As this has become an emotional issue as much or more than a political issue, can't we wonder how many of those who support dropping the requirements for citizenship and just allowing illegal immigrants from whatever country they are from to remain in the U.S., would also not mind if these same illegal immigrants just showed up in their personal homes and stayed without permission? I have my doubts anyone would allow this.

However, basically, and with or without protests, for or against by either side, this is a "done deal".

This country, as we who are native born here have known it, is no more. The "United States of America" is now history and we are headed in a new direction.

Releasing Pollard would be delusional and therefore talk of it is to be dismissed? I know there are nefarious reasons for everything this administration does but to suggest they're incapable of being delusional is far off the mark.

The "delusional" reference must refer to the timing of Bush granting Pollard a pardon. With the looming trial of former AIPAC staffers, increasing scrutiny of WH handling of intel matters and increased focus on US/Israel relations, such a move now would create a political firestorm.

Not that Bush won't grant Pollard a pardon at some point, but my bet would be it would be after the 2006 elections at the earliest. Unless, of course, Frank Luntz has done some focus groups that show that grateful Christian Evangelicals would come out in droves to support GOP candidates as a result.

The Arutz Sheva article is no doubt another salvo designed to pressure the current Israeli government to actively intervene on Pollard's behalf. SOP for Pollard's supporters.

What's new is this claim:

"Esther Pollard said, "Someone who is very close to President Bush came to me last night and said that Bush is ready to free Jonathan even in time for the upcoming Passover holiday [which starts Wednesday night] - as long as Olmert makes an official request."

She said that the source with whom she spoke is "known very well to Mr. Olmert as trustworthy and having close ties with the U.S. President."

Now who might this friend be?

This country, as we who are native born here have known it, is no more. The "United States of America" is now history and we are headed in a new direction.

New direction?

As in "send me your huddled brown masses"?

Or is the writer imagining what it was
like to be a Amerindian in the 1800s?

If so, I am waiting to see the
new modern version of the "Ghost Dance."

That ought to be entertaining.

Wow Koreyel, could you be any more bigoted with such statements?

Far from being just about racism, bigotry, demagoguery a la Sensenbrenner, La Marcha actually speaks volumes about the American public.

Legal and not-so-legal immigrants, many of them without the right to vote and at the margins of society (to say the least), have beaten the public *at large* to the first real march on Washington during the reign of Bush.

For 6 unbelieveably long years of this administration, people around the world have been wondering when exactly - at precisely what point - the American people will have had enough...apparently that day has still to come.

I have little sympathy with LaMarcha. Invasions can take different forms--people can march across borders with armies or they can walk across borders without legal authorization and when enough of them get here they can demonstrate.

My son has an interesting point: the demonstrations aren't really about immigration. The demonstrations are about economics: The third world is demanding that we share our riches. The poor are willing to work, they are willing to leave home. They just want us to be generous.

Random observation--why should a child born in the US to a mother who is here without legal documentation become an American citizen? That seems like a loophole in the Constitution that we should close.

Tucker....., I wish I knew.

The game and lies have been exposed, the players have all been exposed (albit, not by the mainstream media nor the phony Sunday morning "meet the press" type of programs)and it doesn't seem to make any difference.

The republican congress has its head in the sand and the democrat congress doesn't know which end is up. Both parties are afraid of offending Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld.

Maybe we're not close enought to 600 dead a week coming home from Iraq. But I'm no longer sure even that would do it.

There needs to be a medium found, where the illegal immigrants understand and respect the existence of immigration laws and accept some sort of legal position on their status where we then can also work to assimilate them.

I have to say, Im not really for punishing them, but they do need to come to the realization that the code of laws needs to be facilitated in some way as it relates to their illegal status, Im just not entirely sure how.

One thing is true, the Democrats are turning it into an issue, instead of actually working towards reform.

Hillary Clinton continues to embarrass herself to those who actually know whats really going on.

All I can say from watching the marches yesterday on C-span is it looked and sounded like a third world revolution. Maybe it is.

Somehow I just can't get my head around people who are illegal, as in having broken the law, having "right's", other than human rights, in a country not their own. One question I have is why the people migrating from country to country for work haven't or don't put as much effort and risk into changing or building up their own country?

I have sympathy for anyone who has to take such risk to earn a living and the labor they do. But where does it end? Does the US become the dumping ground for every country's problems and end up with the same bare surival standard of living?

Why were the original immigrants able to throw a revolution and build a country and an economy out of raw land and somehow the populations of some other countries would rather switch than fight for their welfare and rights in their own homeland?

My ancestors put 391 years of blood, sweat and tears into this country..I would march to DC and burn Washington to the ground if goverment was so incomptent and so mismanaged the economy and was so backward that they let the population go without the possibility of jobs to feed their families before I would leave. And that may happen in not too distant future since everything, including immigration, is now about the good of the "political parties" and not the good of the country at large.

One thing the immigration issue is not about is compassion and human rights, it is about business greed and niche vote marketing.

It's time Americans started revolting or on America's tombstone will be inscribed .."Died while the minimun wage was still $5.15 an hour"

And if the fact that congress has voted themselves a raise every year while voting down a minimun wage increase for 9 years doesn't tell you what the immigration issue is really about nothing will.

To all the racists who hate immigrants and want to build up fortress America:

The first American soldier killed in combat in Iraq was illegal immigrant Jose Gutierrez. He was an orphan from Guatemala who at 14 hopped trains and went all the way across Mexico so he could come to America.

I suppose the fact that he snuck across a border is much more important to you than the fact he loved this country and died in its service. I find it fascinating that anyone can look at that crowd and see a bunch of criminals. I see exactly the kind of people I want to live with--people who believe in the American dream and who are willing to fight for it--and who I'd be honored to call my fellow Americans.

The bottom line remains that Congress isn't willing to address the one issue that can truly turn border security around.

Democrats were right to stop a bad bill from making it through the Senate. Harry Reid and others deserve credit. I applaud the IDEA of Kennedy-McCain, but I've heard from many former INS officials who state that the infrastructure to handle it isn't even close to being in place. So we better get prepared for that reality. In addition, 10-15,000 border agents, as well as fencing close to dense cities is important, but isn't the bottom line. Also, a path to citizenship is not amnesty, but Republicans are going to say it is because they need a send 'em home bone to throw to right-wing radio, which is the mechanism by which Republicans GOTV. I know this to be true because I've done interviews all over America on right-wing radio, have had my own radio show, also lost my show (still trying to get it back on the air), so I know how these guys play the game. Just listen to what one right-winger said about illegal immigrants:

‘‘What we'll do is randomly pick one night every week where we will kill whoever crosses the border,'' James said in the March 8 broadcast. ‘‘Step over there and you die. You get to decide whether it's your lucky night or not. I think that would be more fun.''

He said he would be ‘‘happy to sit there with my high-powered rifle and my night scope'' and kill people as the cross the border. He also suggested that the National Guard shoot illegal immigrants and receive ‘‘$100 a head.'' (source)

But the real issue is targeting employers, which takes more than legislation. It takes funding so that investigators have the manpower and tools to go out and nail employers who break U.S. labor laws, which affect both illegal immigrants and poor workers. The issue is funding and putting real teeth in the enforcement of targeting employers. If we don't address this issue it doesn't matter what else we do.

Last night, Lou Dobbs took great offense to a rally sign that read "We were here first".

Perhaps he, like many other Americans, doesn't know that the southwest was colonized by the Spanish long before northern Europeons established a foothold in New England. Except for the 11-year period after the Pueblo revolt drove most of the Spanish colonists in NM back to Mexico, the centuries-long uninterrupted presence of that ethnic group in America is indisputable.

