Hey Mexico: Lose the Double Standard or Keep Quiet

“If American policy-makers are looking for legal models on which to base new laws restricting immigration and expelling foreign lawbreakers, they have a handy guide: the Mexican constitution.” J. Michael Waller, Center for Security Policy in Washington

In a recent article entitled Mexico's Glass House, J. Michael Waller exposes the blatant hypocrisy of the Mexican Government with respect to immigration laws. Here are some highlights:

In brief, the Mexican Constitution states that:

*Immigrants and foreign visitors are banned from public political discourse.

*Immigrants and foreigners are denied certain basic property rights.

*Immigrants are denied equal employment rights.

*Immigrants and naturalized citizens will never be treated as real Mexican citizens.

*Immigrants and naturalized citizens are not to be trusted in public service.

*Immigrants and naturalized citizens may never become members of the clergy.

*Private citizens may make citizens arrests of lawbreakers (i.e., illegal immigrants) and hand them to the authorities.

*Immigrants may be expelled from Mexico for any reason and without due process.

In a Decision Brief that followed Waller's article, the Center for Security Policy in Washington writes:

If you think these critics [Mexican government officials and illegal aliens] are mad about U.S. immigration policy now, imagine how upset they would be if we adopted an approach far more radical than the bill they rail against which was adopted last year by the House of Representatives -- namely, the way Mexico treats illegal aliens . . . Mexico deals harshly not only with illegal immigrants. It treats even legal immigrants, naturalized citizens and foreign investors in ways that would, by the standards of those who carp about U.S. immigration policy, have to be called "racist" and "xenophobic."

In truth, Mexico's laws are repugnant and very much xenophobic in nature. I am proud that America's immigration laws are the most liberal in the world. However, I am disgusted that America's borders are the least protected. I'll make this real simple: immigration, GOOD; illegal immigration, BAD.

For another worthwhile article on the topic go here.

By the way, if Jacques Chirac can have a French only policy, surely we should recognize that the unifying language of America, the National Language, is English.

Note: this post will be made available in Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Arabic, German, and Russian by request only.

Posted by Dr Politico at May 21, 2006 3:21 PM
Comment #149945


Posted by: BRUCE at May 21, 2006 4:11 PM
Comment #149949

So, Doc,

Is America the only country with the right to bully around other countries?
Do we actually respect the sovereign nation thing anymore, and if we do what exactly is your point?

Double standard or not Mexico has the right to treat their immigrants however they want to.

Of course it is still our right to bribe them with our aid dollars, but wasn’t the gist of your post.

Posted by: Rocky at May 21, 2006 4:59 PM
Comment #149953


Actually, my point, and the point of the articles, is quite simple. Mexico should examine their own immigration policies before criticizing those of the US.

“Mexico has the right to treat their immigrants however they want to.”

You are absolutely correct. It is, however, slightly ironic that the Mexican government is charging us with violating human rights by stepping up border security. What’s that old addage, again? Oh yeah: It’s like the pot calling the kettle black.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 21, 2006 5:15 PM
Comment #149957
It’s like the pot calling the kettle black.
Sort of like the Bush administration claiming the right of pre-emptive warfare, but criticizing others for claiming the same right, eh?

Posted by: ElliottBay at May 21, 2006 5:26 PM
Comment #149958


Again, I would say so what.

America has it’s own issues to deal with before we can start criticizing Mexico.
Let’s keep our own eye on the ball and not get distracted by what other countries do or don’t do.
We already have two in-completes in the war on terror and we’re once again rattling our sabers with Iran.
Time to wake up and smell the pavement.

Posted by: Rocky at May 21, 2006 5:34 PM
Comment #149967

Isn’t it nice of xenophobes to use xenophobic policy to defend their xenophobia? A funny alliterative note: I was born in Xenia, which means hospitality in Greek, at least that’s what I was taught in school. I googled it, and xenos can mean both friend and traveller. hmmm. I hear a xylophone.

Posted by: gergle at May 21, 2006 6:19 PM
Comment #149984

What really do you expect from a country where corruption is a way of life, bribery (la mordita)is how you do business, and a bad fatal accident replaces capital punishment and is also a reward for those (citizens and whatever)who can’t keep their mouths shut. But,hey,no problem. This is the future that the fat cats in this country have planned for the American worker. Deal with it. Enough of our senators have been bribed to make it “doable.”

