Thursday, August 09, 2007

Scapegoats (R) Us

Warning: Partisan pontification ahead.

I know this will strike many of my friends on the Republican side of the aisle as unfair, but having been the recipient of such cynical political posturing, I don't mind saying that the GOP's penchant for creating and then campaigning on the pledge to contain or eradicate some dangerous "other" in our midst is the single greatest reason I don't trust their party as a whole. The approach is antithetical to my belief that "united we stand" (in which I assume "we" is inclusive), and perhaps most offensive to me is how in private (I lived and worked in the cesspool of national politics we call the nation's capital for five years) many of them will confess to not really feeling personally the way they campaign, especially when it comes to the party's rhetoric surrounding a presidential campaign season's chosen scapegoat (when the stakes are so high, good soldiers must simply fall in line).

The last time around (2004) the main domestic scapegoats were "the gays" (which reminds me, you have to see
this video). But, even though I expect plenty of gay bashing from the GOP in the 2008 elections, it'll be somewhat tempered by the dual facts that 1) after you propose removing every book from a library that was written by a homo or features a gay character, you haven't really left your fellow gay haters much in the way of novel legislation to campaign on, and 2) shining too bright a light on the threat that gays pose to "normal" Americans risks reminding the base of the seemingly never ending parade of closet cases in the GOP who just yesterday were right there beside the rest of them fighting the scourge (and, let's face it, eventually even the dimmest among them will connect the dots and realize that means there are probably others right there beside them, or ---gasp---standing behind them, at the "Blame the Gays" rally).

But not to worry, the GOP already has its next main scapegoat lined up, the next biggest threat to our way of life, the scourge for 2008: "the illegals." Now, I'll be fair and note that I believe we have some significant problems with our immigration laws at the moment. But I also strongly believe that resolving them is possible without the sort of demonization we're seeing the Right stir up in its
radio hack shows and blogs. Of course, Congress is working (heh) on the issue, but with the true Red-White-and-Blue believers in no mood to compromise (and I believe it's fair to assume that's because they're more interested in using immigrants as a wedge issue than they are in actually solving the problems), a national, compassionate approach is not on the horizon. Therefore, we're seeing a hodge-podge of local and regional initiatives that reveal a hatred so vicious it quite literally frightens me.

I read a bit of graffiti the other day calling for civil war in the US to stop immigrants from taking over, claiming that the number of "illegals" was higher than the total number of police and military in the country (implying that immigrants could band together and overthrow the country). It was so paranoid and hateful I seriously considered calling the police to have them track down the author before he/she hurt someone. But in the absence of comprehensive unified legislation, and given the fear being mongered by the Right's PR machine, is it any wonder average citizens are dreaming up their own (twisted) solutions? But as horrific as such paranoid mutterings are, what's actually happening officially is even more inhuman.

The New York Times nailed the resulting atmosphere and ad hoc strategy perfectly in an
editorial titled "The Misery Strategy" today:

The path the country has set on since the defeat of immigration reform in the Senate in June enshrines enforcement and punishment above all else. It is narrow, shortsighted, disruptive and self-defeating. On top of that, it won’t work.

What it will do is unleash a flood of misery upon millions of illegal immigrants. For the ideologues who have pushed the nation into this position, that is more than enough reason to plunge ahead.
[...]
The federal government’s abandonment of comprehensive reform has been matched by unprecedented crackdowns at the state and local level. Lawmakers this year have introduced more than 1,400 immigration-related bills in all 50 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and enacted 170 of them. Many of the bills severely restrict where immigrants can live and work, and leave them vulnerable to exploitation and fearful of the police. It’s the federal approach of raids and aggression, metastasized across the continent.

