Archive for the ‘Immigration’ Category

Irrational fear of foreign culture or accurate social commentary?

Thursday, March 6th, 2008

I report, you decide.

Mark Steyn recently authored the book America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It, a book which may appear to European multiculturalists and American liberals as the rantings of a hateful, zenophobic rube and to Muslim groups as the textual equivalent of a hate-crime, the mere publication of which constitutes a human rights violation (e. g., Steyn and Maclean’s magazine may have to face investigations by Canadian Human Rights commissions at the instigation of a group of Canadian Muslim law studens at Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto and the Canadian Islamic Congress; Steyn for having published the book and Maclean’s for having published an extract from the book) for suggesting, as I understand his thesis, that unassimilated Muslims, invited by European nation states to alleviate the problems presented by the demographic declines of their own native populations — populations that are growing older and are demanding to be kept by their bloated welfare states in the fashion in which they’ve become accustomed to demand — are posing a threat to the very democratic institutions and free culture that the Muslims were invited into and this precisely because many of those Muslims refuse to assimilate to their host culture and because their hosts refuse to demand that they do; that the diminishing fertility rate of Western Europeans in these states will eventually see the native Western Europeans be overtaken by the higher fertility rates of those Muslims in their midst; that violent overthrow of these cultures (though violence is already apparent in these countries) will ultimately be unnecessary since, once in the majority, Muslims in Europe will be able to exercise their vote to turn Europe into Eurostan. Indeed, some of these countries have been making said accomodations while Muslims are still minorities, perhaps to stave off violence.

But that’s not what I’m particularly interested in at the moment. What I’d like to focus on is this post by Steyn on The Corner, the group blog at National Review Online because, whatever the merits or demerits of the thesis of his book, I think he makes an interesting point. Quoting from and commenting on a column in the Boston Herald, Steyn writes:

‘A while back I mentioned Harvard’s decision to ban men from its pool and fitness center six times a week in the interests of “accommodating” Muslim women. Our pal Michael Graham picks up the theme:

In the old days, Harvard would have laughed if some Catholic or evangelical mother urged “girls-only” campus workouts in the name of modesty. Today, Harvard happily implements Sharia swim times in the name of Mohammed.

At Harvard, that’s called progress.

‘Well put. And thus “progress” comes full circle. In Minneapolis last year, the airport licensing authority, faced with a mainly Muslim crew of cab drivers refusing to carry the blind, persons with six-packs of Bud, slatternly women, etc, proposed instituting two types of taxis with differently colored lights, one of which would indicate the driver was prepared to carry members of identity groups that offend Islam. Forty years ago, advocating separate drinking fountains made you a racist. Today, advocating separate taxi cabs or separate swimming sessions makes you a multiculturalist.

‘Every society has culturally self-segregating groups - the Amish and whatnot. But they’re usually in small numbers somewhere out on the edge of the map. In Europe and Canada, the self-segregating group happens to be the principal source of population growth, which presents a profound challenge to societal cohesion. America does not face the same scale of problem, but nevertheless “sharia creep” ought to be resisted before it becomes remorseless. The rest of Michael’s column goes on to explain why that doesn’t happen: at Harvard and elsewhere, bigshot Saudi princes waving gazillion-dollar checks are in effect buying silence about one of the central questions of the day - Islam’s relationship with the west.’

Thus endeth Steyn. This is a good point. Suppose the Phelpses demanded that American universities institute separate exercise and swiming times for gays and straights because they can’t bear the thought of straight Americans sweating or appearing in revealing swimwear in the presence of gays? Oh how the howls would be heard from liberals around the country but how does that substantially differ from Muslims demanding separate exercise and swimming periods for Muslim women over religious and cultural concerns for modesty? Isn’t there a tinge of “separate but equal” here? Sure, granted that we’re not talking about seperate facilities here but merely times when the majority is excluded for the sake of the minority but how is separate for the sake of a minority discriminatory interest any more equal than separate for the sake of a majority discriminatory interest. Doesn’t the evil of discriminatory practices consist in the fact that they are discriminatory? And this is doubly discriminatory in that it tends to (a) perpetuate the Muslim discrimination against women — they’re weak, must be protected by men, cannot be trusted to participate fully in society with men without either drawing to themselves unwanted sexual advances from men or, worse, lasciviously inviting said sexual advances — and (b) it deliberately excludes men during those periods? Or is discrimination that perpetuates discriminatory stereotypes of Muslim women for the sake of a minority (Muslims in America) somehow ethically pure while discrimination that perpetuates discriminatory stereotypes of gays for the sake a majority (straights in America) or discriminatory stereotypes of women is evil? Or, more succinctly:

Forty years ago, advocating separate drinking fountains made you a racist. Today, advocating separate taxi cabs or separate swimming sessions makes you a multiculturalist.

I don’t call this progress. I call it capitulation to demands for special treatment based upon religious scruple. If the Phelpses can’t bear the thought of exercising or swiming in the presence of gays, they can damn well stay home or move somewhere where gays are hanged. If Muslims can’t bear the thought of their women showing skin in the presence of men, they can keep them covered head to toe, locked away at home or move somewhere where women are gang-raped for the crime of appearing in public insufficiently covered or imprisoned and beaten for the crime of appearing in public unaccompanied by a family member.

Or am I committing a hate crime for even suggesting this?

Institutions that would not dream of making exclusionary and discriminatory accomodations for the religious scruples of Christians should not be making such accomodations for Muslims.

Educating our Illegal Immigrants

Sunday, January 13th, 2008

Higher education even at a state run college is one step up on the ladder of life for all individuals. All of the life long benefits of that college education will allow any person the ability to make a few more dollars per year because the person invested in themselves first. They become a valuable asset to any company that would hire them. Should this same thought process apply to illegal immigrants though?

Apparently, Governor Deval Patrick thinks it should and he is testing the waters of the corner office in Boston to see if he can authorize reduced tuition for state residents to illegal immigrants.

In-state tuition divisivePatrick favors illegals break
By Ken Maguire THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

BOSTON— Gov. Deval L. Patrick said yesterday he’s looking into whether he can skirt the state Legislature by unilaterally allowing illegal immigrants to pay in-state tuition at state collegesPatrick’s revelation touched off strong reaction on Beacon Hill, where House lawmakers two years ago defied Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi, D-Boston, and defeated a bill that would let those immigrant students pay the same rate as their high school classmates.

“We have had some legal research done to see whether it’s possible to address that question without legislation,” the Democratic governor told an audience of education and business leaders. “The answer to that is by no means clear.”