Posted by: reddogs at May 21, 2006 8:24 PM
Comment #149992


In response to President Bush’s new plan:

Non-Mexican Hispanics entering the United States illegally are studying up on Mexican history and geography, even learning to whistle the national anthem, to beat U.S. plans to fly them home.

I’m sure that non-Mexican NON-Hispanics are doing the same. I, myself, am a Middle Eastern, but I can pass for a Mexican quite easily (most people mistake me for one). Add to that my impeccable Spanish-speaking skills, and I would have no problem jumping the border.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 21, 2006 9:14 PM
Comment #150003

Dr Politico’s an Israeli? Explains a lot.

Posted by: Aldous at May 21, 2006 10:16 PM
Comment #150005


Please elaborate. In fact, you owe me as much.

So you know, my mother is Iraqi, my father is Israeli. Dr Politico is American. Tell me what that explains.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 21, 2006 10:25 PM
Comment #150019

Dr. Politico-
There’s a certain style of right-wing politics that’s identifiable as coming from around those parts. I believe he might have been indicating that your logic and politics might have been shaped by that influence, which means finding out your roots would explain it. It’s like if you ran into somebody who argued a lot of far left politics and you found out they came from California or Seattle.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at May 22, 2006 12:00 AM
Comment #150026


I do appreciate your input. However, neither my ethnicity nor my place of residence determines my belief system, and I treat every person that I encounter with that in mind.

I currently attend the most liberal college in the country (UC Berkeley) and I was raised in one of the most liberal counties in the country (Marin). Every member of my family identifies as a liberal democrat. My belief system is very much my own; it is not the necessary consequence of my upbringing.

There is a high level of closed-mindedness that informs such generalizations (and I’m not speaking of you, Stephen). When I socialize with Muslims, I do not assume that they pray for the destruction of Israel, nor would I ever imagine that they support terrorism.

Aldous should respond for himself. I would love to understand how he can ascertain a person’s belief system based on his heritage.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 22, 2006 1:03 AM
Comment #150059

Doc and Stephen

Aldous was clearly making an argumentum ad hominem, which is a known fallacy in logic.

Posted by: krishan at May 22, 2006 7:23 AM
Comment #150063


You made the following statement: “I, myself, am a Middle Eastern, but I can pass for a Mexican quite easily (most people mistake me for one).”

Aldous concluded from that statement that you are Israeli. The most obvious question is: “Are all Middle Easterners now considered Israeli?” It wasn’t until your next response that you mentioned your father’s heritage.

You are 100% correct in pointing out Mexico’s hypocritically xenophobic policies. Its instrumental to note that Rocky was able to see Mexico’s policy for what it is, yet still found a way to blame America by suggesting that our aid dollars are “bribes”. Elliot went further by ignoring what Mexico is doing, and focusing on America’s faults. I guess it IS in fact true: All other countries are exempt from criticism regardless of what they do; America is the root cause of all world problems regardless of what she does.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at May 22, 2006 8:03 AM
Comment #150077


You missed the point entirely.

We, America spend 10’s of billions of dollars to the governments of foreign countries, in the form of aid.


“An African Union study pegged the takings at a much higher rate, estimating Africa’s toll from corruption at $150 billion every year. Lavish automobiles are so popular among African government officials that a word has come into use in Swahili — wabenzi — for “men of the Mercedes-Benz.” Investment guru Jim Rogers, who recently drove around the globe, declared,

Most foreign aid winds up with outside consultants, the local military, corrupt bureaucrats, the new NGO [nongovernmental organizations] administrators, and Mercedes dealers. There are Mercedes dealers in places where there are not even roads.
A Brookings Institution analysis observed,

The history of U.S. assistance is littered with tales of corrupt foreign officials using aid to line their own pockets, support military buildups, and pursue vanity projects. It is no wonder that few studies show clear correlations between aid flows and growth.
A Heritage Foundation report noted, “Most recipients of U.S. development assistance are poorer now than they were before first receiving U.S. aid.” Former World Bank senior economist William Easterly estimates that World Bank and IMF loans “actually boosted poverty worldwide by a total of 14 million people.”“

This what you wrote;

“Its instrumental to note that Rocky was able to see Mexico’s policy for what it is, yet still found a way to blame America by suggesting that our aid dollars are “bribes”.”