The country will have a long time to watch this approach as it fails. The politicians who killed the Senate bill for offering “amnesty” have never offered a workable alternative. Their one big idea is that harsh, unrelenting enforcement at the border, in the workplace and in homes and streets would dry up opportunities for illegal immigrants and eventually cause the human tide to flow backward. That would be true only if life for illegal immigrants in America could be made significantly more miserable than life in, say, rural Guatemala or the slums of Mexico City. That will take a lot of time and a lot of misery to pull that off in a country that has tolerated and profited from illegal labor for generations. [emphasis mine]
That bears repeating. The current, piecemeal strategy, spearheaded and/or supported by Republican Senators, like John McCain, Jon Kyl and Lindsey Graham, and even reluctantly tolerated by moderates Republicans like Arlen Specter, is to create a permanent noncitizen immigrant underclass, and make life more miserable for them here than it was in the country they left to come here. In other words, to create a scapegoat and collectively and systematically oppress them.

God reserves a very special place in Hell for folks who operate like that.

Labels:

40 Comments:

Blogger Lisa Hunter said...

You know what? It's already hard to be an immigrant (even a legal one) without piling on more obstacles. People who work back-breaking jobs, struggle with an unfamiliar language, and endure so many dangers to be in America fit my definition of patriot.

8/09/2007 09:39:00 AM  
Anonymous jec said...

Yeah, I've seen this one coming for a while: Illegal aliens are the new gays for the 2008 election cycle. Unfortunately, the Right is still better at framing and controlling the message, so this just might work (again). I haven't seen much on the creation of a counter-message or what it is.

When people are hurting financially, they look for someone to blame; some "other" must be responsible for their misfortune. The Right's anti-illegals message plays perfectly into that mindset.

8/09/2007 09:41:00 AM  
Blogger Edward_ said...

It's already hard to be an immigrant (even a legal one) without piling on more obstacles.

Yes, I know, having lived abroad for a number of years: something that would lessen this tendency to scapegoat immigrants if more Americans were to do so.

Unfortunately, the Right is still better at framing and controlling the message, so this just might work (again). I haven't seen much on the creation of a counter-message or what it is.

I think it's time to get to the root of the practice and expose it for what it is, a wedge-issue-creating modus operandi that any self-respecting Republican should be ashamed to be associated with. In other words, target the GOPers who are above such cynicism and get them to distance themselves from it in hopes that it will eventually disintigrate from the inside out. Calling it was it is, consistently, is probably much better than attacking the whole party (as I've done here, admittedly), as that only results in them circling their wagons to defend their fellow Elephants' honor.

8/09/2007 10:15:00 AM  
Blogger George said...

It's racism rearing it''s ugly head again.

8/09/2007 10:20:00 AM  
Blogger Joanne Mattera said...

I'm wondering about Lou Dobbs, who is bully-pulpit vocal about his anti-immigration views on CNN, and about the talkshow hosts I don't listen to, and republicans in and out of Congress: Where exactly do they think they came from?

Given the enormous waves of immigrants into the US since its founding (by um, immigrants), a very large percentage of Americans are descendants of people who came from somewhere else--unless they are the descendants of folks who were brought here in chains, or of Native Americans, who have been treated like immigrants.

We need everyone who comes from someone who came from somewhere else to say, "I am the child...grandchild...great grandchild of immigrants." Kinda like coming out.

And then we work to elect the public servants who will bring a non-hysterical perspective to the issue.

I am a lesbian granddaughter of Italian immigrants, so these are issues for me. Can you tell? (P.S. Grandpa Antonio came here senza documentazione when he was 14.)

8/09/2007 10:39:00 AM  
Blogger George said...

‘Illegal immigrant’ doesn’t it just roll off your tongue, like ‘illegal drugs’ or ‘illegal sex’.

As a scapegoat, they are the perfect victims, they don’t speak the language and they can’t vote.

So what is real reason for making this an issue today?

It’s more than just framing something adroitly, it’s intended to deflect attention from somewhere else, where or what?

8/09/2007 11:03:00 AM  
Blogger Chris Rywalt said...

I think the whole Left/Right dichotomy is perpetuated by the ruling class, which is above such worthless distinctions. It's professional wrestling for people who think they're too smart for professional wrestling.

Everyone should finally come out and admit that America -- capitalism in general -- couldn't operate without illegal immigrants. The United States has always relied on an oppressed underclass to maintain the "quality of life" for its upper class.

