Secure Borders
Sitting here and listening to Sen. McCain, saying we have first to 'secure our borders'. This is totally impossible, and saying it has to precede any other action on immigration is insane.
Why is our big issue immigration? Because the employment situation is really, really bad. The problem isn't those evil immigrants taking jobs, it's those employers who don't want to pay a living wage. I am so fortunate that I can collect social security but what about you?
oh, yeah, right. and ... here's your talkradio spew;
This is so much a ridiculous contention, we have to see any claim that they are going to 'secure the borders' as an exercise in lying without any respect for the electorate's intelligence.
As I've posted previously, this is not an issue, it's a suggestion that we all would be doing fine if those dark skinned folks would stop coming in here and taking jobs for less than we can live on.
That begs the question, what are we letting our employers getting away with?
We are not keeping out illegal immigrants because all of us are hiring them. Have you killed and cut up your own chickens, washed and waxed the floors, mowed your lawns lately? Neither have I.
Those candidates who keep shouting that they're going to 'secure the borders' know perfectly well that we aren't either.
We're going to have to stop those employers hiring them, because those illegals are going to keep coming to keep the jobs we won't pay a living wage for.
Incidentally,when I was a little girl I got every third Sunday to wring the necks of two chickens and throw them in the boiling water, so I am very convinced that when we grow and process our own food, make our own beds, clean our floors, then we can start 'securing our borders'.
(btw I didn't take one single bite of my pet chicken when he got to be dinner after he attacked my bother - Prince Joy - yeh, that was my name for my chicken.)
Na Ga Happen.
Why is our big issue immigration? Because the employment situation is really, really bad. The problem isn't those evil immigrants taking jobs, it's those employers who don't want to pay a living wage. I am so fortunate that I can collect social security but what about you?
Article IV, Section 4, Paragraph 1: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestics Violence.
With an estimated 20 million aliens illegally in the United States and perhaps an additional 3 million added annually to that number, "It's fair to estimate, based on a Time investigation, that the number of illegal aliens flooding into the U.S. this year will total 3 million --" Time Magazine, September 20, 2004." The question arises: Does this constitute an "invasion?" If not, what would an invasion look like? If yes, then what should the federal government be doing, in the words of Article IV, Section 4 to "protect each of them (the States) against invasion"?
"The simple truth is that we've lost control of our own borders, and no nation can do that and survive. We ignore America's lost sovereignty at our peril."
- Ronald Reagan
oh, yeah, right. and ... here's your talkradio spew;
Are we now into the long, long campaign, or just watching the petering out of the GOP tide of the past quarter century?
In 1976, Ronald Reagan refused to take early losses as a reason for exiting and made Gerry Ford go the distance. Every step of the way Reagan fought for ideas, and refused to accept defeat. He didn't win that nomination battle, but he did win the war for the GOP's heart. Because he refused to quit and because he believed in the ideals of small government, low taxes, liberty and a strong defense.
To survive another second place finish in New Hampshire, Mitt Romney has to communicate to the GOP that he believes in Reagan's ideas and Reagan's coalition --in tax cuts and originalist judges, in a strong national defense and secure borders, in restrained domestic spending, the protection of the unborn and traditional marriage, and of course, free trade and victory in the war.
McCain flunks the tax cuts' test, voted for the Gang of 14 and against the Federal Marriage Amendment. Huckabee is against free trade and the free market when it comes to the governance of corporate America. Huck's a big spender, and a soft-on-crime, serial commuter-of-sentences.
Huckabee is so anti-Reagan coalition that his main campaign guy, Ed Rollins, declared the coalition to be dead.
This is so much a ridiculous contention, we have to see any claim that they are going to 'secure the borders' as an exercise in lying without any respect for the electorate's intelligence.
As I've posted previously, this is not an issue, it's a suggestion that we all would be doing fine if those dark skinned folks would stop coming in here and taking jobs for less than we can live on.
That begs the question, what are we letting our employers getting away with?