Snip – jump the border here X

Opposition to the tuition break is rooted in the larger ideological issue of how to address illegal immigration. Opponents say the state shouldn’t be making it easier for undocumented students, who could take higher paying jobs from legal residents.“I’m amazed that he wants to be the sole person responsible for implementation of the wrong policy for Massachusetts,” said state House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones Jr., R-North Reading. “The public will be rightly incensed.”

Jones said he hasn’t researched whether the governor can grant the tuition breaks.

“We provide the free public education K-through-12 for these students,” he said. “We’ve already done quite a bit for these students. By doing this, we would add incentives for people to come here. Illegal immigrants do pretty well finding out where the best places for them to go are.” – Worcester Telegram

Hold the INS deportation bus! This kid is going to UMASS and has a get out of jail card. This kid is going to Fitchburg State, these two are going to Worcester State and those sixty three are all enrolled in Quinsigamond State College. Sorry Mr. Bus driver but that seems to be about everyone on the bus. Carry on sir!

I’m as liberal as they come but even I have my blood boiling over this buffoonery by Governor Patrick. As a parent of five daughters I worry about how the hell I am going to put all of them through college and yet the resources to keep tuition rates down are going to be spent on illegal immigrants? Besides that little scenario it concerns me that this will set a precedent for anyone that wants to come to Massachusetts illegally to have state citizenship recognized by the state which would then toss the legality of all illegal immigrants’ status into the courts.

Granting reduced resident status tuition to illegal immigrants is tantamount to slapping all of the residents of the state in the face. Especially, those that have come here legally from all around the world that has faced the gauntlet of legally immigrating and is in the process of earning their citizenship. Why should someone that broke into this state and this country get a reduced resident tuition rate? Our tax dollars from our jobs and the money we spend as legal residents help to pay the costs of some of the best state colleges in this nation and this proposal by the Governor is a giveaway to legitimate criminals.

I’m Liberal but I’m not stupid. Governor Deval Patrick should put this idea in the draw and never let it see the light of day again. He needs to be realistic and know that the education of all legal residents in the Bay State should always supersede the rights of anyone here illegally. Besides the fact that the reduced rate tuition education could find the benefactor on a bus back to the nation they came from if they are ever found by INS or the proper authorities. Then again are they not going after employers who hire illegal immigrants? Bad idea Deval, real bad!

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

Biggest lies of the year..part deux

Sunday, December 30th, 2007

I report..you decide..all of this is from FactCheck.org:

Rudy’s Adoption Deception

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani claimed adoptions went up 65 percent to 70 percent when he was mayor of New York City, when in fact adoptions at the end of his tenure were only 17 percent higher than at the start, and they were falling. His manipulation of official statistics was a classic case of using data selectively to create a false impression.

Levitating Numbers May 7, 2007

Rudy’s False Cancer Claim

Giuliani claimed in a radio ad that men suffering from prostate cancer have only a 44 percent survival rate under England’s system of “socialized medicine.” The true figure is 74.4 percent. Giuliani’s bogus statistic was the result of bad math by a campaign adviser with no particular expertise in cancer research. It was denounced by any number of cancer experts including one who called it “nonsense.” Giuliani stubbornly refused to admit his error, claiming the 44 percent figure is “absolutely accurate.” It isn’t.

A Bogus Cancer Statistic October 30, 2007

Bogus Cancer Stats, Again November 8, 2007

Rudy’s Inflated Cop Count

Giuliani falsely claimed that he grew New York City’s police force by 12,000 officers, but 7,100 of those he counted were already housing or transit police who were simply merged into the New York Police Department. The actual increase in the size of the city’s uniformed police officers was about 3,660, or about 10 percent, and the cost of hiring about 3,500 of them was partially covered by the federal government under President Bill Clinton.

Cop-Counting Cop-Out October 9, 2007

Rudy’s Bogus Crime Claim

A Giuliani TV ad falsely claimed New York City experienced “record crime … until Rudy.” In fact, the city recorded its highest rates of both violent crime and property crime years before he took office. The downward trend was well established before he was sworn in.

The Not-Quite Truth About NYC November 27, 2007

Rudy’s Tax-Cut Puffery

Giuliani constantly repeated that he “cut or eliminated 23 taxes” while mayor of New York City, but eight of those were initiated at the state level, with the mayor cheering from the sidelines. A ninth cut, one of the largest, was opposed by Giuliani in a five-month standoff with the City Council, until the mayor finally acquiesced. He can properly claim credit for initiating only 14 of the cuts.

Giuliani’s Tax Puffery July 27, 2007

Richardson’s Job Inflation

Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson continually boasted of creating 80,000 jobs since becoming governor of New Mexico. But official figures showed a 68,100 gain when he first started making this inflated boast. He based his claim on a definition of “jobs” that includes unpaid workers in family businesses and freelancers who don’t draw a paycheck.

Richardson also claimed he “made New Mexico 6th in job growth,” when the state already ranked 6th for the 12-month period before he took office and later fell to 17th under Richardson’s stewardship.

Richardson’s Job Boast August 22, 2007

Richardson Flunks Math and Science

Richardson also claimed over and over that U.S. students rank 29th in the world in math and science. Not true. The two leading international assessments of student achievement rank U.S. students better in all cases, and in most cases much better, than Richardson claims. U.S. students do post mediocre scores compared with those of other industrial nations, but Richardson is using a fanciful number that paints too dark a picture.

Richardson Flunks Two Subjects September 12, 2007

Mitt’s Immigration Malarkey

An ad by Romney in New Hampshire claimed that his rival John McCain “voted to allow illegals to collect Social Security.” That’s untrue. Nobody who is in the country illegally could be paid any Social Security benefits under McCain’s immigration bill. What McCain and 10 other Senate Republicans voted against was an effort to strip illegal aliens of a right they currently have: to apply the taxes they paid and the time they worked while in the country illegally as credit toward future Social Security benefits if and when they become citizens or legal residents.

The same ad said one of the differences between the two candidates is that Romney “opposes amnesty” for illegal immigrants. But Romney himself once called McCain’s immigration bill “reasonable” and said it was “quite different” from amnesty. Indeed it was. The McCain bill would have required those here illegally to pay thousands of dollars in fines and fees to gain legal status.