Call me cynical, and you may dismiss my reference if you like, but exactly would you call it?

The money we spend doesn’t make it to those that need it most, and we are bitching about how the countries we send it to aren’t cuddling up with us?

Since Mr. Bush declared “victory” in Iraq, there has been an issue du jour, that distracts the American people from the purpose of why we were there to begin with.
Mexico and the illegal problem is just the latest in a long line.

This illegal problem didn’t just pop up over night.
This has been going on for years, yet it only has become another issue to divide America just as the campaigns for our National elections start to rev up.

You tell me Joe, what is a thinking man supposed to believe?

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 8:58 AM
Comment #150086

Politico, someone can be hypocritical and make a good point nonetheless. Just because Mexico has its own problems is no justification for ours.

Posted by: Zeek at May 22, 2006 9:29 AM
Comment #150091


A “thinking man” is supposed to understand that a xenophobic policy is a xenophobic policy. Were America espousing such a policy, its clear that you would take America to task for it. But when Mexico does it, you suggest that sovereign nations can do what they wish. The appropriate response is to condemn in other countries that which you would condemn in your own.

You seem to blame the US for the misdeeds of others. If I gave you a thousand dollars, and you wasted it, would I be to blame? Under your logic, it would be MY fault.

The US gives money in aid and much of that money gets misused. I’d push for the US to make demands on how the money is utilized, and to withhold money if its not utilized well. But then you’d likely have the right to claim that the US was “controlling” or “mandating” other countries with bribes. Which way to do you want it—you simply cannot have it both ways.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at May 22, 2006 9:45 AM
Comment #150095

What is a thinking man suppose to beleive? perhaps that thinking man should think a little more. Your response shows that some people may be harmed by foreign aid. Is anyone helped at all? What is the alternative to giving monetary aid, I suppose you may say to give the aid directly to the people who need it. That sounds like Somalia, How successful was that? Perhaps we should force the government to ditribute it the correct way. But that sounds alot like Iraq. Another alternative is to give nothing. This is being tried with Iran. Is there any way that America would not be blamed, or is there any way to get it right.
I would like to point out that I do like the idea of no foreign aid from our government and have all foreign aid be voluntary through organizations outside of our government. I don’t think any government is capable of handling this type of thing correctly but that is another topic.
I think Joe’s argument is right on. There is no reason to feel guilty of handing money from one government to another when the money originator has no control over the recipient. A little less guilt would make your “thinking” more clear.

Posted by: Frankxcid at May 22, 2006 9:54 AM
Comment #150096


“If I gave you a thousand dollars, and you wasted it, would I be to blame? Under your logic, it would be MY fault.”

If you gave me a thousand dollars, and I wasted it, and then gave me another thousand dollars, and I wasted it, and then gave me a thousand dollars…..

Yep, I can see where America should be respected for pissing that money away.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 9:55 AM
Comment #150103


“There is no reason to feel guilty of handing money from one government to another when the money originator has no control over the recipient. A little less guilt would make your “thinking” more clear.”

Yeah, absolutely, you’re right. NAFTA and all that aid have done wonders for the Mexican people, and they should respect us for that.

What could I have been “thinking”?

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 10:17 AM
Comment #150105


I understand your desire to whine and complain. Its an easy way out. What are your suggestions?

Should the US refuse to give aid money?
Should the US place specific demands on how the money is to be used?
Should the US control how foreign governments distribute aid money, and if so, by what mechanism?

I fully agree that money gets wasted. But in your zeal to condemn America, you leave out the other component….BLAME THOSE WHO WASTE THE MONEY!!

I reread your posts and so far, you’ve blamed ONLY America for this issue. You’ve not said a single solitary word about the people who receive and waste the money they are given. Its very instructive to note this, as it shows the mindset you have. A thinking man would condemn the policy of giving money repeatedly to those who waste it, but would also condemn those who were wasteful. Its easy to see that you’ve avoided doing that…you might change that now that its been pointed out to you, but your gut instinct has been to blame America.