Arguing over how exactly this underclass should be properly oppressed allows people to label themselves as Right or Left, Conservative or Liberal. This is helpful because then all you have to is throw your shit at anyone wearing the wrong label. Everyone wins!

I mean, everyone loses. Well, not everyone. Most of us, all the ones killing each other over breadcrumbs under the masters' table, anyway.

8/09/2007 12:15:00 PM  
Blogger Chris Rywalt said...

Joanne sez:
I am a lesbian granddaughter of Italian immigrants

Holy crap, you just made me fall in love with you.

8/09/2007 12:17:00 PM  
Blogger George said...

This isn’t just an issue here in the US, it’s also occurring in Europe. I suspect that the migration of labor may be a result of globalization. Just like capital, labor flows to where the opportunity is. This appears to have always been the case but may be more accentuated at the moment due to the increase in wealth in the industrialized countries.

Never the less, I am still wondering why it is being made such a political issue. The articles Ed linked were appalling, recalling the 1943 Zoot Suit Riots in LA, where the yellow press fanned the problem into full fledged riots. Something similar feels like it is happening now, it important that those involved in fanning this racist response be called out in public for it.

Whatever the social actual problems are, they can be solved in different, more rational and moral way.

8/09/2007 12:51:00 PM  
Blogger George said...

Ran across this article Mexicans Send Less Cash Home, Bad News For All

Bendixen also notes that the anti-immigrant sentiment is a problem for many U.S. communities.

"In many of these cities where immigrants feel unwelcomed and are beginning to leave in large numbers, their economies have collapsed," Bendixen said. "They are living very difficult times because immigrants provided so much of the labor."

8/09/2007 01:49:00 PM  
Blogger zipthwung said...

I had a few jobs that taught me: I'm sure glad I don't have to work in a factory.

One thing is the repetitive nature of the work. Immigrants are great at repetition, because a lot of them come over the border numerous times. This trains them to do the same thing over and over. The ruling class must content themselves with the myth of Sisyphus, which is theorteticly a sound idea, but rolling rocks around is not going to get me my cold macrobrew.

Another thing is the stagnant nature of the career ladder. Many blue collar jobs pay minimum wage, with raises and incentives given to returning workers.

Unlike the opressed native, immigrants are encouraged to change venues every year. This means immigrants get the best of both worlds - a new job every year but with the same skillset.

Part time work where a worker is given a 35 hour flex-time week is another great innovation - it allows the wage earner a break from the daily grind, and with the siesta and long lunches a custom in many latino cultures, the split shift seems like a matter of timing.

I'm not sure whyt the US doesnt allow more French workers into the country - with their high unemployment rate they would make great workers, and the the wage difference could be recouped by increasing the fee for a work visa to say, 1,000 Euros.

8/09/2007 01:51:00 PM  
Blogger nms said...

And so it who is opposed to illegal immigration, I wanted to clarify a few things. First of all, I do not hate illegal immigrants. I do think they are violating the law and should be deported, but other than that I feel they should be treated humanely.

My opposition to illegal immigration does not have a racial basis. If someone enters the country illegally from Ireland, I believe they should be treated the same as an illegal alien from Guatemala.

I also believe it's unfair to classify local initiatives to crack down on illegal immigration as vicious hatred. All these initiatives are trying to do is enforce the law. I really don't understand why American sovereignty has become a dirty word.

8/09/2007 03:13:00 PM  
Blogger nms said...

"And so it" is a typo, what I meant to write was "As Someone." Sorry for the typo.

8/09/2007 03:16:00 PM  
Blogger zipthwung said...

i like Chinese food. Sezchuan usually, because there aren't a lot of options.

If Mexicans want to make me cheap Chinese food, thats ok too.

Let the laws reflect my gustatory desires.

Amen.

8/09/2007 03:17:00 PM  
Blogger zipthwung said...

Fresh Trtillas is a travesty. Chinese people should not be allowed to make Mexican food. No way Jose.