In an earlier TV ad, Romney cast himself as tough on illegal immigration, saying “I authorized the [Massachusetts] State Police to enforce immigration laws.” He doesn’t mention that his order never took effect. It came in the closing days of his administration and was rescinded by his successor

More Mitt Malarkey December 28, 2007

Tough Guy on Immigration? November 9, 2007

Mitt’s Meth Miss

Yet another Romney ad attacked Huckabee in Iowa, claiming Romney “got tough on drugs like meth” in Massachusetts while Huckabee “reduced penalties for manufacturing methamphetamine” in Arkansas. But the legislation Romney supported never passed. Furthermore, convicted meth dealers face prison terms in Arkansas that are four times longer than those in Massachusetts, even after the reductions Huckabee supported. The reductions were drafted with help from Arkansas state prosecutors to ease prison overcrowding.

Romney on Huckabee II December 19, 2007

Mitt Mauls History

Romney claimed that Democratic President Clinton “began to dismantle the military,” but really it was Republican President George H.W. Bush who started making deep cuts in defense budgets years before Clinton took office.

More Mitt Missteps July 9, 2007

Hillary’s Trumped-up Troop Claim

In a TV ad for her presidential campaign, Sen. Hillary Clinton falsely claimed that members of the National Guard and military Reserve didn’t have health insurance until she and a GOP colleague took action. “You would think that after all the sacrifices and service of the National Guard and Reserve protecting our country, they would have had health insurance. But they didn’t.”

In fact, most of them did. All active-duty Guard and Reserve troops were covered by federal insurance long before she became a senator. Furthermore, four out of five non-active-duty guardsmen and reservists also were covered by their civilian employers or other sources. Clinton did help expand and enhance government health care coverage for reservists but can’t claim credit for creating coverage where none existed, as this ad implied.

Exaggerating Help for Troops December 20, 2007

Huckabee’s Tax Hooey

* Huckabee tried to duck charges of being a tax increaser by claiming an Arkansas gasoline tax hike passed after 80 percent of state voters approved it. But the referendum vote on highway repairs didn’t occur until after the tax was increased.

Huckabee also claimed repeatedly that he cut taxes “almost 94 times,” sliding by the fact that 21 other taxes were raised during his tenure, resulting in a net tax increase.

Huckabee’s Fiscal Record November 21, 2007

“FairTax” Falsehoods

Proponents of the so-called “FairTax,” prominently including Huckabee, claimed that a national sales tax of 23 percent could replace both the federal income tax and Social Security taxes, and eliminate the Internal Revenue Service.

In truth, the actual rate of the proposed tax would be 30 percent, when calculated the same way as state and local sales taxes. And it would have to be 34 percent to raise the same revenue as the taxes it would replace, according to a bipartisan presidential commission. The FairTax would, for example, raise the price of gasoline by roughly $1 per gallon at today’s prices and cause a $150,000 new home to cost at least $195,000 including the 30 percent tax.

And while the Internal Revenue Service might disappear, two new federal bureaucracies would be needed: one to administer the sales tax and another to keep track of sending out hundreds of billions of dollars in checks every year to compensate taxpayers for the regressive nature of sales taxes. The proposal calls for “prebates” to all taxpayers of all taxes paid on purchases up to the poverty level. That of course would require an IRS-like system to validate each person’s income and the amount of “prebate” they are due.

Unspinning the FairTax May 31, 2007

Edwards’ Empty Threat

Former Sen. John Edwards said, both in a TV ad and constantly on the campaign trail, that as president he’d tell Congress to act within six months to make sure all Americans have health insurance or “I’m going to use my power as president to take your health care away from you.” But he would have no such power. Lawmakers have health coverage granted by law, not by executive fiat.

Edwards’ Empty Threat November 13, 2007

McCain’s Supply-side Spin

McCain claimed the major tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 “dramatically increased revenues” and that tax cuts in general increase revenues. Not true. The Congressional Budget Office, the Treasury Department, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers and a former Bush administration economist all said that tax cuts lead to revenues that are lower than they otherwise would have been – even if they spur some economic growth.

Supply-side Spin June 11, 2007

McCain’s Impossible Energy Dream

McCain promised that if elected he’d set up a massive government program to develop alternate energy sources and “we will in five years become oil independent.” But the U.S. imports two-thirds of its oil, and dependence is growing. Experts we consulted said McCain’s five-year goal is an impossibility. “There’s just no way,” said Frank Verrastro, director of the Energy and National Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “You can’t institute technological change that quickly.” Studies assessing how to achieve energy independence set target dates ranging from 2025 to 2040.

Republicans Debate in Iowa December 12, 2007

Scott Olson/Getty Images
Biden’s Bogus Labor Boast

Sen. Joe Biden claimed during a Democratic forum to have a labor record equal to or better than all the candidates present that evening:

Biden: Look at our records. There’s no one on this stage, mainly because of my longevity, that has a better labor record than me.

Actually, all the candidates on the stage had a better lifetime labor record than Biden, as measured by the AFL-CIO’s ratings of Senate and House votes. Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Edwards had the best ratings, tied at 97 percent for their congressional careers. Biden’s lifetime rating brought up the rear at 85 percent.

AFL-CIO Democratic Forum August 8, 2007

Democratic Hot Air on Medicare

Democrats made a false promise to senior citizens by claiming that they had a painless way to bring about lower prices on pharmaceuticals. Michigan Rep. John Dingell summed up his party’s empty promise during House debate on their bill, H.R. 4:

Dingell: This legislation is simple and common sense. It will deliver lower premiums to the seniors, lower prices at the pharmacy and savings for all taxpayers.

That claim was contradicted by a number of experts including the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office and the chief actuary of the Medicare system. Both said the bill wouldn’t bring the lower prices Democrats promised, because it wouldn’t have allowed the federal government to set up a “formulary” of approved medications for Medicare, such as the one the Veterans Administration uses to squeeze price concessions from drug companies for the drugs it covers. Formularies can be unpopular with patients if preferred drugs aren’t covered. The Democratic bill would require federal officials to negotiate while denying them any leverage. The bill passed the House but the Senate took no action.
Medicare Hot Air January 17, 2007

Bush Baloney on Children’s Health

President Bush falsely claimed that a proposal to expand the 10-year-old federal SCHIP program “would result in taking a program meant to help poor children and turning it into one that covers children in households with incomes of up to $83,000 a year.” That wasn’t true. Nothing in the proposal would have forced coverage for families earning $83,000 a year.

Actually, the Urban Institute estimated that 70 percent of children who would gain coverage under the bill that Bush attacked (and later vetoed) are in families earning half the $83,000 figure Bush used. One state, New York, had proposed (under current law) to allow families of four with incomes up to $82,600 a year to be eligible, but the administration successfully prevented that from happening.