By the way, I’m betting Aldous never responds to your request. He’s a hit-and-run poster. When called to explain obviously flawed comments, he historically gets very busy and disappears for a while, only to return after the thread has moved on.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at May 22, 2006 10:23 AM
Comment #150113


“I understand your desire to whine and complain. Its an easy way out. What are your suggestions?”

“Its easy to see that you’ve avoided doing that…you might change that now that its been pointed out to you, but your gut instinct has been to blame America.”

You seriously can’t expect me to subscribe to your Pollyanna-ish belief that America doles out billions of dollars in aid with “no strings attached”.
Especially with our “sterling” record in the region.

Give me a freaking break!

America reaps what it sews, and then we are surprised when we are criticized.

Joe, we’ve got serious problems, and the time to quit bitching and address those problems is now.

Condemning Mexico for it’s attitude toward America might make you feel better, but what does it actually accomplish?


The only thing I blame America for is putting it’s collective head in the sand and keeping it there.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 10:52 AM
Comment #150120

Oh, and BTW.

I feel no guilt what-so-ever. We can only vote our conscience.

Our leaders are the folks that screwed the pooch.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 11:08 AM
Comment #150132


I’ve never said America gives money with no strings attached. Those are YOUR words, not mine.
I never even suggested such a thing.

What I DID suggest was that you are condemning America for giving the money and allowing it to be misused. I already said I’d prefer tighter controls on who we give money to and for what.

I notice that you didn’t take the opportunity to give any suggestions on what you’d like to see done. All you did was whine some more. Given the opportunity to give constructive criticism, you gave only criticism. Not at all what a thinking man would do.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at May 22, 2006 11:40 AM
Comment #150135
A Heritage Foundation report noted, “Most recipients of U.S. development assistance are poorer now than they were before first receiving U.S. aid.”

This is an extremely misleading statement that the foundation issued. Correlation does not equal causation. In truth, the majority of aid recipients have been in the past unwilling to integrate into the global community (globalization anyone?) and today are unable to do so. In today’s globalized world, if you’re not in, you’re out. Obviously there are other factors, but this is a major one.

As for the “who’s to blame?” argument, America has few options in this matter and none are optimal.

Most foreign aid winds up with outside consultants, the local military, corrupt bureaucrats, the new NGO [nongovernmental organizations] administrators, and Mercedes dealers.

Absolutely, but as the argument goes—generally from those on the left, though this thread seems to have turned things around, I think?—if even a little of that money gets to those in need, then it’s worth it.

On the other hand, if the US were to discontinue aid, we’d be ostracized in the international community and viewed as even more of a bully.

There is a lot of debate, today, regarding the IMF’s role in distributing and overseeing the use of lent funds. Personally, I think it’s essential to a recipient nation’s survival. Most recipients are lured into spending that money on foreign goods, instead of using it to build their own infrastructure and support domestic trade.

Of course, the problem that others see in such oversight is that it challenges the recipient state’s sovereignty. Indeed, the international community is not immune to political correctness, which is extremely unfortunate. Even if more oversight is a temporary trampling on a state’s sovereignty, in the long term that state might be better off. If not, then we will have found yet another arrangement that doesn’t work.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 22, 2006 12:00 PM
Comment #150149


“What I DID suggest was that you are condemning America for giving the money and allowing it to be misused. I already said I’d prefer tighter controls on who we give money to and for what.”


Come on Joe.
Criticize, why not?
Condemn, I don’t think so.

I have said this before and I guess I must repeat it for the benefit of you that haven’t been paying attention.

After WW2 America had the goodwill of countries all over the world, well deserved I might add.
Shortly after that Communism reared it’s ugly head and America began to show some imperialism of it’s own.

America supported some mighty dubious characters in it’s attempt to stem the tide of Communism. quite a few of them in Latin America, but also in the Middle East and Asia. We tied foreign aid to their support of our policies.

Unfortunately there was little or no trickle down from the leaders to the peasants, and little by little, while the leaders of these countries still supported America, the populations of these countries grew increasingly restless. In some cases, the leaders of those countries had to put down the restlessness, sometimes brutally, often with American governmental approval, and with the help of our very own CIA.

Please stop me where you feel I am wrong here.

How can I condemn America for doing what was in it’s own best interests?
After all we were kept safe from the Communist scourge and life has been good.

Mexico is corrupt from the neck up, and has been for decades, a fact that America cannot have been blind to.