8/09/2007 03:22:00 PM  
Blogger zipthwung said...

Trtillas is a typo, it should read Tortillas. Or Nachos, but thats not a franchise, thats a state of mind.

Speakinf of franchises, check it out - Gap is going Target with the art dealio! Makes me want to put on my khakis, spit polish the jack boots and take it to the streets! Its like when you have altoids and you can't sit down because you have a curiously strong urge to look at visual puns and other interesting meditative objects. Life can be so interesting sometimes, what with all the characters and quirky individuals around. Makes you wonder how this country developed any social sense of nationalism doesn't it?

8/09/2007 03:28:00 PM  
Blogger Edward_ said...

nms,

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

I also believe it's unfair to classify local initiatives to crack down on illegal immigration as vicious hatred.

That was a sloppy conflation on my part, you're right. I'm sorry. The hatred I meant is best illustrated by the rhetoric on the radio shows, blogs, and grafiti I noted.

All these initiatives are trying to do is enforce the law.

As someone who wants to ensure immigrants found living here illegally get treated humanely, though, wouldn't you prefer a comprehensive, compassionate approach? The combination of so many DIY approaches guarantees chaos, and chaos is usually the biggest culprit in cases where immigrants get separated from their families or held in limbo for long periods, etc. Also, as the Times points out, not all of the initiatives are as benign as you suggest:

Many of the bills severely restrict where immigrants can live and work, and leave them vulnerable to exploitation and fearful of the police.

That's hardly humane in my opinion.

I really don't understand why American sovereignty has become a dirty word.

I'd counter that sentiment by noting I really don't understand why "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free." seems to have expired as an American ideology.

8/09/2007 03:34:00 PM  
Blogger Joanne Mattera said...

Perpective, please. The children born here of illegal immigrants become citizens--citizens who are bilingual, thereby enriching our American culture; work hard; pay taxes; integrate into society. Let's not demonize their parents. And let's not deport them.

I understand the need to be watchful of terrorist infiltration. I understand the need for cultural sovreignty(no "honor" killings in the name of a higher power; no genital mutilation) but American culture is ever more expandable and interesting--from language (look at the names of our cities and states, for godsake) to food, to music--as a result of the people who bring their old-country culture to it. Pizza, jazz, salsa; Connecticut, Vermont, Nevada: American, American, American; American, American, American

P.S. Why Chris......(I'm batting my big butch fan as I say this)

8/09/2007 03:40:00 PM  
Blogger George said...

If someone enters the country illegally from Ireland, I believe they should be treated the same as an illegal alien from Guatemala.

Some of my best friends are Mexicans.

Like I said, it’s racist.

8/09/2007 03:47:00 PM  
Blogger nms said...

I don't understand why treating illegal immigrants humanely automatically clashes with enforcing American immigration Law. As long as all American laws are followed and the person accused of being in the country illegally is given a fair deportation hearing, I don't see how that is not humane. I don't think treating illegal immigrants humanely means you have to abrogate American law.

I don't believe the line "give me your poor, etc." has expired. You can be against illegal immigration Indians favor of legal immigration. To classify opponents of illegal immigration as anti-immigrant is unfair and untrue. I do think Lou Dobbs can sometimes be over the top, but I can't remember him ever saying something that I'd classify as anti-immigrant.

Calling for deportation of illegal immigrants does not equal demonization. It is simply asking for application of American immigration Law.

8/09/2007 03:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Magic Carpet Bagger said...

Its just not economicly feasible nms - the US is dependent on foreign labor for its cheap food. If you restrict this flow of cheap labor, as in the linked article, then its not like workers magicly appear. Immigrants do the scut work. These are jobs NO ONE WANTS TO DO. Like cleaning the toilet after happy hour.

SO when small towns take the benign direction from above, no matte rhow well intentioned, it gets translated into zenophobic bigotry.
Prove me wrong.

On another note what about people with legitimate cause (the real tired):

"According to past years, America absorbed many cases which weren't really about asylum, while real persecuted people who waited behind, were tortured or killed. The whole process has to be reviewed thoroughly," he said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250595,00.html

Oh yes, lets wait and wait and wait. The second coming is coming.