Furthermore, the program wasn’t aimed at “poor” children as Bush claimed. Those in poverty generally are covered under Medicaid already. SCHIP was aimed at children in families without health coverage and with incomes that are above the poverty level.

Bush’s False Claims About Children’s Health Insurance September 21, 2007

Bush’s Iraqi Exaggerations

Bush played loose with the facts in an address address to the nation on Iraq. He said “36 nations … have troops on the ground in Iraq.” In fact, his own State Department put the number at 25. The White House later said the president was counting some nations that had troops in the country temporarily as part of a military exercise. Bush also said the city of Baqubah in Diyala province was “cleared.” But the Washington Post quoted a State Department official as saying the security situation there wasn’t stable at the time.

Operation Iraqi Gloss-Over September 14, 2007

Off-Base About Offshoring

An ad by a labor union PAC supporting Democratic presidential candidate Edwards in Iowa implied that the closing of a Maytag factory in the state and the loss of 1,800 jobs were due to “tax breaks to companies that move jobs offshore.” And it said Edwards would end such breaks. But the jobs didn’t move offshore. They were sent to Ohio. And eliminating the “tax breaks” in question probably wouldn’t do much to keep jobs in the U.S.

Not Working 4 Edwards December 19, 2007

“Lawsuit Abuse” Nonsense

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce ran a TV ad claiming that “lawsuit abuse” is costing “your family” $3,500 a year. But that figure came from a study estimating the cost of all suits, not just abusive ones. The author of the study called the chamber’s ad “misleading.”

A False Ad About ‘Lawsuit Abuse’ May 11, 2007

by Brooks Jackson, with the staff of FactCheck.org

So, there you have it..all the lies and bs from both sides of the aisle..it’s a doozy ain’t it?

To the radical right: Your racism is showing

Wednesday, December 5th, 2007

I wrote yesterday about Mychal Bell, he of the Jena 6, and his plea bargain to a charge of simple battery, after his court case for attempted murder was tossed out. I thought about how the radical right has risen up lately to bitch and complain about the massive protests held in Jena LA regarding the racist rightwingers overt racism and inequality in the justice arena.

Seems I am not the only one that has sat up and taken notice. The TomPaine.com article really set me on edge as I read it, noting how horrible it actually has become since all hell broke loose in Jena LA.

The NYT has done a comprehensive writeup as well on how far the fuckwits of the lunatic fringe are willing to go to stifle the voices that are protesting the racism and the problems within our justice system with regards to people of color. Read this and weep for our country:

 

But since the huge Sept. 20 rally in Jena, La., where tens of thousands protested what they saw as racism in the prosecution of six black youths known as the “Jena 6,” this country has seen a rash of as many as 50 to 60 noose incidents. Last Tuesday, for example, a city employee in Slidell, La., was fired after being accused of hanging a noose at a job site a few days earlier.

 

If that fact doesn’t bother you, I don’t know what will my dear reader. Since the 1880’s until the 1960’s there were around 4700 men and women lynched in our country.

 

Read that again: 4700 men and women were lynched in these United States of America. 70% of the victims were of course black. Is it a wonder then why the noose strikes terror in the hearts of African Americans?

 

These ‘noose’ incidents are not just occurring in the South either. As the TomPaine writeup states: incidents are also being reported in places like Minneapolis; Cicero, Ill.; Pittsburgh; Philadelphia; Newark; Baltimore; and New London, Conn.(emphasis mine)

 

The Southern Poverty Law Center tracks hate crimes and hate groups. The SPLC’s Intelligence Project director, Mark Potok has this for us, regarding hate crimes and their rise:

 

These incidents are worrying, but even more so is the social reality they reflect. The level of hate crimes in the United States is astoundingly high — more than 190,000 incidents per year, according to a 2005 Department of Justice study.

 

And the number of hate groups, according to the annual count by the Southern Poverty Law Center, has shot up 40 percent in recent years, from 602 groups in 2000 to 844 in 2006.

 

It seems that the September rally in Jena — much as it was seen by many civil rights activists as the beginning of a new social movement — signaled not a renewed march toward racial and social justice, but a surprisingly broad and deep white backlash against the gains of black America.

 

So, it seems we are going backwards when it comes to equality among the races doesn’t it? Thousands of individuals rose up to point out the heinous acts in Jena. They pointed out how the law is not meted out evenly in Jena and they did it loud and proud, so the whole world took notice during the September rallies held in Jena LA. I was proud of them all, it made me happy to see that little town inundated with thousands of people, of every color, that wanted to show solidarity with the black teenagers being railroaded through the court system in Jena by a bigoted DA, judge and jury.

 

As a ‘woman of color’, the color brown my dear reader, I have long considered the Republican attacks on illegal immigrants as a bigoted issue that paints brown people as the big brown menace to blame for all things that ail America. The rights attempt to paint this issue as part of the ‘war on terror’ has made me sick to my stomach. Seems I am not alone in that regard either. From the TomPaine writeup:

 

But it’s also becoming true on a broader scale as well, with a rising tide of openly espoused ethnic bigotry manifesting itself in myriad ways, particularly on the immigration front, where Latinos are increasingly targeted by rhetoric emanating from the very highest levels of Republican leadership that manifests itself in a tide of hate crimes; and in the “war on terror,” which has provided for an opening for a variety of right-wing figures to spew hateful anti-Muslim rhetoric, with similarly predictable consequences.

 

Isn’t that interesting? Oh, its very interesting to me. I am glad that people are finally putting two and two together as it were. Even CNN has an article that points out how the FBI has stated that ‘hate crimes’ have jumped Eight Percent in the last year with racial hatred accounting for more than half:

 

Police across the nation reported 7,722 criminal incidents in 2006 targeting victims or property as a result of bias against a particular race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnic or national origin or physical or mental disability.

 

Disgusting no matter how you look at it, unless of course your a rightwing nutjob that still believes that people of color and gays are taking over the nation. It should also be noted that “Only 12,600 of the nation’s more than 17,000 local, county, state and federal police agencies participated in the hate crime reporting program in 2006”, which should also bother the hell out of progressives and people that despise bigotry and racism.