We are not keeping out illegal immigrants because all of us are hiring them. Have you killed and cut up your own chickens, washed and waxed the floors, mowed your lawns lately? Neither have I.
Those candidates who keep shouting that they're going to 'secure the borders' know perfectly well that we aren't either.
For years there has been an implicit understanding among businesses that need workers, illegal immigrants willing to do those jobs, communities that benefit from such commerce, and a government that rarely intervened. Now that understanding has been torn apart.
Of 1,500 people surveyed in June by the Pew Research Center, 55 percent said the most effective way to reduce illegal immigration from Mexico is to increase penalties on employers. In a Democratic presidential debate in November, Barack Obama said: "An employer has more of a chance of getting hit by lightning than being prosecuted for hiring an undocumented worker. That has to change." All of the candidates, with varying degrees of vigor, have expressed the same sentiment.
ICE made 863 criminal arrests at companies last year; 59 of those were owners and 33 lower-level managers, most charged with knowingly hiring illegal workers. Two years ago, ICE made only 176 such arrests.
We're going to have to stop those employers hiring them, because those illegals are going to keep coming to keep the jobs we won't pay a living wage for.
Incidentally,when I was a little girl I got every third Sunday to wring the necks of two chickens and throw them in the boiling water, so I am very convinced that when we grow and process our own food, make our own beds, clean our floors, then we can start 'securing our borders'.
(btw I didn't take one single bite of my pet chicken when he got to be dinner after he attacked my bother - Prince Joy - yeh, that was my name for my chicken.)
Na Ga Happen.
Labels: Economy, Immigration
3 Comments:
George McGovern has an op-ed in the WaPo today, calling for impeachment.
It's a good read, albeit I'd have liked to see more, sooner.
The comments are being freeped, one common tater mentioned she had received an email from freerepublic urging her to 'disrupt the liberals' in the comment thread.
ifthethunderdontgetya wrote:
"TheMadKing wrote:
...
You mena the way Clinton passed the Al Qaeda/bin Laden mess to Bush? Or do you need reminding?
1992: Somalia, then an Al Qaeda hotbed.
Black Hawk Down. The response? Retreat.
bin Laden declares US "paper tigers."
1993: First WTC bombing. No repsonse.
1995: Khobar Towers. No response.
1998: African embassy bombings. A few Tomahawks into Sudan and deserted terrorist camps. That scared 'em!
2000: USS Cole bombing. 17 Americans dead, a quarter-billion dollars in damage to a new front-line ship. No Response.
Not to mention all the "anti-discrimination" policies at airports and the wall set up between the CIA and FBI preventing them from exchanging information which facilitated 9/11 as surely as the terrorists themselves.
You mean messes like that, Thunder?
1/6/2008 2:12:21 PM"
Why yes, yes I do, Mad. Somalia 1992, remember that? Apparently, you don't.
"On December 12, 1992, the U.S. sent 28000 soldiers into Somalia under the cover of the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM)."
Bill Clinton
First Inaugural Address
Wednesday, January 21, 1993
See, this is why you freepers have no credibility. Whether it is babbling nonsense about Somalia, or insisting that Saddam (best buddy to Reagan and Bush I) didn't let the UN weapson inspectors in, you are discredited with a quick check on google.
Thanks for playing, though.
~
1/6/2008 2:23:33 PM
Recommended (1)
ah. i am actually commenting on this post (securing our borders) - it's inspired me to post a followup on my own secret little blog (it's secret 'coz no one goes there)
you are exactly right, ruth. the problem isn't border security, it's financial security and worker security. but it is so much easier to put forth a convenient scape-goat than to address the real problem.
I had the misfortune of listening to McCain today telling Timmeh about his plan to secure the borders and designate "categories" of immigrants.
How Brave New Worldish. Deltas, nice docile brown people who will work cheap and never bother us Alphas with little things like voting rights and workplace security.
If they work, they get to vote.
That'll bring about "secure borders" in a New York Minute.
Post a Comment
<< Home