8/09/2007 04:04:00 PM  
Anonymous magic carpet bagger said...

I odnt know who gets to do the dirty work after all the foreigners get kicked out - read about the joy of Workfare programs in one of Barbara Ehrenreich's books - talk about a breeding ground for home grown terrorism - also called "dissent".

Reading Barbara is great for alleviating liberal guilt - it builds up in your joints after going to the gym.

8/09/2007 04:13:00 PM  
Anonymous bambino said...

I think even if you are legal in this country and if you are different race, you still would have some other problems and issues besides being legal in this country. And now image on top of that if you are illegal.

To solve this problem we should listen someone who had experience being illegal.

On the other hand nobody wants to do the job immigrants do, am I wrong?

8/09/2007 04:40:00 PM  
Blogger Edward_ said...

I don't understand why treating illegal immigrants humanely automatically clashes with enforcing American immigration Law.

I don't think it has to. I think what Bush outlined was consistent with both (and when I'm pointing to Bush as the rational Republican on an issue, you know it's a confusing case).

I do think the refusal to acknowledge that deporting millions of people is not practical, nor, as magic carpet bagger notes, economically feasible, can in many instances be explained as xenophobia. Would you agree?

Perhaps that's ultimately unfair to those who really just want the law enforced, but that's an idealist stance and, even there, when reality is taken into consideration, the only feasible explanation for the absolutism I can think of is xenophobia. I'll accept that that's not the same as racism, but could you explain what's so threatening about a compromise on the folks already here? Is it just the "amnesty only made things worse last time" argument?

My overarching concern here is that by refusing to compromise, nothing of a comprehensively practical nature will end up getting done, and immigrants will be increasingly be scapegoated and abused.

8/09/2007 04:44:00 PM  
Blogger Henry said...

Mexico has much stronger immigration laws than us. I think someone either needs to argue that Mexico is being racist, or else please drop this toxic word from the debate.

It seems to me that we're really debating special treatment for landlocked laborers over those who come by plane (who need valid paperwork to fly and land) and those who seek white-collar jobs (who face legal hurdles for visas and sponsorships). Those two groups get pretty upset when talk of "amnesty" arises, but I hope no one would call them "racist".

(I don't know about boats. One hears occasional stories about ships crammed with lots of people aboard illegally, but I don't know how common this is, and it doesn't seem to have entered as a factor into this discussion that I'm aware of.)

"Give me your huddled masses" doesn't require discriminating in their favor. A guest-worker program could alleviate the fears expressed here. One might even argue that after implementing a workable guest worker program, it would only be fair to close up the other holes.

P.S. President Carter once (supposedly) asked a Chinese official to stop restraining Chinese citizens from emigrating. (Let your people go!) The Chinese official said, "Sure. How many do you want?" How far should our compassion extend? It's easy to philosophize, not so easy to legislate. I don't know the answer and don't have a strong opinion, but I don't think either side has the higher ground on this issue either.

8/09/2007 04:49:00 PM  
Blogger Edward_ said...

I don't think either side has the higher ground on this issue either.

I think the side not scapegoating the immigrants has the higher ground, actually, although, that doesn't exclusively mean Reps vs. Dems (just mostly) as much as those who want a highly civil solution vs. those who are willing to enact Draconian measure to ensure stronger enforcement.

There is definitely reason for calm and rational debate about what to do (and I agree with those who feel we can't continue with the way things are...we can't let as many Chinese people who might want to live here enter the country, for example...we'd be overwhelmed).

"Give me your huddled masses" doesn't require discriminating in their favor.

That's a red herring. It suggests not being for inhuman enforcement is the same as prefering illegal entry over lawful entry.