Now Mexico wants to bite the hand that feed it, but it is a sovereign country, and yeah, they have that right.

So which country is being duplicitous here?
I would suggest both.

Mexico has allowed it’s population to take advantage of America.
America has allowed employers to circumvent the laws and hire these illegals, and has looked the other way until just recently.

Condemn? Not hardly.

Criticize? Absolutely!

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 12:42 PM
Comment #150150

I’ll also bet that Mexico makes immigrant learn Spanish to live there.
I’ll also bet that this isn’t the only double standard that Mexico has.
Maybe we need to have a reciprocating immigration policy. Whatever another country requires for US citizens we require for their citizens. Of course this might lead to some real problems. But it’s just a thought I ‘m throwing into the mix.

Posted by: Ron Brown at May 22, 2006 12:49 PM
Comment #150166

Double standard or not Mexico has the right to treat their immigrants however they want to.

And so do American Citizens. If these illegal immigrants are threatening our children’s education, threatening the lives of our citizens (read here: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2006/160506raceriots.htm) then WE THE PEOPLE have a right, in fact a duty, to defend ourselves.

If someone doesn’t like it I have two words for them: OH WELL.

Pretty soon, Americans are going to start shooting back. Try disarming 80 million people. ;)

Posted by: Silent Majority at May 22, 2006 1:20 PM
Comment #150168

Silent majority,

Dead link.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 1:24 PM
Comment #150178

As a WW2 history buff I must correct a misconception. There was not global goodwill for the US in the post war world. America was again condemn and blamed by people outside and inside for the damage during war, for being mean in insisting debt be repaid, for imposing nation building on the conquered territories, for imperialism, and crimes done by the occupying forces. America has always been blamed for taking the lead in the world stage since she has become a world power. I have a different take on this data then the “Blame America First” crowd. I say if your country is better than America, history will vindicate you. For now, America is still the best country on the planet and its leader. The fact is if this was not the case, we would not be having this discussion

Posted by: frankxcid at May 22, 2006 1:39 PM
Comment #150183

“I say if your country is better than America, history will vindicate you. For now, America is still the best country on the planet”

Well said, frankxcid!

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 22, 2006 1:46 PM
Comment #150184


“There was not global goodwill for the US in the post war world. America was again condemn and blamed by people outside and inside for the damage during war, for being mean in insisting debt be repaid, for imposing nation building on the conquered territories, for imperialism, and crimes done by the occupying forces.”

You have to admit even though it may of been for only 15 or 20 minutes after the war was over everybody wanted to be an American.

And of course they all refused the Marshall Plan money.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 1:47 PM
Comment #150185

I think the Germans, Japanese, Phillipinos, Russians, Iranians, North Africans, Scandinavians, Slaviks, Czechs, English would not be in the everyone list. This goes to the nub of the problem with those who pay too much attention to the Media: France is not the world!

As a matter of facts, there was only one group that seriously considered being American: The Sicilians!

Posted by: frankxcid at May 22, 2006 1:53 PM
Comment #150186

Sorry Rocky.

here it is…


The parenthesis at the end of the original link killed it.

Posted by: Silent Majority at May 22, 2006 1:55 PM
Comment #150206


“I think the Germans, Japanese, Filipino’s, Russians, Iranians, North Africans, Scandinavians, Slavic’s, Czechs, English would not be in the everyone list. This goes to the nub of the problem with those who pay too much attention to the Media: France is not the world!”

Let’s see, the Philippines were an American protectorate until July ‘46.
The Slavic’s and Czechs, if not under Uncle Joe’s thumb, were nearly there, the Russians, well, Uncle Joe already had them well in hand, and they rejected the Marshall Plan outright.
The Iranians, and most of the rest of the Middle East under the British.

The Germans, England, France, and Italy received the bulk of the reconstruction, with a bit here and there elsewhere in Europe.

We shipped 1 million dollars worth of food a day into Japan, and while they chafed at our occupation, I would have to say they have done pretty well. Oh, and they were on their own after ‘52, though we controlled Okinawa until ‘72.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 2:29 PM
Comment #150211

Sorry I was wrong to include Iran and the Middle East.

Iran is still pissed for the Shah thing.

Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 2:36 PM
Comment #150235

While immigration continues to be such a contentious issue, here’s something you may wish to consider. A new study has come out dealing with the massive waiting periods to get a green card under our current system for legal immigration.

Among the findings of the study: — Waits for green cards (permanent residence) in the Skilled Workers and Professionals category have worsened considerably in the past few years, with the current wait for a newly-sponsored high skill immigrant in this category exceeding five years.

— Siblings of U.S. citizens can expect to wait 11 to 12 years from today before immigrating to America (22 years from the Philippines). Unmarried adult children can anticipate waiting six years, but 13 years if from Mexico and 14 years from the Philippines.

— A spouse or minor child of a legal resident (green card holder) from Mexico has a seven year wait (a five year wait from other countries). A married child of a U.S. citizen must wait seven years to immigrate (11 and 15 years, respectively, if from Mexico or the Philippines).

Maybe, just maybe, we should improve their ability to get the proper documentation legally before we condemn them for being here without their papers. Think of the waits involved. Skilled workers sponsored by American companies are waiting more than five years for a green card. Spouses and minor children of legal residents are waiting seven. And those of Mexican or Philippine origin are waiting longer than immigrants from other countries. Think about that. How much longer a wait must be faced by unskilled workers from those nations? And how long would you be willing to simply wait for a piece of paper to give you permission to join your loved ones?

Posted by: Jarandhel at May 22, 2006 3:36 PM
Comment #150257


You often ramble on and on and never make a bit of fricken sense. You are all over the place. Contradicting yourself. You accuse the US of causing problems all over the globe and then say we should just go back to sticking our heads in the sand?! Which is it man!

No one on this earth is perfect, nor is any country. Just like people, some countries are better and worse than each other. This does not, and should not mean that any country should give up their sovereignty (including the US). Just because we are a melting pot should not mean that we should not have a backbone or rules of membership.

I’m sure you have done some wrong things in your life. Should you then have no pride or strong stand in life? Of course you should stand up for yourself and what you believe. Should you not have a right to fire back at your accusers, if they themselves do what they accuse? The US has that right too.

Stop the liberal regurgitation please and be more objective…

Posted by: Chris at May 22, 2006 4:32 PM
Comment #150270

Hey Chris,


Posted by: Rocky at May 22, 2006 4:49 PM
Comment #150298


I wonder if the influx of illegal immigrants has contributed to those extensive wait periods.

Either way, a secure border is far more pressing an issue than is the waitlist for legal immigration, no matter how long that wait may be.

Posted by: Dr Politico at May 22, 2006 5:50 PM
Comment #150332

Has anybody noticed that the legislation being offered now is actually NON-legislation? Both the GOP and the dems are significantly supported by corporations that are invested in keeping things as they are. The SOLE reason for stirring up all the paranoia right now is to try and manipulate voters prior to November. Nothing more. DON’T BE SHEEP, MY FELLOW BLOGGERS!!!

Find another significant reason for casting your vote this fall. Ignore the manipulation, because that’s it is.

Posted by: RGF at May 22, 2006 7:21 PM
Comment #150339

Dr Politico:

As I said to d.a.n., it seems more likely that illegal immigration is encouraged by such long waiting periods. If going the legal route takes a skilled worker 5 years, how much longer are unskilled workers forced to wait? At a certain point, illegal immigration seems more tenable than waiting forever for government permission. Imagine if you applied for a drivers license at age 16 and five years later you were still waiting for it to come through, and were expected not to drive (even to work) in the meantime. Would that be reasonable, even if a lot of people were on the roads driving without licenses?

If the lack of a legal route to enter the US is the primary reason for illegal immigration, perhaps it is indeed more pressing than “securing our borders”. We need to look at why we are keeping these people out, not just how to do it.

Posted by: Jarandhel at May 22, 2006 7:46 PM
Comment #150346

My response is specifically directed at poster “Jarandhel”, who seems to “justify” remaining “illegal” b/c of the “long wait” extended family members have to “endure” to get green cards. Give me a break! Just b/c one immigrant, with skills the US wants/needs, is granted permanent residency, how does that translate into a “welcome to the USA BONAZANA” for brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, grandparents, etc.

And, how does the US ensure extended families dont apply for gov assistance after the initial proof of financial responsibility application period is over? The INS doesnt follow-up after the green card is granted. I have heard of many applying and receiving Social Security for parents and grandparents, even though they only arrived in the US 2-3 years prior and never worked here.