It seems that the hysterical rants over such things as the speaking of (or even learning) Spanish reflect profound ignorance of American history, racism, or the realities of life for those ethnically Hispanic illegals.

As with most complex political issues, little more than rhetoric is available for the average citizen to evaluate in order to fully understand the consequences of the numerous proposals being discussed. Immigration brings together a never before seen constellation that stands to change much of what Americans have come to understand about our economy, our political affiliations, corporate interests, globalization, trade agreements, the influence of unions, and many other ramifications yet to be identified or calculated.

Characteristically, the issue is polarized by intense passion on both extremes. This passionate posturing makes it increasingly difficult to carve out a compromise. Many politicians have taken positions based on their perceived constituency sentiment that allows them little room for flexibility. Regional economic considerations coupled with the potential impact to certain corporate and business segments create an incoherent patchwork of conflicting considerations. Navigating this difficult terrain is likely to foster more political stalemate than innovative compromise.

While Washington plays politics, Americans cannot ignore the fact that there are currently an estimated 12,000,000 reasons to resolve this issue. It’s time for politicians to set aside the rhetoric and complete the daunting task of a thorough evaluation that will provide the necessary, albeit frightening, calculations and considerations. Despite voices to the contrary, these 12,000,000 people are here to stay. Unless we get about the business of accepting this reality and moving forward with a coherent and tangible policy, we will soon find ourselves with an additional 12,000,000 reasons to solve this problem.

more observations at:

www.thoughttheater.com

More Stream-of-Thread than Open Thread.

This is off topic, but I just had to drop a note somewhere about the possible bombing of Iran. It occurred to me last night that the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld modus operandi on middle east conflict is essentially to attempt putting out fire with gasoline. Reading some of the doomsday scenarios with regional war around the Shia Crescent (if that phrase is right) has me staying awake at night. So from here on out I'm borrowing an appellation from the world of bluegrass music and calling Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld the "Gasoline Brothers".

Taylor Marsh: "The issue is funding and putting real teeth in the enforcement of targeting employers. If we don't address this issue it doesn't matter what else we do."

I agree that we need to target employers, and yet, and yet...

Unskilled Americans are likely to drawn mostly from the bottom 20% of the population, in terms of ability. To put this in perspective, the US army won't recruit people in the bottom 10% of the population, because they have found, through hard experience, that they are untrainable.

The unskilled Mexicans who are being hired are more likely to have average or better IQs plus a strong work ethic. Compared to the immigrants, the native born unskilled Americans won't learn as fast, will require more supervision, and will be less productive. In other words, employers who hire immigrants are hiring better employees for a lower wage. How nice is that for the employers?

So, oddly enough, another issue is figuring out how to train and motivate low-skill Americans. Raising the minimum wage might attract higher ability workers (the college student who picks cherries during the summer, eg) but it won't help the low skill American become a more productive employee. And, in the absence of that, employers will be looking out for any opportunity to hire the immigrants back.

Until Mexico and Central America's economies can provide opportunities for its citizens, their citizens will seek to come to the US and US employers will be eager to hire them.

Yes, Steve seems a litle quiet about the Hersh article. Maybe a little too quiet.

Looks to me like some of the underwater parts of the icebergs are grinding.

"Random observation--why should a child born in the US to a mother who is here without legal documentation become an American citizen? That seems like a loophole in the Constitution that we should close." PTateMN

That is because the Framers of the US Constitution adopted a jus soli stance on granting the right of citizenship. This made sense in its day and has been the practice. The question is, does it make sense to change that now? In my opinion it significantly alters what we've always been about.

Most Latin states recognize jus saguinis--that is, citizenship is through parentage (blood) alone with the providence of where one is born not the primary factor.

Elizabeth: "The question is, does it make sense to change that now? In my opinion it significantly alters what we've always been about."

The Framers of the US Constitution were trying to encourage population growth in the US. Is that what we still want to do? Evidentally, a lot of nations are rethinking jus soli because of this kind of thing.

It doesn't make sense to me that the child of someone who has come to the US without the proper authorization--that is, someone who is here illegally--should be automatically conferred the blessing of citizenship.

Request: Some comments from you, Steve -- please -- on the role Bolton is playing in building up the "necessity" of a military "solution" to the Iran "crisis." He's looking like a real team player these days.

Lalla wrote: "Last night, Lou Dobbs took great offense to a rally sign that read "We were here first". Perhaps he, like many other Americans, doesn't know that the southwest was colonized by the Spanish long before northern Europeons established a foothold in New England."

If, like Native Americans, Mexicans want to negotioate a new deal on land - to regain the swath of land from California to Texas, that's what they should say through their President.

But what immigrants want is to be part of the United States of America, which wasn't created by Native Americans or Mexicans, important groups who lived on land that is now US terrotory. There was no country to immigrate into before the Revolution. Those Native Americans, various settler colonist Anglos, and black (mostly slave) people primordially created this country that every dies to get into.

Wanting power in a new country is different from wanting territory back. So, Dobbs is right is some small way. The Mexicans did not "create America", I think they mean the US, first. Though, like other groups they have contributed in many ways.

Carroll >"...One question I have is why the people migrating from country to country for work haven't or don't put as much effort and risk into changing or building up their own country?..."

One major reason is Right Wing Death Squads in those nation-states (countries) funded/supported by American administrations since the 19th Century (ever heard of United Fruit & Gen. Smedley Butler ?)

and as someone that posted this :

"...My ancestors put 391 years of blood, sweat and tears into this country..."

I have to ask you to stop & think about Why They Came Here ? from wherever it is "They" were before

This (mostly) "lily white" American has a trail of ancestors that have been here at least as long as yours (yea, someone on the Mayflower...blah, blah,blah) & I welcome these folks because "We the people..." have become the Beacon of Liberty we are BECAUSE of all those folks that got fed up with the crap going down where they were & decided here had to be better for their offspring

You seriously want the so called flood of migration to slow down ?

Well, Do Ya ?

THEN STOP with the support of people & organizations that provide support to fascist elites that run nation-states that do nothing but SCREW their populations over

STOP SUPPORTING THEM NOW !!!

Quit watching the Fox Noise Channel & STOP reacting to low ball political propaganda put out by their backers

Quit being part of the SILENT ONES & stop supporting "the reign of witches"

Teach yourself daily & never stop

And a big Semper Fi to Jose from this vet

"A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt..." - Thomas Jefferson

Or you could always just post pictures of Oakley.

SueD >"...But what immigrants want is to be part of the United States of America..."

What ALL immigrants want is to be left alone to have a fufilling life & to have their children live somewhere they can prosper

Currently "We the people..." are the goal because The Land of "We the people..." is where that is (was...)

Everyone has something to contribute, they just need to be allowed to do so in a non-destructive manner

This Gordian Knot (immigration) is a real challenge as to who "We the people..." are to become

"...Only the most naive gamblers bet against physics, and only the most irresponsible bet with their grandchildren's resources..." - William H. Calvin

Anonymous hit the nail on the head. We are all pro-immigation, illegal or otherwise, as long as immigrants mow our lawns or serve in the military , but we get "outraged" when the real economic costs come due. We want to pay for their labor, we don't want to pay for a social safety net. Since all immigrants want to have a full life, e.g., get married, have families, visit the doctor when they get sick, so economic sanity must enter the equation. But, of course, that's pretty scarce in our deficit fueled society. It strikes me that illegal immigation always becomes a "crisis" whenever the benefit of cheap labor no longer massively outweighs its attendant.

1. Read Billmon's: "Mutually Assured Dementia"
http://billmon.org/archives/002375.html
2. Understand
3. Comments
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2006/04/wb_mutually_ass.html

(Sorry for pimping here. It is important though.)