The belief in the ideals behind "Give me your poor..." explains the resistance many of us feel to mindlessly slamming the doors shut, rounding people up, separating them from their families, tolerating xenophobic rationales in doing so, treating folks who just want work like their pariahs, all those things that some folks interpret as, for example, suggesting "American sovereignty has become a dirty word." When it's ingrained in your identity that yours is a nation of immigrants, you can't expect those who either are or who love someone who's recently arrived to simply give that ideal up because other folks who have it good now are content with the status quo, either. In simpler terms, it requires not identifying with immigrants (or the plights that drove them here) to be that cut-and-dry about it.

8/09/2007 05:18:00 PM  
Blogger Edward_ said...

illiteracy reigns

that should be " treating folks who just want work like they're pariahs,"

8/09/2007 05:25:00 PM  
Blogger Chris Rywalt said...

Joanne sez:
Why Chris......(I'm batting my big butch fan as I say this)

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body.

Not for nothing, also, but I think your paintings look pretty cool, too. I like the Mudra Series particularly. It looks like someone had a lot of fun with colored candles.

Oh, I'm sorry, Ed. I didn't mean to talk about art.

8/09/2007 05:32:00 PM  
Blogger Edward_ said...

Oh, I'm sorry, Ed. I didn't mean to talk about art.

Not at all...it all gets mixed up in my murky gray matter somehow anyway.

8/09/2007 05:36:00 PM  
Blogger Henry said...

My comment about huddled masses was a reference to my point elsewhere that I think we're talking about giving preference to one group of immigrants over two others. I'm surrounded in life by members of those two other groups so the question is not necessarily an academic one for me. From your response it seems you don't disagree.

As to your point about draconian measures, I'm trying to suggest that a guest-worker program might alleviate the need for such measures, by providing a middle ground for people who want to be here and who will fit into our job stream, both clearly differentiating them from those who want to be here for untoward reasons, and also giving illegals a path for making good.

8/09/2007 06:08:00 PM  
Blogger George said...

Sorry, but I think it is important to keep this debate focused on the ‘toxic’ word ‘racist’.

If one is to discuss immigration laws, I agree this in itself is not racist, it involves questioning how manage immigration across borders. Unfortunately, this is not the case, especially in the examples Ed gave. Moreover, this ‘debate’ over immigration reform has been shifted and reframed to exploit the xenophobic impulses in part of our society and as a result, it encourages racism.

People want to pretend that the issue is ‘upholding the law’ because it makes their conscious clean and they do not have to directly confront the other issues. The fact of the matter is that this issue is racism to exploit the emotions of part of the populace in order to either; gain support for a political agenda or; to deflect attention away from something else.

I haven’t analyzed this whole question down to details, but there is no doubt that the immigration question is primarily an economic problem.

As I see it, this is a problem in labor supply and demand. In this country there is a demand for cheap labor, across the border there are laborers willing to work. If we close the borders to immigrant labor, the US economy will collapse, this is really not an option.

There is an argument that the ‘illegal immigrants’ are putting undue economic pressure on local services and infrastructure. I would agree that there is an economic factor involved here, but I would like to suggest that whatever visible economic deficit exists may be offset by other positive, but less clearly visible, economic contributions made to both the local economies and to the national economy as well.

By making workers ‘illegal’ the US government is creating a new, illegal, underground, and exploitive, economy which provides goods and services to a non-franchised social group which have no way to speak for themselves.

For the most part, individuals and families immigrate to this country because they want to work, they are seeking a greater opportunity than they feel exists ‘at home’ They want to work, and there are businesses here that want to employ them.

What’s the problem? Allow them to work. Give them green cards. Make them legal and reduce the ability of others to exploit their fear that there is no one to turn to for help.

I don’t think that in modern society, there is a way immigration can be reversed, it is an inevitable entropic shifting of the workforce and it will not respect borders. It can be delayed by force, like it was in the old USSR, but eventually some people will migrate towards perceived opportunity.

The question I would ask the politicians is how do we use our available resources (after we’ve blown a half trillion bucks on an overseas adventure)in a way that benefits the population both today and in the future. Do we discuss this issue by inflaming racial prejudices to serve some cause? Or do we take a higher road?

8/09/2007 07:57:00 PM  
Anonymous Ben said...