 

You want to know what really jacks my jaw? That people like Bill O’ Reilly feed the bigotry live and in living color nightly via our airwaves. They push the rightwing nutjobs into action with quotes like this one:

 

But do you understand what the New York Times wants, and the far-left want? They want to break down the white, Christian, male power structure, which you’re a part, and so am I, and they want to bring in millions of foreign nationals to basically break down the structure that we have. (emphasis mine)

 

Disgusting on every level wouldn’t you say? We are NOT a nation of just white, Christian, males. We are a melting pot of all colors, genders and sexuality. We are NOT a nation that should be governed by only the “all white boys club”. All of us should receive representation. Every Single Last One of Us. We All pay taxes, we all add to this nation in one way or another and we all deserve to have a voice. Our, the collective ‘our’, taxes are paying the salaries of those congressional representatives and that worthless man we call President. I will be damned if I will shut the fuck up so that the fearmongerer’s among us get to run this nation into the ground and take us back 200 years to when women and blacks were just considered “chattel” to be traded or used as the white, Christian males saw fit.

Crossposted at the UnCapitalist Journal

Third Rail of Immigration Politics

Tuesday, November 20th, 2007

Illegal immigration is a real problem in this nation and no matter how much all of the candidates try to bob and weave away from it, it is still the 400 pound gorilla in your part of America. There are those out there that believe we should buy the Great Wall of China and move it piece by piece to the border with Mexico. There are also those amongst us that believe that the only crime many of these illegal immigrants have committed was not coming here legally. Once here they melt into society and fade in to being just another part of America. Huge crime there.

With neither political party willing to admit that our nations immigration policy is busted they are backing off of the topic because it is the easiest route for their campaign. That sounds similar to what the latest votes on immigration reform were in the house recently. Their changes in position is not about illegal immigrants or the broken policies of the past twenty plus years, it’s about votes. Voters have an opinion and neither side has the guts to stand firmly when it comes to fixing our immigration problem.

With our nation having an illegal immigration problem the candidates are backing up to the safe zone that does not offend illegal immigrants or those that might think the current laws are a joke. Does that not in fact point out that this issue, according to the pull back by the candidates, really is not important to legal immigrants and citizens born in the good old USA?

Candidates Walk a Tightrope on Immigration By MICHAEL LUO
Published: November 18, 2007

THE Republican presidential candidates talk about illegal immigration as if they were in an arms race on toughness. The Democratic candidates have begun to tread more warily on the issue, as their debate last week in Las Vegas showed, but they still favor the language of accommodation over alarm.

Each approach, political strategists and officials warn, could have costs next November. Pollsters on both sides agree there is widespread anxiety, even anger, about the impact of illegal immigration. But an increasingly influential Hispanic electorate could be turned off by a hard line from the party they turned to in increasing numbers in the last two presidential elections.

Much will depend, strategists say, on how the candidates balance their statements.  “A Republican who only talks border control or a Democrat who only talks about benefits and services for illegal immigrants are going to find themselves in a lot of trouble next fall,” said Dan Schnur, a Republican strategist who worked on Senator John McCain’s presidential bid in 2000.

Looking at the Republicans at this point, it is often hard to find much difference among most of the leading contenders. They sound just as tough as the candidate who has been the angriest on immigration, Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado, whose shoestring campaign recently began to run a television commercial in Iowa declaring that Islamic terrorists roam free in the United States because of an unsecured border. - New York Times

Maybe we should just all face the facts, while Mitt is down in Miami insulting legal immigrants in their native tongue, and Hillary is off car pooling with her latest potential voter base, the rest of us will be wondering where the 200,000 plus buses are to deport the current illegal’s. Somebody check the bus schedule but I don’t see it on the listing I have.

While many folks would be tempted to vote for the first person to come up with a plan to have our military (What’s left of it anyway) take full possession of Laidlaw, Greyhound, City of New York, Chicago, Houston, LA, Seattle, Atlanta, Miami, Boston Transit systems, and Durham bus companies to expedite the exit strategy for all illegal immigrants that is not the answer. We need a mad man’s plan to fix illegal immigration once and for all and I have just the plan…

While Rudi and John McCain are ready to build the next wall of China on our southern border I propose seizing Home Depot, Lowes and Ace Hardware to get the job done, I might want to add Toy’s R Us, Best Buy and Circuit City for all the high tech electronics needed to maintain the second greatest wall for surveillance and entertainment purposes. We could sell the rights to the news networks or comedy shows. I’m guessing we will need about one million plus people to just watch the southern border based on three shifts round the clock with seventy or so holidays a year and six weeks vacation time each. We are going to need a payroll system to pay them all.

Bank of America should be seized by our government because they have that pesky America thing in their name. They should be honored that my plan chooses to invade them to save America. We will have to change all the signs out front to Border Under Revolutionary Patrol Institution for No Gringo’s or BURPING for short. Most of their customers are used to that happening every six or seven weeks anyway so the transition should be smooth. It should not take more than six or seven divisions to make them do the job for us. Losses to our six division of IRS workers will be high but that is the risk we will just have to take to save America from the plague of illegal immigrants. Then we seize all of the banks along the southern border and turn all of the branches into military outposts with gun barrels facing every direction. We won’t make the same mistake the Germans or French or whoever the hell it was with the marginal line… This is a two-fur because bank robberies will be drastically reduced at all BURPING branches.

We will need to feed these folks protecting our border so everyone in California will need to either get out or be enlisted in the Workers Environmental Nutritional Defense of Your Safety, yup WENDYS for short. We are going to need to level Los Angeles and San Francisco and Sacramento and most of the state to grow buns and pickles and ketchup trees. We may need to save Orange County because we hear that Sesame Seeds roam wild there and only the good ranchers of the area know how to round them up to milk them. Then again, we need someone to administer all the workers at WENDYS too.

We can not overlook healthcare for all of these border guarding protectors of America. For that we move Walter Reed to the border as an example of what kind of care you will get if you dare to cross our borders or guard it. What is good enough for our troops is good enough for the ones lucky enough to make it through the entire state of Texas that will be land mined. This may pose a problem for commuters in many of the larger cities but our border is more important. My apologies to the memory of Lady Bird Johnson and all her flowers but I think they actually were drawing the immigrants to our border.

I’m having a problem with Florida, should we just sink it and make all of the Snow Birds move back to where they came from or just sell the damn state to South America. That might offset some of the costs of a real system or plan that might actually rebuild Louisiana. I here they need some kind of a drainage system or levee or something down there but that is just a rumor.

I’ve got work to do on this plan. If my plan to invade all of them bus companies fail I have to have a counter plan and Kansas is just the right shape for a mega prison for anyone daring to object to my plan to solve the illegal immigration problem. Any Republican candidate for President can feel free to steal my notes here.

Holy crapola, while I have a plan to save the southern border from being over run, the northern border is at risk. I need to get Rush and Billy O on the phone. Together we can save America from future Americans!