PTate says: "The Framers of the US Constitution were trying to encourage population growth in the US. Is that what we still want to do? Evidentally, a lot of nations are rethinking jus soli because of this kind of thing.

It doesn't make sense to me that the child of someone who has come to the US without the proper authorization--that is, someone who is here illegally--should be automatically conferred the blessing of citizenship."

This is exactly where the dialogue needs to be because to alter it will require an amendment. Definitely not something to do overnight. It's interesting that, as you pointed out, other nations have reconsidered jus soli and made modifications, though not throwing the notion out entirely.

Do you favor the Irish 27th amendment or the UK stance? What would be better for America? What message does this send? And is it a drastic change from what we've always been?

SueD writes: "If, like Native Americans, Mexicans want to negotioate a new deal on land - to regain the swath of land from California to Texas, that's what they should say through their President."

Well said, well said. I think that giving back
Texas and California is a bit too much. But I would
be happy, nay overjoyed, if we could give the
Texas back to Mexico. Maybe we could even throw in
Oklahoma, getting Senator Tom Coburn out of our
hair. I believe that most of Oklahoma is now
depleted of oil, so we're done with the state.
It's gone right wing wacko; Mexico can have it
too.

I realize that this could never happen: Mexico
would never take Texas back. They would probably
try to hold out for Calinforia, which I'm sorry,
they can't have. So it's Texas or nothing amigos.

Ian

From PTate in MN:

Unskilled Americans are likely to drawn mostly from the bottom 20% of the population, in terms of ability. To put this in perspective, the US army won't recruit people in the bottom 10% of the population, because they have found, through hard experience, that they are untrainable.

The unskilled Mexicans who are being hired are more likely to have average or better IQs plus a strong work ethic. Compared to the immigrants, the native born unskilled Americans won't learn as fast, will require more supervision, and will be less productive. In other words, employers who hire immigrants are hiring better employees for a lower wage. How nice is that for the employers?

The key is to target the employers and enforce existing laws against hiring undocumented workers. Especially useful is the inspired notion of jailing any CEO who allows his/her company to violate this law.

This comment also reveals the need to beef up education in the U.S., which has been steadily dumbed down for years. The No Child Left Behind Act appears to be all about corporate welfare for Neil Bush, not anything at all about rejuvenating American public schools. It is insulting to American workers to persist with the lie that there are jobs "Americans won't do" or that they are lazy, etc. The reality is this corporate-owned government is driving down wages on purpose. No American can afford to take jobs for third-world wages. And why should American workers be required adjust to that? Depressing wages at the low end of the scale pulls down everyone who isn't in the top 2%, because business uses the "savings" -- not to lower prices, but to increase profits and upper management compensation. We have seen the ratio of CEO to worker wages go from 30 or 40 times the wages of the average employee to 500:1 -- so the CEO and other top execs can reap their million dollar bonuses while they bankrupt their companies, send the jobs to China, and continue by hiring 32-cent/hour labor. Disgusting.

At the rate things are going, we will soon be a country with NO middle class. Aiming this new legislation at the undocumented workers -- upping the misdemeanor (illegal entry) to felony charges, etc. is, in my opinion, a deliberate attempt to distract attention away from the American corporations wage-depressing tactics by planting seeds of racism and fear among the citizens -- simply stir up anger among the people so nobody notices what's going on in the boardrooms. Outsourcing jobs to India, China, etc., is in the same basket with hiring undocumented cheap workers, and is a problem that will never be appropriately addressed by this corporate-owned government.

Corporations love it. Big question: who will they be selling their goods and services to when there is no one left who can afford to buy?

daCascadian :

Please grow up fellow.

Comparing immigration at a time when the country was being built and now when it is a full tilt is apples and oranges.

I support realism and the long term good of the country as a whole. You are talking from emotion and your arguement is so personal and illogical it tells me you have a dog in this hunt on the open borders side.

And to be plain, bashing Americans, as the pro open immigration side has done it labeling it a racist issue in order to deflect the real factors, saying Americans are substandard to the "new" immigrants won't win you any friends on this issue and will make even reasonable Americans dig in their heels in opposition.

I haven't made up my mind on what a realist immigration policy would be yet...but if you are any indication of the mentality of the open borders side you are making some great enemies against your cause.

Carroll:

Please grow up, fellow.

To state that daCascadian's comparison of immigration "when the country was being built" and now when it is "full tilt" is apples and oranges is quite self-serving. The fact is, the country wasn't "being built" when the European illegals came. There was already a fully populated, quite successful country and continent in full swing.

I do agree that comments like yours do not necessarily smack of racism. But they are skewed, as the comment by one poster that this was "raw country". What they smack of is ignorance.

The USA did not begin on page one of the Constitution. It began with the first invasion of the Spaniards, the British, the French, and their attendant diseases, prejudices, thievery and outrageous sense of entitlement.

For those offended by the marches---don't fret. This wave of illegals could be worse. They could have turned out to be like your proud ancestors.

SueD et al:
I wasn't referring to the (American-born) fringe reconquitsedoro movement and neither was Dobbs.

They have nothing to do with this issue unless diversionary fear-mongering is on the menu.

Considering how long it took to form the United STATES of America, it's a bit silly to designate the contributions of certain ethnic groups as inconsequentional ingredients to the whole enchilada.

Again, the earliest colonists were SPANISH, not Mexican. (So much so that linguistic scholars from Spain would travel to remote NM mountain villages to study an archaic form of Spanish that had disappeared in their native country).Big difference, compadres.

I'm a native Californian and also enjoyed more than a decade as an ethnic minority in northern NM. My POV and sympathies are no doubt shaped by those experiences.

That said, I think a new country should be formed by combining Baja, western states including the Rockie Mtn ones (except Utah), BC, Alberta and Alaska.

Wonder if some of the Pollard speculation is because Cap Weinberger is gone. It seems to me that Cap pretty much drove the bus for the stiff sentence in the beginning, and was always there to fight any attempt at leniency over the years.

There is nothing impressive in Tucker Carlson, nothing.

Nepal: Malaria, Polio, Monarchy
Nepal: Hamro Nepal: Draft Constitution
Nepal: Protests
Nepal: Nepali Mandir
Nepal: Mero Sansar Video Clips 5
Nepal: Happy New Year 2063
Nepal: Interim Constitution, Revolutionary Parliament
Nepal: Shoot At Sight Order: Dead End For The King

Carroll >"Please grow up fellow..."

I`m clearly more mature than your posting presents you as being

Please step down from your high & mighty horse

Carroll >"...Comparing immigration at a time when the country was being built and now when it is a full tilt is apples and oranges..."

Wrong !

One point to note is that North America is still mostly empty space (try leaving the urban area sometime); there are other points I could state but they would be wasted on you

Carroll >"...it tells me you have a dog in this hunt on the open borders side..."

You Are Wrong but such an assumption does match the attitude you project through your posts

Carroll >"...And to be plain, bashing Americans, as the pro open immigration side has done it labeling it a racist issue..."

Me thinks thou doth protest Way Too Much

And I`ve not claimed anyone is "racist" so don`t project your hidden fears onto others

Carroll >"...you are making some great enemies against your cause."

I`m doing nothing of the sort; you are taking words, twisting them to serve your purposes so as to make yourself feel more comfortable

Take your own advice & GROW UP; temper tantrums are for kids

"The mind is its own place,
and in itself can make a heaven of hell,
and a hell of heaven." - John Milton

To all you folks who think you can identify a Republican by the tone and content of a person's words:

I am a lifelong Democrat. I do not ascribe to the current tenets of the party, though. I think for myself, and my intelligence and experience tell me that illegal aliens must pay restitution for breaking our laws, or get the hell out of our society. Plain and simple. They must remove the stain of criminal behavior before we can call them citizen. Why should they get a free pass when we still take away the citizenship rights of felons who are citizens by birth?