Those invoking the argument that the majority of Americans are immigrants obviously recognize the importance of history in understanding the present situation. in a world in which Mexico's mineral wealth hadn't been so thoroughly robbed by the Spanish, Mexicans might have had the means to protect their national borders from the US immigrants who flooded into Texas in the early 1800's and led to its "annexation" from Mexico. The oil wealth of that state in latino hands might have caused a somewhat different immigration picture.

but that's pure speculation. what isn't speculation is the fact that successive american governments and corporations have had significant roles in continuing the work started by the Spanish in exploiting latin american people in their own countries. american agro-industry taking away a peasant farmer's land in Guatemala is not disconnected from that farmers desparate relative who risks his life to get into the US. for me compassion implies understanding and understanding requires us to think about both historical and current reasons that lead illegal immigrants to the US.

8/09/2007 08:48:00 PM  
Blogger zipthwung said...

I lived in a small town with immigrant labor once, so I know how this shit goes down without reading anything, but everything I've read hold my experience to be true, and I have yet to find an example of humane whatever, even in NY, where immigrants do the scut work except for the children of the wealthy, who seem to find green cards somehow. There are tragic examples of wealthy people having to return home to jobs in the family business, but those are few and far between.

No, in small towns there are a set number of jobs based on some primary industry - Slaughtering cows, for example.

Where I was it was processing vewgetables. The townsfolk (mostly women) worked during the harvest, earnign a dollar raise every year topping out at fifteen dollars an hour. The rest of the year they went on welfare.

The immigrants received the same wage every year I believe.

One year they bulldozed a bunch of housing for migrant workers, despite having recruited workers to come.

And that is without any watchamacallit immigrant nonsense.

So tell me again how this shit is going down, I wanna hear it.

ALso, who wants to pay ten bucks a pound for beef?

Rioting, its an unbeatable high.

8/09/2007 11:58:00 PM  
Blogger zipthwung said...

Unemployment, not welfare. Thats what I meant. I dont knwo how many did that though, its hearsay.

8/10/2007 12:01:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

America, land of the free and leader of the world's democracy... yeah, right. But at least it does still have freedom of speech to a large extent.

Allowing illegal immigrants to join the US military would seem to solve two problems at once...

8/10/2007 09:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907


In a political party system where there is only Democrat or Republican

Issues become Black or White

It becomes US or Them

Reason is bullied by madmen shouting in fear

We are scared into believing it is a choice between Good and Evil

Then pressured into a choice of Allegiance or Treason..

"Truth and reason are eternal. They have prevailed. And they will eternally prevail; however, in times and places they may be overborne for a while by violence, military, civil, or ecclesiastical." --Thomas Jefferson

"I am satisfied the good sense of the people is the strongest army our government can ever have, and that it will not fail them." --Thomas Jefferson


--Rage Out

8/10/2007 03:22:00 PM  
Anonymous ml said...

This country is about assimilation. We voraciously take all cultures and make them us. To have a category of "guest workers" is to keep them separate and not equal. We've already seen how well that works.

The way I view the undocumented workers is the domestic version of out-sourcing. If minimum wage were raised and all jobs received at least minimum wage and decent working conditions, then I say let the most qualified win.

But this still leaves us with Edward's basic question: why do we need someone to hate? that is beyond me.

8/11/2007 02:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's not so much to hate, as it is to blame... then it's not your responsibility...

8/11/2007 07:39:00 PM  
Anonymous ml said...

Sorry but it sure looks like hate to me.

8/12/2007 07:45:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Allowing illegal immigrants to join the US military would seem to solve two problems at once..."

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3271/illegal_immigrants_uncle_sam_wants_you/

nms, let's talk about that word, "humane". Do you really think it's humane to raid a factory, arrest one parent and deport him, put the other parent on house arrest, and thereby make one 17-year-old girl responsible for her family's entire income? Can you imagine the strain --I mean, what were you doing at age 17? Now, picture that girl also attending English classes 12 hours per week.

How do I know? She's my student.

Edward, thank you.

8/13/2007 05:44:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home