IMHO, emphasis should be only on the “skilled worker” and his/her immediate nuclear family to include a spouse and children ONLY.

Part of our multi-prong approach to immigration must be first our right to sovereingnty, safety and protection, then the ability to match high/low skilled workers w/ companies period!

Posted by: kristy at May 22, 2006 8:03 PM
Comment #150401

Kristy, the nuclear family you describe is a product of our modern western age; it is not a historic basis of family, and in many parts of the world it would be almost incomprehensible. Elsewhere, people live in what are known as extended families. Cousins, uncles, brothers, sisters, grandparents all live together as one household. They take care of each other, and provide for one another many of the services which we have come to rely on public aid for, such as unemployment/welfare/ssdi, child care, and elder care/social security. For people who have grown up in families like this, leaving their families behind save for their spouses and children are simply unimaginable. They quite rightly wonder who will take care of the elders in the family that are left behind, not to mention who will care for the children that they bring with them while they are at work. Splitting up these families is far more likely to result in creating the need for government aid than allowing them all in will.

Also, as I pointed out, even skilled workers face a five YEAR wait to get into the country; their minor children and spouses face a seven year wait (I believe if I am reading this correctly this is in addition to the five years for the first person, as they speak of this being spouses and children of legal residents who already have their green cards) So just getting one whole nuclear family of a skilled worker into the country would take 12 years. Does that sound reasonable to you?

Add onto that the fact that unskilled workers would take even longer to get a green card, and I think you can see why so many unskilled workers are coming here illegally. If you were trying to provide for your family, and needed a job in another country to do so, would you be willing to wait five years or more to get it? Can you even imagine what it would be like to try to get by for five years under conditions so bad it had you seeking to leave your country in the first place?

Posted by: Jarandhel at May 22, 2006 10:32 PM
Comment #150450


While I can appreciate your perspective of the immigrant extended family being a “nuclear family” to you, with the Immigration Issue being “hotly debated” about the justification for skilled and non-skilled labor, and just who qualifies as “re-unification” family members, you are missing my point—that is why is it America’s responsibility to provide for additional family members to the first qualifying immigrant in the first place? Wouldnt the “burden” to provide for extended family abroad be YOUR BURDEN? As I am aware in most third world countries, $300.00 US dollars is the average annual salary for most. Sending those dollars home from a skilled immigrant professional making 100K+ US dollars a year would be a pentence, plus the added benefit of keeping cultural unity intact, and avoiding the cultural shock and isolation many older immigrants feel when they immigrate here.

Anyway, the original question was WHY Mexico refuses to acknowledge the right of American sovereignty they hold so dear in their own constitution.

Posted by: Kristy at May 23, 2006 6:37 AM
Comment #150456


Just a note: I predicted that Aldous wouldn’t dare show his face in this thread again to respond to your question. He hasn’t. It is salient to note that he has posted in other threads in the meantime.

Now, it could be that he tired of this thread and moved on. That’s a possibility. If so, there is a remarkable coincidental trend going on, in which Aldous tires of threads shortly after being called on the carpet to explain some inane comment of his.

Just wanted to point it out so that others can follow the coincidental trend if they choose.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at May 23, 2006 8:20 AM
Comment #150475

WE SHOULD JUST TREAT MEXICO THE Sme way thay treat us and stop careing that we p off people

Posted by: Rich at May 23, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #150498

If they don’t respect our laws when they come here (illegally), what would make them respect our laws after they are here?
Chop off one finger everytime we catch them here illegally and see how long before they respect our border.

Posted by: kevin at May 23, 2006 11:57 AM
Comment #150557

As I read these postings, I am wondering if Aldous will ever man up and explain what he meant when he said,

“Dr Politico’s an Israeli? Explains a lot.

Posted by: Aldous at May 21, 2006 10:16 PM.”

Posted by: Seaners at May 23, 2006 3:05 PM
Comment #150730

To the South of Mexico sits an area of the world that is historically one of the most violent, hostile and unstable regions on the globe
…Three guesses who made it that way?