OR

We could fix the immigration laws and enforce them! The current law(s) do not work, they are not enforced and it is a joke. Is amnesty the way to go? Ronald Reagan thought so! Is a plan that makes the unknown resident known workable? Yes, it is! How that actually happens is in the fine print that is scary to all of the candidates in fear of pissing off whom? Hispanics? What about the Irish, Polish, Armenians, English, French, Italian, Russian, Portuguese, Germans, Lithuanians, Swedes, Canadians, Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Africans, and this list goes on for all nations of the world, are we not all Americans too?

Stop blaming the majority of illegal immigrants for your lot in life’s problems because the politicians tell you that they are to blame. It’s so easy to sling mud and eventually it sticks if you believe the sound bite. There is a big difference in telling you who to blame and the people that are entrusted with your vote that are supposed to protect you as an American that will still do nothing to solve the issue of illegal immigration.

Show me a candidate that tells you the truth that our nation needs a constant flow of immigrants both legal and illegal and that is the candidate that knows that America will constantly need a source of cheap labor with a goal that their children will have a better life than themselves. Parent’s sacrifice for their children. Funny thing is, my parents wanted that for me and they were born in America.

This is the land of opportunity after all. We all came from somewhere and that was the goal of our forefathers. My full apology to native American Indians of course. That is another post for another day though…

Papamoka

Originally posted at Papamoka Straight Talk…

Our Immigration Laws are Busted, Small Business Owners Must Fix IT?

Wednesday, October 10th, 2007

When in doubt our brightest of the lawmakers in Washington have pushed even more off of the Federal Govern-Mint onto the States and now the small business owners of America. With their failure to fix the immigration laws that they are supposed to enact, they figured that passing the buck was a far easier pill to swallow.

Judge Breyer from San Fransisco was right to rule as he did. It is time to face the problem and make it right. The Congress and the President need to put in place an immigration policy that works. Over at the Los Angeles Times they have this about the Judges ruling…

Illegal hiring crackdown is blockedA federal judge stops a controversial program to punish companies based on discrepancies between their workers’ names and Social Security numbers.

By Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
12:56 PM PDT, October 10, 2007

In a major defeat for the Bush administration, a federal judge ruled today that the government could not use mismatched Social Security data to ferret out illegal immigrants from the workplace.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer issued a preliminary injunction that blocks the Department of Homeland Security from starting a controversial program to punish companies based on discrepancies between their workers’ names and Social Security numbers.

“Altering the status quo would subject employers to greater compliance costs and employees to an increased risk of termination,” Breyer wrote in his 22-page ruling.

The injunction will remain in place until Breyer holds further hearings and decides whether to strike down the proposed Homeland Security rule permanently.

The Social Security Administration had planned to begin sending out “no-match” letters in September, and the Department of Homeland Security had warned companies that they could face criminal or civil sanctions if they did not clear up the discrepancies within 90 days. The administration planned to send about 140,000 letters, affecting more than 8 million workers.

Labor and immigrant rights groups, who sued the government to stop the crackdown, called the decision a major victory. They had argued that the new policy was unlawful and that U.S. citizens and documented workers would be fired as a result of the proposed rule.

“This is a particularly important day for the labor movement because the Social Security no-match letters have long been used to defeat worker organizing,” said Ana Avendano of the AFL-CIO. - LA Times

Thank you Judge Charles Breyer for laying the smack down on another policy concerning immigration by the Bush administration, not my problem, kind of busy in Iraq, but I will return your call later philosophy. America has an illegal immigration problem and the President wants to put the ownership on business owners? Let me make myself clear, if you as a business owner hire and illegal immigrant then you are breaking the law. If the government hands you questionable Social Security numbers and then tells you that you have ninety days to fire the person or prove that they are in fact a legal immigrant, is that not the govern-mint’s job to begin with? Heavy fines will follow if your employee can not prove citizenship.

Ask yourself this question? You’ve lived in America all your life, how can you prove that you are a citizen if your employer asked you to do so? Other than a birth certificate or your Social Security card you can not. If one or two of those documents is questionable by your government then both are questionable. Parading your Mom or Dad into the human resource office does not count either. For all intents and purposes, I could not find my birth certificate if you asked me for it right now. Same goes for my original Social Security card. I know they are here somewhere but I have not needed them in decades. Your job, your families livelihood is on the line and the decision to fire you or keep you on is on the line. Prove that you are an American citizen!

Everyone over at INS should get a pink slip next payday! For that matter we should fire all of the border patrol guards too because they failed to check for proper paperwork as the immigrants ILLEGALLY walked into America. Lock up all the Mom and Pop business owners and throw away the key. Mom and Pop are the ones to blame for illegal immigration is what the administration is really saying to the American people. Fine their sorry butt’s out of business. And yet they are a pro business administration?

Bush and Homeland Security on immigration is a joke. Mom and Pop don’t have the resources or the tools to handle who is legal and who is not. For some odd reason the war on terror and everyone we are supposed to be afraid of is not a high priority for this President when it comes to immigration policy. Putting illegal immigration at the feet and ownership of small businesses or big business is dead wrong. That is the job of our government PERIOD!

I’m not a basher of Legal Immigrants but I do have concerns when people come to our shores illegally. Granted, our nation and our way of life offers many opportunities to all and if you follow our laws then you are more than welcome to begin your travels and experience on becoming an American citizen. This policy deserved to be struck down because the Federal Government policy sucks and does not work, it is busted. Rather than fixing it they passed the blame down and now it is Mom and Pop’s fault.

Thought for the post here from the political mind. All you illegal immigrants that might vote Democrat raise your hands? All you illegal immigrants that might vote Republican raise your hands? All of you Democrats get the hell out! Republicans, you can stay but we are going to be watching you.

That my friends is the mine field that is Washington politics. If you were a national politician would you want to touch this topic? That is the dilemma we face here with our nations immigration policy. Nobody has the guts to call it like it is for fear of losing large new immigrant blocks of voters.

Our nations immigration policy is busted and the only way to fix it is in the White House and in the Congress. Ownership of this issue belongs there. Stop passing the damn buck. Somebody FedX from the Smithsonian Harry Truman’s desk top statement to the White House!

Papamoka

Cross Posted at Papamoka Straight Talk 

Immigration and Strongly Worded Politics Equals Disaster

Wednesday, September 26th, 2007

Quite some time ago I wrote a piece on Hazelton, PA and Farmers Branch, TX with its enforcement of punishing landlords and employers who cater to illegal immigrants. On paper the idea is a disaster and in practice it kills local economies. The proof is in the latest report from the New York times on communities that adopted strongly worded local laws that forced the law not on the illegal immigrants but the people that might provide housing or employment to them.