Why should some asswipe who thinks he's too slick to get caught disrespecting our border get a damn free pass?

If they want to be US citizens so damned badly, they should line up and pay their dues like everyone else.

To all you folks who think it's trendy to use spanish to describe current events in US society:

F**K YOU, and f**k the audience you're pandering to! Were you trying to make the hispanics feel more comfortable and at ease by inappropriately calling the event by some spanish name? Well, you're talking to english speakers here, so speak to us in our language. I don't care how many generations it takes, they must learn to read, write and speak english, and leave the spanish at home. That's what American Citizens do. Chinese people do it. African, Arab, Polish and Russian people do it. English is the official language of the United States, so anyone wanting the news in another language better hire a damned translator. What happened this week was A MARCHSheesh!

Elizabeth, you are dead wrong about when this citizenship thing became a part of the Constitution. It's an amendment, and:

This language was added to the constitution after the Civil War to provide protection against former slaves being denied their rights as newly recognized citizens. It should never have been interpreted as an invitation to sneak into the country to give birth as a way of circumventing the process of legally attaining citizenship.

See, if it had been part of the original constitution, slavery would never been feasible, since all the little negro babies born to slave mothers would be US citizens by birth...

LOL Gaskins!

What a beautiful piece of satire. Here's a suggestion or two for your next pieces of work.

Why not mount a movement to change all Spanish place names to their English equivalents?

Or, you could rant that all Spanish terms now in common use be declared liberal pc panderspeak and insist that the American translation be used instead.

(For example, you could start with the championing the use of the Americanized versions of "pinche pendejo" and "taco")

Salud, bro!

So Jerome

Nice

I think you have a future on the Comedy Channel, maybe even as a stand in for Colbert

Keep polishing you skills

"There is nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept." - Ansel Adams

Or: She has the absolute assurance of a second rate mind. (Dennis Hattersley on Margaret Thatcher)(quote from memory).

Well, I see that Jerome is the language police, so maybe Jerome can tell me-

When an Englishman says "corn", does he mean what an American would call "wheat", or does he mean what an American would call "maize", or does he mean what an American would call "corn"?

I've always been curious and never seen a clear unequivocally sourced answer.

The media, and the lying opportunistic sacks of shit we call "politicians", as well as the so called "insiders" such as Clemons here, have for the most part IGNORED the past peace marches against the war such as Cindy Sheehan's recently organized event. Yet the media, and our politicians, can't get enough of the spectre of hundreds of thousands of foreign CRIMINALS parading through our streets demanding REWARD for violating our immigration laws while waving the flags of other nations in our faces.

Gee, think public opinion is manipulated by these bastards in Washington??? SCREW THE IMMIGRANTS, we have bigger things to worry about, like these lying conniving sons of bitches in Washington that are using issues like this one to conceal the fact that we no longer have a representative government, and have a bunch of self serving CRIMINALS AND FANATICS running the show.

I mow my own lawn, and vacuumn my own carpets. Get these criminals off my streets and show them the FRONT DOOR in, like the one all other immigrants have had to enter. And they can take their Mexican flags and shove them right up Bush's, Reid's, and Fox's ass.

Regardless of one's position on immigration policy, everyone has to be impressed by the organization and numbers of people who have turned out in recent weeks for the public demonstrations. No one has been able to mobilize that many people to march against the Iraq War before it started or now when a majority is against it. The only time in my life that I ever took part in a march for a political issue was in 2/03 about a month before the Iraq War began.
I couldn't get many of my liberal friends to join me then in Los Angeles. There only were 10-20,000 people--not very many for such a large city but enough to get MSM front page attention.

So I wonder if others have any thoughts about why we don't have hundreds of thousands of people out demonstrating against our failed foreign policy.

Join the campaign for progressive legislation.

http://www.boycott-republicans.com

Even the famed Rove/Cheney/Bush political machine
is breaking down, or perhaps I should write "has
broken down". As the discussion here demonstrates,
the issue of immegration is an extremely controversal
one. This is an issue where factions of both the
right and the left oppose and support more immegration.
It is an issue where the controversy crosses the
ideological spectrum, with virulent Bush opponents
and Christian Right nativists on the same
side against immigration. And then there are
liberals who are taking the same stand as the
odeous Editors of the Wall Street Journal, favoring
immigration.

If you're politically weakened, as the Bushies
and the Republicans unquestionably are, the last
thing you want to do is to bring up a fantastically
controversal piece of legislation that your
own party cannot agree on. This is nothing but
a lose/lose proposition for the Republicans, yet
old G.W. is pushing it. Maybe Rove is so worried
about prosecution that he's taken his eye off the
ball. Or maybe he's not the "Boy Genius" that
he's supposed to be.

Ian

From the illogical rants here I think Steve might change his mind about having open threads.

It looks like the immigration issue attracks for the most part activist on both side who are equally illogical and loud.

The agressive tone of the pro immigration activist and their lack of understanding of long term consequences pro or con tells me they aren't
considering it from any angle except their own ethnic or party affiliation and some in the "legal" immigration camp sound fed up with any immigration period.

The real issues are:

# economic resources..the test of which will come when the US undergoes it's reckoning on our current debt.
# and whether or not a country enforces it's laws and controls it's borders.

The "open borders" people are to me extremely naive and have no concept of how quickly that would set up a state of governing by the "internationals" not goverments. And in an international society of migrating workers the only rule will be profits and production. If you want to go back to the stone age of traveling hordes and tribes in search of survival resources or a fiefdom of international regional overlords that is a good way to do it.

It's interesting that the "progressives" are playing right into the hands of the exact same "corporate forces "they claim need to be controlled and humanized.

But the basic truth, is what is really happening is the "extremes", the special interest ethnics, the special interest orgs of all types have found the warring two party system's use of issues to gain or maintain power the perfect opening to "infiltrate" one party or another in order to accomplish their own narrow goals. With some PR help they have turned the issues into only two sides..anti-illegals= racist or protectiveness..unchecked immigration = real democratic ideals. Everyone can see how their "label" positioning is for their own benefit and has nothing to do with the jingo "American" mantra on both sides.

Sooner or later we will have the long overdue hicup in our economy due to the political spending sprees and there will be a shake-up.
When that happens the sleepy majority will be shocked into reality and reject both the business dominated extremes and the naive open boarders flower children and be shocked into reality and start looking for some middle of the road common sense.
Don't ask me for an exact date, but it's coming.

Nice idea to have an open discussion but the display of willful ignorance in this thread on this topic shows how far away that ideal actually is

Few here have any ground to stand on, particularly those that refuse to admit to existance of the issues "behind the curtain"

As long as humans try to use a biased bogus monetary system (irrespective of the currency referenced) to evaluate their options chaos will be the outcome

NO EXTERNALITIES !!!

"There is no such thing as inaccuracy in a photograph. All photographs are accurate. None of them is the truth." - Richard Avedon

Just noting something about the amnesty -- most reasonable estimate (i.e., not from the Bush people) suggest that there are 18-20 million wage earning illegal aliens in the US. That obviously doesn't include children, and many of these people are single males. After the 1986 amnesty, each amnestied illegal alien brough over an average of 2.5 (actually 2.51 or 2.53 -- I can find the cite if anyone is curious) people through family reunification and sponsorship. So, if we are talking about an amnesty for about 20 million people, we should expect that we will also get 50 million people over the next ten years in addition to these folks the exact same way. That's 50 million people largely without English language skills, insurance, skills other than the ability to work for almost nothing, largely from cultures where tax evasion is absolutely standard, many of whom will want to have kids when reunited with their spouse, creating a baby boom of children sharing most of the attributes of their parents. This is exactly what happened in California. How do I know this off the top of my head? I grew up in LA and I watched what happened over the last 30 years with a lot of personal interest. I am 48 and one of those very rare California hispanics whose ancestors were actually from there, so I did grow up with a lot of prejudice back when California was very white, very prejudiced, and really didn't like "Mexicans" (who I was confused for so reliably that I was surprised when someone would actually talk to me like I knew English)(and it was usually New Yorkers and Texans in LA in the 70s, oddly enough, almost never locals)(I was asked if I was an Indian when I was really dark in the summer, but the rest of the year people would speak to me slowly, loudly, like I couldn't understand English) but frankly California in the 1970s with a lot of white people was just a nicer place then (with no one who looked like me) than it is now (with a lot of people who look like me). How do I like it? I left. I am not sure that the US wants to wind up like LA, and I am pretty damned sure because my job takes me all over the US that most of American cannot fathom being a serious minority in a hostile sea of non-English-speakers. That's what's coming with an amnesty. I am really stumped at why the white folks aren't at least a little nervous about it. Maybe they won't talk to me, I don't know. But I can tell you that I would be the demographic that should be delighted (grew up poor, "Hispanic", college educated, somewhat liberal, somewhat multicultral, married a white chick) and I decided to get out of Los Angeles. The crime is out of control, the tax base is shot, and I don't care if my kids have an accent (hell, I still have an accent) but I want them to grow up speaking English and not sounding like Speedy Gonzales and both of those things are getting to be a lot harder unless you want to live in a neighborhood with $4,000,000 homes and a 24 hour SWAT team. This illegal alien amnesty will make the US look like Los Angeles (a lot of it, anyway) is now, and Los Angeles now is not the LA I grew up in.

I am not comfortable with this. I really think that there are a lot of Hispanic or Latino (or in Texas "Mexican") people just like me who have a really bad feeling about this.

Tucker C. is just a spoilded elite preppy. I bet he had to shower after spending time with that crowd. Their illegal working dirt probably caused an allegric reaction to his blueblood metabolism. He was a nobody at CNN and PBS, his show on MSNBC is a joke.

And another aside -- you people know that all of these people will be EOE candidates the minute that the ink is dry, right? How many jobs does the US create every year? Seriously, I don't know, but I really wonder if the US can absorb and make jobs for all of these people who, again, probably won't be starting the next Microsoft. And when the economy struggles to digest this, all of these people will get ahead of the line because they are a protected minority. I have spent a lifetime in sales, and it literally does not matter how much affirmative action you get in sales -- you sell or you don't, and people STILL think that somehow I get an edge because I am hispanic. How good are race relations going to be with poor, dumb white people being edged out without exception by (equally poor and dumb but officially minority and EOE) Mexicans? Again, I have seen this happen in LA, and everyone hates everyone else. And of course I get the benefit of this crap, because I am not going to be any less brown any time soon. Wonderful.

I am really finding more and more reasons to not like anything related to this amnesty.

50 million people. 50 million. That's more than the population of California, and almost none of them will speak English, have insurance, and so on. This is on top of the ones already here.

My Senator is Sam Brownback and everything he is saying now I remember from Sacramento in the 1970s and EVERY SINGLE THING WAS WRONG. I really don't have a good feeling about this.

BROWN SURFER:

Dude, relax before you hyperventilate.

The LA that traumatized you so much is not by necessity a precursor for the rest of the country. What happens next depends upon so many factors, but I'll tell you this: you and your children will never be happy until you truly understand your own culture. You seem to think that LA is a mess because the brown people are inferior somehow. We're not.

So many Mexicans-Americans have launched businesses, raised college-educated children, and contributed to their communities through their taxes and charity work. I've had the pleasure to see this in my own community, once I took the time to open my eyes.

My father struggled with English, but he learned it with little help from school. But I know the language better than most Anglos, and so do my siblings. It didn't take long for our family to assimilate. The taxes my husband and I pay every year pays for services that go to a lot of angry, anti-immigrant Anglos out there. Does that matter to them? Will they ever acknowledge it? Probably not. But that doesn't really matter to me.

What does matter to me at this moment is that you give yourself a chance to really understand your own bloodline. Pick up and read "1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus" by Charles C. Mann. And try "The Discovery and Conquest of Mexico" by Bernal Diaz del Castillo. If you do, you will finally understand the full character of your own ethnic group.

The true barrier between any immigrant and the general population is not a physical one. It is actually the thick layer of ignorance that keeps us all from true, realistic solutions.

Tucker Carlson was there to get footage for his show.

All he chose to show was footage of non-citizens who wanted to claim it was their country too.

He'll say he likes "illegals" because they work hard, but then sets them up for the anti-immigrant viewers.

That's a nice story, CS, but the fact remains that illegal aliens have no citizenship rights in the US, and neither do their children. Until this is acknowledged and solved, illegal aliens are going to be a problem.

As for your story, I heard the same crap from "black nationalists" and "afro-american studies" neophytes and acolytes. Surfer's experiences are his culture, and you have no place judging them as legitimate or not. Your examples of individual successes are as relevant to his life as the "Buy Black" scam was to mine. Sure, there were honest people who succeeded, but not in my neighborhood.

So try not to make the mistake several people here repeat consistently, denying the legitimacy of his arguments because you didn't experience them, and focusing on the gnats and ticks of his propositions in an attempt to score meaningless points.

As a country we need to work at these issues, because they affect the longevity of this society. Not only are or grandchildren in trouble, Bush has focused the magnifying glass on the ends of OUR lives. The two of you could be fine leaders, but you must be willing to make the position of your enemies your own so you can be better than the leaders yo propose to replace.

CS:

I am glad that things worked out for you. If that were the rule, I would still be in California.

Here's the funny thing -- the LA that traumatized me would be a relief compared to the LA that exists now. The funny thing is that despite the fact that I was marginalized as "the other" (yeah, I have a liberal arts degree) when I was growing up, I think that I may have a lot more in common with the majority culture than not. I think that "my culture" may be closer to that of retired aerospace engineers in Orange County who treated me like a thief when I was mopping the floors growing up, which is really, really, really not how I saw it growing up and categorically not what I was expecting to be thinking at this stage in my life. Go figure. So when you suggest that I get in touch with my bloodline, what are you talking about? Because Mexico is a foreign country to me, as it was to my father, and his father, and his father (I think we are talking about my great great great grandfather here if you are talking about someone in my family who was an actual Mexican national).

I don't think that brown people are inferior (if I did, it would be pretty hard to shave every morning). I have spend a lot of time in NW Mexico over the last 30 years (working with manufacturing chemicals, US and Mexico, any place that stamps metal) and know that Mexican primary education is awful, Mexico's class system strongly discourages the short, brown, and rural from getting an education, and that Mexico is actually a large, pretty well off economy that generates a lot of jobs and keeps the cost of living very low. I think that we are getting huge numbers of the poorest of the poor who can't make it in a growing economy with almost no taxes (well, people don't pay them), almost no regulations (well, people don't follow them), and a very low cost of living almost everywhere outside of the DF and some of the larger cities. I think that doesn't bode well for the skills and abilities that these folks may be bringing, and having seen the effects of this up close in LA, literally on the bottom line. I don't think that more of the same folks are going to suddenly improve the tax base when a smaller number have caused social services expenditures to go through the roof and my taxes with them. The bottom line (no pun intended) is that my taxes were as high as they were to support the people who could not support themselves. In California, those were the recent Mexican immigrants and their children. If we were about to get people with college degrees and a history of decent earnings, I would be very pleased because California really needs those people right now. But we're not getting those people. And I am watching this debate about an amnesty while everyone dances around the question of the worth (not as human beings, but as dollar signs, consumers or suppliers of public funds) of a lot of these people when we have the example of California right there in on display. The California situation hasn't worked for California as a whole, although it did transfer a lot of wealth to make a lot of poor non-US nationals less poor. But California is a lot worse off for it. I don't see it as a good model to duplicate, especially on such an amazingly huge scale as the whole US and 20 million illegal aliens and 50 million additional family members.