Well the plan to kick out all the illegal immigrants worked and they moved out. Job well done to any local government that took this hard line stance or should I say you get what you enacted! So why are all those mom and pop shops downtown closing? Might it be that the townspeople fired some of their largest customers? Could it be that the same people that were buying in their shops every day as community members were forcibly evicted. Mega DUH!

Towns Rethink Laws Against Illegal Immigrants

By KEN BELSON and JILL P. CAPUZZO
Published: September 26, 2007

RIVERSIDE, N.J., Sept. 25 — A little more than a year ago, the Township Committee in this faded factory town became the first municipality in New Jersey to enact legislation penalizing anyone who employed or rented to an illegal immigrant.

Within months, hundreds, if not thousands, of recent immigrants from Brazil and other Latin American countries had fled. The noise, crowding and traffic that had accompanied their arrival over the past decade abated.

The law had worked. Perhaps, some said, too well.

With the departure of so many people, the local economy suffered. Hair salons, restaurants and corner shops that catered to the immigrants saw business plummet; several closed. Once-boarded-up storefronts downtown were boarded up again.

Meanwhile, the town was hit with two lawsuits challenging the law. Legal bills began to pile up, straining the town’s already tight budget. Suddenly, many people — including some who originally favored the law — started having second thoughts.

So last week, the town rescinded the ordinance, joining a small but growing list of municipalities nationwide that have begun rethinking such laws as their legal and economic consequences have become clearer.

“I don’t think people knew there would be such an economic burden,” said Mayor George Conard, who voted for the original ordinance. “A lot of people did not look three years out.” - New York Times

What kills me about this story is the simple fact that this is a FEDERAL GOVERNMENT problem! Local communities can enact any law they want against illegal aliens but in the same sense the community they live in will pay the price for economics 101 lessons of the local government politicians.

Illegal and legal immigrants live in one community and for the most part are peaceful participants in the world they live. Extremist will label every immigrant a terrorist and all of them are to blame for your lot in life. Wake the hell up people and look in the damn mirror. They are us! The only difference is time.

I tend to find it humorous that towns that kicked out the illegal immigrants are now boarding up their businesses. When the people that wanted them out made it illegal for them to be there the illegal aliens and legal immigrants sort of voted with their feet and immigrated out.

Board up the car parts store, poor people like new immigrants and illegal immigrants prefer to fix the old Chevy. Board up the local corner store that sold bread and milk into the wee hours of the morning because the new immigrants and illegal immigrants work long hours into the night. Board up the local shops that cater to ethnic foods and a touch of back home for legal and illegal immigrants. Coffee shops, board them up too! Jose and Miguel don’t live here any more who used to stop in every single day for a quick bite to eat and a coffee. The trickle down gets worse.

Now that all them pesky illegal immigrants are gone we don’t need those five extra cops that used to stop at the coffee shop on their breaks. Ten of the teachers at the local school can be let go because the kids are no longer there. Close up one or two of the fire stations because the need is obviously no longer there. Realty companies can start laying off sales staff because there is nobody buying the houses at the lower end of the market. No lower end market house sales means new houses will start to fade in need. Carpenters can’t find work. Over at the supermarket they can lay off many of the stores shelf stockers because the food is just not moving anymore. You get the idea.

America needs an immigration policy that is feasible and will be adaptable to the illegal aliens that are already here. This should not be the responsibility of any local communities or for that matter the states problem. This issue and the failure to fix it rests with the current President, his predecessors and those that wish to follow him in the next election.

Immigration can never be a NIMBY policy simply because they, the immigrants, legal or illegal are a large part of the economy. Thirty communities have proven this point and now they are closing down main street. Many communities will rescind the laws passed only to find that the immigrants no longer wish to be a part of that community. I know I would not!

Papamoka

Cross posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

Ahmadinejad, The Voice of Iran?

Monday, September 24th, 2007

Tell me that George W. Bush is the voice of America and you will get an earful from over seventy percent of the population. Tell me that Ahmadinejad is the voice of the Iranian people and you will here this Irish American with his Iranian American friends that will have an earful for you.

On the other hand, we have to listen to Bush with his theory on who is a terrorist. This is America and the man is welcome within the 25 miles of the United Nations because we are a nation of diplomats and peace keepers. We used to be anyway, and I’m sticking with my theory that we are a nation of peace keepers.

Let us just put this visit by the distinguished leader of Iran as what it is. It’s a rock star tour without the music, without the roadies that follow the bands, without the groupies and head bangers. Like Madonna or the Rolling Stones he is out on tour selling his music but the sad fact is that America can’t stand the lyrics. Something about September Eleventh and the chorus just doesn’t work.

What does work for him in his favor is that he has the guts to even come to this nation, a nation at war with world terrorism and speak at one of the greatest institutions our country has. Not just speak, he answered questions from the students. Whether they liked the answers or not was who the man is. Over at the Washington Post they have this great coverage and must read…

Ahmadinejad Met With Protests, Criticism at Columbia University
Iranian President Defends Country’s Human Rights Record
By Robin Wright and William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, September 24, 2007; 5:26 PM
NEW YORK, Sept. 24 — Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was greeted with student protests and withering public criticism during a visit to Columbia University Monday in which he defended his government’s human rights record, denounced Israel and rejected U.S. efforts to restrict Iran’s nuclear program.

Speaking to students and faculty at Columbia a day ahead of his scheduled address to the United Nations General Assembly, the hard-line Iranian president also asserted that his people, including women, “enjoy the highest levels of freedom,” and he claimed that homosexuality does not exist in his country. - Washington Post

Okay, this is where I change my opinion of this guy from Iran that says he speaks for all Iranian’s and wants a peaceful world for all men and woman. There are no homosexuals in Iran? Did they move out? I have to wonder if they moved or were just shot? If this guy isn’t in the closet then there is a serious issue with his entire concept of humanity and the percentages of life on this planet. Something does not smell right and it isn’t the dumpster at the back of the United Nations.

It gets better or it gets worse depending on your political philosophy. You know how history has recorded the deaths at the hands of the Nazi’s. It did not happen that way according to this President of Iran. Nope, never happened. No wait, he’s changing his story. But you have to look at Palestine to prove it! HUH?