This evening I will find the cite for the additional family members brought over per illegal alien amnesties in the 1986 amnesty and post it, in case anyone is curious. If there are "only" 11 million illegal aliens, then that would still be 27-28 million additional people, which is about the same as the greater LA area. That is a hell of a lot of people.

I have a serious problem with people who are not citizens and are illegal based upon the fine laws and upholding of our blessed constitution coming here and saying they have the rights of American citizens. Thinking they have the right to have laws changed to suit them, when common Americans are getting screwed over, especially the middle class, if we can call it that anymore.

Some of these Immigrants rights groups have "democracy" seriously misrepresented and have skewed it to a point where its completely losing its meaning.

Democracy allows for peaceful protest, not absolute disregard of the Constitution and its legal foundations and protections, not the right for you to have them rearranged to your specific whims.

With the way the Dems have been acting, youd think the illegal immigrants already have voting rights and priveleges.

Although, if they get their way they just might in time for November.

formerly "the brown surfer":

You make two points that I find particularly interesting and that I haven't seen made elsewhere. The first is your observation about what happens when 11 million people reunite with their families. Your second point is also worth pondering: that California has been a natural laboratory of the effect of low skill, non-English speaking people coming into the US in great numbers. California is often held up as the future of America, and we need to consider whether that is mostly positive, neutral, or more negative than positive.

This whole discussion has been driven by the passionate emotions of sentimentality and fear. Conventional wisdom and name-calling have run roughshod over serious, thoughtful dialogue: It reminds me of the run-up to the Iraq war.

Questions I would like to see real evidence address (as opposed to slogans) is how long does it take for new residents to assimilate and is there a cultural tipping point at which assimilation will not happen?

This is a good question...

"Questions I would like to see real evidence address (as opposed to slogans) is how long does it take for new residents to assimilate and is there a cultural tipping point at which assimilation will not happen?

Posted by PTate in MN at April 12, 2006 09:44 PM

..because I think we have been seeing for quite a while our multi culture- diversity- becoming a slippery slope of sorts.

I have been seeing signs that indicate people are confused about what diversity means or should mean in this country. When someone comes to America they are welcome to keep their "ethnic" status, their "culture" and their "religion"....but unless they can subscribe 100% to their "nationality" as American then there is no assimilation.

Somehow it has become "acceptable" and even chic to be a 'dual citizen"...to say you maintain a loyalty to two countries. I guess it is like loving your wife and your mistress. This is something we see in some segments of the politicaly active Jewish American community regarding Israel and in the older Cuban community regarding Cuba.

Then there is this, that I read not long ago that stuck me as a prime example of this slippery slope resulting in people in US goverment not understanding who they were elected to actually represent:

Mel Martinez says goal as senator is a free Cuba

Mel Martinez, who will be the first Cuban American in the U.S. Senate, said he hopes to bring his vision of a free Cuba to the highest circles of government.

BY OSCAR CORRAL

The Miami Herald

In a wide-ranging interview, Senator-elect Mel Martinez told The Herald that he hopes to become a leading voice for the cause of a free Cuba, promoting ideas that include changing the so-called wet foot/dry foot policy and aggressively planning for a post-Castro Cuba.

''I view it as a really historic opportunity,'' said Martinez, who will be the first Cuban American in the U.S. Senate. ``It will give me a great opportunity to plead with people to better understand the Cuba problem and have a tough attitude on Cuba.''

Martinez, like thousands of Cuban exiles, says he "longs to return to his homeland." Except for a visit to the U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, he hasn't been there since he was 15.

Is this as horrifying to anyone else as it is to me?...that an elected US representive has no problem announcing his main goal as a US representive is the betterment of his "real" homeland by using his position as a representive of the "American" people?

Then we have the Dem Whip in the US Congress , Styen Hoyer announcing to the world that it is not the policy of the US to be 'evenhanded':

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 15, 2003

Hoyer Addresses AIPAC Political Leadership Conference

by Congressman Steny Hoyer

Quote:

"There are some who believe that we must demonstrate more even-handedness in the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.

I do not."

Pretty obvious to me Mr. Hoyer hasn't studied what our original founders had to about how America should conduct it's foreign affair with evenhandedness and fairness to all, rejecting the notion and dangers of "favored nations".

I don't understand how this became acceptable or how we got such Un-American people in office..unless like the questioner asked...where is the tipping point for assimilation?

I guess if I don't like this reversal of our basic American foundations I should move to France, become a French citizen, get elected to political office in France and use France to take back America.

Which probably wouldn't be that hard to do since all the politicans are so busy advocating for democracy for Cuba, and Democracy for the Iraqis and democracy for the Iranians,lower taxes for the oilies and corporations,deregulating the media outlets, amnesty for illegals,raising their own salaries, voting down minimun wage increases, voting more money to Israel, dialing for campaign dollars, taking "educational lobbying trips to Hawaii,investigating each other for bribes and money laundering, investigating where all the money went in Iraq, the Pentagon, the DOD, New Orleans,the DHS,the Indian Trust Fund, HUD and the DOE, that they are actually responsible for overseeing in the first place....they wouldn't even notice they have been overthrown till it was all over.

BROWN SURFER et. al.:

My main point was apparently lost on you and those who posted re my comments. I simply wanted you to understand how much your words and worries say about you, about your self-perception. Read your earlier posts carefully. They don't sound confident at all.

I did anticipate that I would get the "nice story, but..." response. The fact is, people who are already biased negatively will focus on the LA people that scared you so much, and diminish the significance of any positive examples.

The problem with assimilation of Latinos here is that once done, we disappear. The moment the accent is gone, the education rises, the home becomes nicer---that is the moment we are no longer recognized as Latino. I and other Latinas make this "worse" by marrying a non-Latino. Then the Latin name disappears.

The people who are obviously not doing well get all the attention, for good or ill. The rest of us spend the rest of our lives saying "No, I'm not Italian...No, I'm not Armenian..." or suppressing annoyance with people who want to crawl into my family ancestry to find a trace of Europe.

As for rate of assimilation, I read in a newspaper article sometime this year that, according to a study, the rate of assimilation among this wave of Latino immigrants is faster than that during the European wave of the 1890s to 1930s. The fact that people believe the opposite can perhaps be attributed in part to the invisibility phenomenon I cited above.

As for the posters who express outrage over the protesters, understand this: the overriding theme of the protest is simply that they want an entry process into this country that takes into account the actual demand for labor. Right now, the quantity we say we want is disproportionate to our hiring actions. And businesses aren't doing all the hiring of illegal labor. Private citizens hire them, too. So, why not be honest, for a change?

There was a segment on CNN the other day, that reported an analysis of the net economic effect of the illegal labor force in this country. The net/net: this country benefits economically.

Another point: the percentage of US population that is immigrant is actually lower than it was during the European influx around the turn of the century. This controversy is all about perception.

I think that people are missing some important context in the UN Reform/Bolton debate.

THe US's isolation may feed into further isolation by allowing a candidate who is unfriendly to US interests to be picked to be UNSG.

My blog has discussions on this.

http://chapter15.wordpress.com/2006/04/13/us-getting-isolated-in-unsg-race/

I invite all of you who think unchecked immigration is a good thing to come down to Southern California or Arizona.

Live here, get in a car accident with an illegal, get in the middle of a gang war, or have your house invaded and or tagged by obscenities in Spanish, and then talk to me about illegal immigration.