Ahmadinejad, who in the past has argued that Israel should be “wiped off the map,” repeated his assertions that the Holocaust should be researched “from different perspectives” and said Palestinians should not be “paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with.” - Washington Post

Rather than thinking that all Iranian people back this man one hundred percent we should look at him as not a man of the world stage that he is performing on. Reality, facts, and the facts of history are obviously not in the hallowed halls that is the Iranian Government if this man is the voice of Iran.

One of my closest friends that came from Iran and became an American who is also Jewish told me of the non stop persecution of people for any reason if you did not follow the set down by the religious government. That is why his family came to America. Same scenario was happening in the 1600’s here on our shores and the same thing will continue here as long as freedom is our beacon to the world. Religious persecution and personal sexual orientation is not in Iran because they force you out. Welcome to America.

One last thought. While this son of a bitch Ahmadinejad is preaching there are no homosexuals in Iran, how many other facets of human kind are not allowed in Iran. In the same breath you have to wonder how much of his personal philosophy is just right in line with our own President?

America used to be about diplomacy and talking to people and settling our differences. Even Ronald Regan talked with the Evil Empire! Bush talks to no one, and not one person listens in turn.

If our nation has no diplomacy or reaction to settle our differences around the world then America is no better than the administration that was Nazi Germany before World War II in Berlin.

Papamoka
Cross posted at Papmoka Straight Talk.

Got Cancer Amigo? Your Gonna Die!

Friday, September 21st, 2007

I’m of the strongest opinion that our nations immigration policy is not only broken but the damn thing has been in the trash bin for twenty years and nobody will tie up the damn bag and take it to the curb for pick up. George Bush’s style of governing (State side) is to push back the broken policy systems in the federal government for almost everything back onto the states. From education to immigration he has pushed back and stuffed down the throats of the states every federally mandated law but his check is never in the mail to back it up.

It will take years for our nation’s FEDERAL Government to develop an immigration policy that actually works and until they do the states will be forced fed and pay for that broken policy and that is not right. From guarding the borders to the expensive emergency room medical care of illegal immigrants, Bush isn’t paying for it so the States or private business will have too! I’m just guessing that this is the conservative in Bush trying to (wink, wink) save the peoples hard earned tax dollars.

Over at the New York Times they have the latest on Bush pretending to be a conservative by knuckling down on Chemo Medicaid payments to the hospitals that treat illegal immigrants in the emergency room with cancer. His check isn’t going to clear on this one due to a stop payment order by the President…

Rule Limits Emergency Care for Immigrants

By SARAH KERSHAW
Published: September 22, 2007

The federal government has told New York State health officials that chemotherapy, which had been covered for illegal immigrants under a government-financed program for emergency medical care, does not qualify for coverage. The decision sets the stage for a battle between the state and federal governments over how medical emergencies are defined.

The change comes amid a fierce national debate on providing medical care to immigrants, with New York State officials and critics saying this latest move is one more indication of the Bush administration’s efforts to exclude the uninsured from public health services.

Snip Si Casa

In the wake of stricter federal rules, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and 20 other states have extended full Medicaid coverage, using only state money, to some immigrants who do not qualify for federal aid. Under federal law, proof of citizenship is required for full Medicaid coverage, but not for emergency coverage.

But some states with growing immigrant populations, like Georgia and Arizona, have themselves moved to limit coverage under emergency Medicaid, leading to intense opposition from immigrant health advocates. - New York Times

I have to back up on this story for a bit but I’ll get back into it. I promise. If President Bush and the Congress had taken care of the border problem and passed legislation that made sense, then the “Trickle down” effect of illegal immigrants would not have to be pushed back on the states. Instead, we have every single state trying to stop the flow of the Rio Grande with paper towels. If President Bush and the Congress paid a little bit more attention about what is going on at home rather than trying to save the Middle East then their popularity might be higher than a rats ass.

Back to the post… I just get a thought and the fingers type.

Every single person that goes to medical school to become a doctor takes an oath. It isn’t like the one President Bush took where he can define the Constitution and twist it to see how it fits him today. Nope, doctors take an oath to always care for the patient as best they can and to save lives. It isn’t the Hypolitcal oath. I’m thinking the oath that doctors take somehow is above any oath Prescident (misspelled on purpose) Bush took as President.

Our nation has an immigration policy problem. Our Congress and our President think that the states can pay the sins of our lost federal government. They can not and should not have to.

Illegal immigration is a serious issue and as much as I am a Democrat, I want my nation and its borders secured. Stop the problem where it begins and fix the policies that will effect the people already here. There is no magic wand or enough busses to send all of the illegal immigrants back. We more or less own them as a people because our federal government refused to legislate on the issue of immigration. This failure is owned by both sides of the political aisle.

What I see as a result of this President and the Congress failure to act on immigration is the prosecution of some doctor or nurse somewhere in America for failing to perform their duties to save a human life because a green card or legal citizen document was not presented at the emergency room. For all I know it has already happened.

Papamoka

Cross Posted at Papamoka Straight Talk

Spelling Out the Obvious

Friday, September 21st, 2007

This special issue of “DUUUHHH!!!” has TWO cover stories. First: Traffic is getting worse. Hold the phone! Who knew??? They had to do a study to find this out? Christ, all they had to do was get behind the wheel and try to go somewhere.

And the other earthshaking revelation is: Republicans might be losing support among Hispanic voters. [Gasp!] Say it isn’t so! Nobody was more shocked by this possibility than Tom “Kill-All-The-Mud-Races” Tancredo (R-Wingnut).

Yes, illegal immigration is a serious issue with no simple solutions. Bring on the demagogues. The outcry against illegal immigrants is sort of like the fury against school busing in the 1960s and ‘70s (speeding up integration by busing students away from their own neighborhoods and into other school districts). A lot of the resentment was legitimate and not based on racism. But the George Wallaces of the day sure got lots of political mileage out of it. They could whip millions of rednecks into a frenzy just by going on and on about “that #!$#%$#$!! busing.”

Unlike today’s Republicans, George Wallace didn’t act puzzled when Blacks didn’t vote for him.

The most rightwing elements of the Republican Party are trying to get the same political mileage out of illegal immigration. They don’t need to spew out stereotypes and racial slurs. All they have to do is keep hammering away at “them” and “illegals” and “guarding our border,” and millions of voters go into a white-hot fury. Like with school busing, a lot of this fury is legitimate and not based on racism.

But the Republicans are purposely using this issue to fan the flames and court every single-digit-IQ sister-humping mouthbreathing xenophobe in the country. And then they wonder why they’re losing Hispanic voters.


Fish.Travel