See how the incredible Sonoran desert has been destroyed.

See how gang warfare between rival Hispanic groups are tearing apart Los Angeles schools while LEGAL immigrants pay for their health care and education and most blacks in South Central no longer have hospitals.

I speak Spanish because I grew up on the Arizona border, I would consider myself a *liberal* but this is not on.

This is about corporations wanting cheap labor on the GOP side, and Democrats wanting votes. If we allow this wave to be legalized there's a few million ready to cross the border tomorrow and undercut even the newly legalized pathetic wages.

Who is getting screwed? The middle and lower middle class in the U.S. as well as Mexicans and Central Americans whose towns have been decimated by NAFTA, and then by the emigration of the working age population.

The solution: get all the illegals from Mexico who march chanting "Si si peude" all over this country to march on Mexico City, and support them, with economic aid not tied to the oligarchs.

Then establish a Marshall Plan for Mexico and Central America. Get the corrupt governments out (not as if we haven't done it before and./or supported them in our own corrupt interests) and allow these immigrants to go home to their families.

Unchecked immigration is unsustainable, and I would invite anyone who thinks it is to pay my tax bill, the cost to repaint my home everytime it's tagged, and my car insurance. And also to volunteer to patrol the national parks in Arizona, Californa, New Mexico, Utah and Texas to make sure their fragile ecosystems are not completely destroyed (whoops -- too late -- they already have been!)

Most of these posts on Immigation are just rhetorical. I suspect that not all immigrants produce equal benefits for the country. If they did, then Silicon Valley, for example, would have as many Mexican-American high tech companies as Indian-American companies. As long as we focus on "immigrants" without thin-slicing our policies into exactly what skills the country needs, then America probably will mirror Los Angeles.

There are so many good observations on this thread, so many questions I wish I could see answered. Surely someone has studied this?

CS in CA is confident that assimilation is occuring rapidly--perceptions are skewed because Mexicans who have become American are viewed as Americans, so non-Mexicans don't see them as "other".

Carroll wonders about a US Senator who longs to return to his Cuban "homeland" and whose highest priority is a free Cuba. What does it mean to be an American anymore?

Fair concurs with "formerly 'the Brown surfer'" that the American culture of the southwest is deteriorating because of the recent wave of immigration.

Some say immigration is good for the economy. Some say the social costs of immigration are too high. Some want us to differentiate between high-talent immigration and low-skill immigration.

I really feel like we are being asked to form opinions on the basis of passion and anecdote. Where are the calm voices of reason?

PTate in MN:

I'm not certain I understand what you mean by "calm voices of reason." Do you mean statistics?

Then here is this excerpt from a December 2005 newspaper article, which examined the findings of the Continuing Center of the California Economy:

"...One out of every four Californians, or 9.5 million people, were born outside the United States; and that 25% of these newcomers or 2.4 million people, arrived here without papers...California and the United States have been in the throes of an immigration boom that began in the 1990s and has raised the percentage of foreign-born Americans to the highest levels since the 1930s...

...The new California report seeks to quantify migration trends since 1990 and assess their impacts at the broadest economic level. Its principal finding is that California, with its high rate of immigration, has done better than the national average over the past 15 years according to such measures as wages, job creation and unemployment...

...The report noted that average wages in California have risen faster than those in the nation as a whole since 1990. In additon, job growth in the state has outpaced that of the nation since 1994. And California's unemployment rate, three percentage points above the national average in the early 1990s, has now drawn closer to the U.S. figure, measuring 5.2 percent in the most recent month, versus 5 percent nationwide.

...The economy of California has withstood a giant aerospace-led recession (in the early 1990s), a gigantic tech bubble bursting and this large wave of immigration into the state," Levy said. "All the indicators of economic activity have improved relative to the nation. How can it be that immigrants have messed up the economy?"

So there are some stats to ponder. The excerpts, as I said, come from a 64 page study, "The Impact of Immigration on the California Economy." Its author is Stephen Levy of the Continuing Center of the California Economy.

"Surfer" held up California as some sort of boogeyman. My assertion is that he, like too many others, characterize the whole by assessing only one of it's parts. I say that is too narrow.

I don't advocate unregulated borders. I don't believe very many other people do, either. But I think there is too much hysteria.

The environment may not be the major issue in immigration, but it is an important issue and it is generally not discussed. The reason for this is that the Sierra Club, and most other conservation organizations were happy to talk about population control when most immigrants and babies were white. But when they became brown, they were afraid of being called racist. And, in the case of the Sierra Club, the major contributor privately told the club president that he would withdraw support if the club came out against immigration.

As the US becomes more populous and poorer on average, our environment will suffer, it will become much harder to get to a wild environment.

TO: FAIR and Robert Hume:

Can we all assume that each of you walks or cycles to work, or at least drives a hybrid car; that you reuse/recycle religiously; that you buy only environment-friendly products; you never wash your car or use non-bio garden products in your yard?

A few posts ago I recommended a book to Brown Surfer. I think, since you are so concerned about the "fragile" ecosystem, that you read this book. "1491: New Revelations About The Americas Before Columbus" by Charles Mann is a serious read, but if you stick with it, you will gain a far more realistic notion of environment and the impact of humans--all humans.

But to really be educated, I suppose, one needs more than any book. One needs an open mind, free of bias. The fact is, the hysteria over this latest wave of immigrants is not the culmination of objective observation, as you have probably convinced yourselves it is.

I'm not posting here anymore. All the double standards, scapegoating, ignorance and hypocrisy is too depressing. I sincerely doubt that anyone changes their views these days. We are all little George Bushes, taking stands based on false assumptions and staying the course, no matter how wrong it is.

For one thing, I never claimed that illegal immigration destroyed the culture of Southern California or Arizona, which are both deeply rooted in Hispanic culture, for instance "Los Angeles" is two Spanish words. So is "Las Vegas" "San Diego" "Santa Barbara" "Santa Cruz" etc. and ad nauseam.

Not that I know why this is at all pertinent to the immigration debate but I actually never use my car, its battery dies on a regular basis, and it had the highest mileage available when we bought it. My husband drives the highest mileage car available at the time he bought it. We also recycle religiously and give our cans and bottles to the homeless so that they can redeem the deposit. We have a cactus garden that lives off of rainwater. And we don't flush unless it's brown and limit our showers to three minutes ;-)

To get back to the immigration debate: illegal immigration destroyed the Sonoran desert of southern Arizona. That's not me talking but an ecological study done this last year. And it's led to an urgent crisis in health care in the border states which has directly affected the poor and middle class.

And it's destroying the wages of our unskilled workers, our lower-middle class, our college and high-school students who used to mow lawns and work at Wendy's but have been priced out of the market.

And it's destroying Mexico, where whole towns have been left devastated by the emigration of their working age adults. After the family reunification inevitably comes, this will be worse.

And it will be worse for us dumb schmucks stuck with the bill as our own income declines because of our government's war mongering and unconditional support for Israel and her endless wars. Iran here we come, and that rise in gas prices will be the end of the U.S. economy as we know it, in the meantime we'll have these people who don't belong here still claiming or rather demanding the same services that are bankrupting whole states.

Again, there is no comparision between how this country was built and what it is now and what it faces.

I don't think anyone on the board who is against illegal immigration is motivated by racism, rather I would say it's the opposite -- that the ones who favor it want to "stick it to the man" even if that "man" is a Hispanic whose ancestors have lived in what is now the U.S. for a thousand years.

So to those of you for illegal immigration, let's open our borders and our schools to EVERYONE!!!

For instance, in the Univ. of California system first and second generation Asian American students were openly discriminated against -- I'm not making this up -- because they were over-represented at the tops of their classes - EVEN IF THEIR PARENTS COULD PAY FULL TUITION.

Since we are paying so much to educate Hispanic immigrants, let's level the playing field and have race-blind admissions.

Bet you pro-illegals love that, huh -- merit based admissions are right up your alley? Nah -- that would be too fair to all those Korean/Vietnamese liquor store/dry cleaners working 24/7 in South Central to make sure their kids get into Berkeley.

You pro-illegals are guilty of hypocrisy of the highest order...rather than give hard-working legal immigrants (including Latinos) a chance at a college education that they've worked hard for, you prefer to allocate my hardearned tax dollars to people who have no right to them, while people who do get shafted because they are too smart or their parents worked too hard are denied higher education at our state universities.

And then let's open up the borders to Indians from South Asia, who are the best educated minority group in the U.S. Let's get all their extended clans over here too. Whoops -- we can't! See, Indians are too smart -- we're scared Indians will take over our skilled labor force.

So put your arguments where the sun don't shine and pay my state and local taxes -- I dare you. Also, come and repaint my house on a weekly basis -- "Ch*nga su madre" indeed.

Every immigrant had its problem groups but most of them made a long hard journey and came over legally in accordance to the sometimes horrendous laws of the day, some as indentured servants, some as slaves.

Let's help Mexico and Central America get back on their feet, stop our own government propping up the tyrants and death squads there, and get these people home.

There are tens of millions more where they came from and we have to stop it now in a rational, fair and humane way. If not the George W. Bushs and his corporate puppeteers win.

I have to say again PTate in MN has it right..."where are the calm voices of reason?"

I think this is what the public is looking for...here's why....the immigration issue is a hot topic in my area of the southeast. The people I talk to and over hear are primarily, number one "baffeled" ...and ..number two "resentful."

Their first question is how many people can we handle in this country without putting ourselves in the same third world status as the immigrants are fleeing in their own countries.

Their second question is ..How did we get a 12 million illegal people problem in the first place? Where were our laws and enforcement during this time?

The "resentment" part is because the average american feels that they are law abiding citizens, and they see and feel that the laws of their country, that they are required to follow, are being "thrown in their faces" so to speak, by the illegals and the politicans and in addition they are being smeared as racist or selfish if they voice any objection.

Then to add insult to injury, I am sure a lot of people besides myself saw Jim Moran D-VA on Hardball the other night talking about immirgation. Normally I admire Rep Moran but he really exposed the core of political corruption in the immigration issue in what he said. To quote him..."these "new' immigrants have the work ethic and the energy and spirit that Americans don't have, they are the future". So there you have it...in the opinion of our representives normal americans don't work and don't have the spirit of illegals and aren't part of or important to america's future...even though it is the normal americans who are paying their salaries as elected representives of american people. If our politicans were attorney's or bankers they would have already been fired for violating their fudicary duties to their clients with that statement alone.

Never thought I would hear the truth expressed so bluntly as Rep. Moran put it. Every special interest that can be used as a tool by one party or the other for maintaining or gaining power will be used no matter what it does to the country or it citizens... no common sense or reason will be applied to any issue, only what works for the politicans.

The only "reason" I see in this issue is coming from ordinary americans in their expressions of confusion as to how we got to this problem and why no one is talking about it in what to them are common sense terms.

And let me add I personally know people who have gone to bat to help an illegal stay in this country..one incident involved a Mexican who was working for a private hunting and fishing camp. When the members discovered his illegal status they thought enough of him to try and help him gain "legal" status. So I entirely reject the "racist" tool being used by the illegal camp in their campaign and by some politicans...it is a red herring to deflect the practical issues.

This immigration debate should be about economics, whether or not a country will follow it's own laws, whether or not we will actually have borders at all, and whether or not the goverment represents the interest of americans and america.

CS in CA: "All the double standards, scapegoating, ignorance and hypocrisy is too depressing. I sincerely doubt that anyone changes their views these days. We are all little George Bushes, taking stands based on false assumptions and staying the course, no matter how wrong it is."

This thread is probably stale by now, so I don't know if you will see this, but this comment of yours describes why I pine for "calm voices of reason" by which I mean people who are willing to consider multiple points of view, weigh evidence, evaluate trends, who seek justice and compassion, and above all, who are willing to take the time to understand the problem rather than rushing to a solution from fear or bias.

Your statistics are encouraging: the surge of immigration into California, which has resulted in a population that is 25% foreign-born (of whom ~6 are in the US illegally), has not affected its economy. On the other hand, these strike me as macro-level statistics. Both highly educated, skilled Indian software engineers and low-skill Mexican farm workers are included, but perhaps the one kind of immigrant contributes a great deal more economically than the other?

Secondly, people are reporting increase in crime and deterioration of social services and the quality of life in the Southwest. Is the social network and infrastructure keeping up with the demand for services?

Another question has to do with assimilation. Over the past 16 years California has experienced a huge wave of immigration. Is there a cultural tipping point at which the ratio of immigrant to indigenous American is such that historic patterns of cultural adoption are affected and important cultural attitudes are lost? I've seen lots of children go from Russian, Korean, Indian, Thai, Chinese, Ghanaian, Turkish, Mexican kid to indistinquishable American kid in 15 years. But they lived in a culture that, while heterogeneous, was still dominated by old stock Americans. What happens when the culture is dominated by non-Americans?

does anyone else think immigration could be code for first step towards police state?

Charles Blumenthal asks:

"does anyone else think immigration could be code for first step towards police state?"

Yes, there probably are some other people who think that. But they're the sorts of nuts who see _anything_ Bush does--e.g., sneezing--as "code for first step towards police state."

PTate in MN:

If I hadn't been stuck on permanent "hold" on the phone I probably wouldn't have seen your latest post. And I do feel all the hateful comments about Mexicans right in the pit of my stomach sometimes, in unguarded moments. But, since you seem sincere in your quest for calm reason, here goes a quick response.

Regarding your question about the economic contribution of the Indian software engineer versus the unskilled Mexican worker, I can only give you a broad answer, at least for now. The software engineer is obviously going to pay higher income taxes, and wield bigger purchasing power than the low-skilled Mexican worker. But the comparison should not stop there.

The children of the low-skilled Mexican worker, in many more cases than is often credited, move up the economic ladder, and contribute to the economic system accordingly. Many become small business owners, from the humble garden/landscaping business, to the corner grocery store owner, to the trendy SF restaurant owner. Many disappear into companies as white collar workers, or as professionals. The problem is, as I've stated, the minute the Mexican-American isn't a problem, is the moment he disappears. But the loyalty of the immigrant-based family, one that has risen through the ranks, is very strong.

I could also make a case for all the small taxes even an illegal immigrant of any color contributes to our economy, but you probably know them, or can figure them out. But the sheer strength of California's economy when a large number is illegal is answer enough, isn't it? If the Mexican were truly a net negative upon the state, their numbers would have offset the Indian engineers and put us into the minus column.

The lucky thing about the Mexican immigrant is that he/she comes to work. Not to sit around and complain. To work. Working creates a powerful momentum. Those that complain about depressing wages should complain to the companies AND show up for work. See if you can access Cynthia Tucker's column for today in The San Francisco Chronicle. She's with the Universal Press Syndicate. She unwittingly presents a classic case for why the large numbers of Mexican immigrants have had a net positive effect on the economy, and yet a fraction of Americans lose out, will always lose out, as a result of their own work ethic.

As for a tipping point for the American culture, I have to say that yes, the American culture will change. But it already has been changing, from Pre-Columbian times of the Americas, to colonial times, Industrial Age, through wartimes and technological eras. Even if every Mexican immigrant were to disappear, the American culture as you see it now will not be in place in the next decade. Change has been, and ever will be.