Guess who backed coups, propped up
dictator-strongmen who carried out hideous Human
Rights abuses, rammed exploitave agreements down the throats of countries with the threat of continued suport for coups and guerilla groups? Even profitted from negotiations with drug cartels? Guess whose market those cartels are selling to in the first place?

I don’t hate my country. I just think it is finally time we paid the piper. Time to take responsibility and live up to the values we were founded on. Perhaps the best way to do that is to stop acting like a super power. If we continue to act like an empire…well,
forget it! We just get the same old same old. We get disparity all over the globe. We get growing animosity from the third world. We get unstable borders. We get terrorism, bloodshed and a harder and harder world for us to travel in, do business in or just survive in.

Everything you conservatives stand for, or think you stand for, is destroying us. Time to wise up and take responsibility. There is no other alternative…except your stubborn, self-destructive pride. You all put the gun to America’s head. Now I’m begging you to stop and
think. No more ‘American Roulette’. Don’t pull the trigger!

…But in the meantime, don’t be surprised at the harsh and horrible means by which Mexico tries to keep the anarchy we fostered at bay.

Posted by: RGF at May 23, 2006 11:12 PM
Comment #150764

Dr. Politico:

I bet you a dollar that if we had millions of Israelis illegally entering the US, you would see a mighty call for action from the left. Apparently, Israel is the only nation that Democrats do not like better than America.

Posted by: goodkingned at May 24, 2006 1:25 AM
Comment #150782

Truly,RGF, how does a superpower stop acting like one?If we act as a super power, nine tenths of the world doesn’t approve.If we withdraw from the lead, nine tenths of the world think that we are shirking our responsibilities. Just an average day at the u.n.,eh? So where are we to go, what to do? If we are so collectivly despised by all of the world then why is the U.S. the number one stop for immigrants? Could it be that the evryday folks around the world really do like us, even respect us a bit?Could our sullied name and very existance be just the kind of tonic that corupt political systems round the world need to try to convince their own people who’s fault it really is that tey suffer and are destitute? Seems I’d heard that philosophy somewhere in the past.If we choose not to act like a supper power ten who will provide the food, medicine, education and hope that these folks so desperatly need to survive? As a matter of fact, didn’t the vast majority of our folks come here after being outcast, tortured,etc? So now we just toss out our collective spirit and knowledge and become door mats or worse? That will make the world happy? We as a young nation have certainly been guilty of taking, but we have a conscience and have given ten fold in return.

Posted by: scolex at May 24, 2006 2:25 AM
Comment #150784

RGF, who made Mexico the corrupt,violent,amoral place to the south of our border?

Posted by: scolex at May 24, 2006 2:28 AM
Comment #150800


You have clearly missed all of my previous posts on this issue over the past year or so.

So to catch up:
Look up the the Bucareli agreement we forced on Mexico during their revolution in the ’20s.
Look up the reports on the Maquiladoras along the border (Mexican side) that are American owned and run.
Look up the relationships between Pemex and American oil business.

I’m not going to try and catch you up on months worth of material in one post so it’s up to you find it for yourself now.

Posted by: RGF at May 24, 2006 4:35 AM
Comment #150802


Neo-cons seem to love to infer. However, none of you are very good at it. Absolutely nowhere did I say that we are despised by nine tenths of the world. The immigrants come here for the same reason they have always come here. The promise of a better future. The promise of freedoms and liberties that our founding fathers envisioned when they wrote The Bill of Rights into our constitution.

Unfortuneately, we have also grown economically powerful and thus we now exert a tremendous influence over the rest of the world to our short term benefit and much of the rest of the world’s long term detriment. There are areas in the world that we have utterly exploited. Mexico is one of them.

How does a superpower stop acting like one? It would be in the best long-term interests of our whole region to work towards our mutual benefit rather than for us to continually exploit our neighbor to the South as we have done and continue to do now. The disparity between our two nations, which is driving so many from the South to try and make a life in the North, is also attributable to pressures, no,… coercions, we have exerted on them over and over again. The criminal element that makes the border region so horrible on both sides is the drug trafficers. They would create the hell and misery they create with out the money they get from the sale of those drugs to us on the North of that border. We absolutely MUST stop the profit motive and thus an immense amount of corruption, death, desparation, exploitation and violence on BOTH sides of the border.

We have MAJOR corporate interests that are INVESTED in the status quo, so it’s not very surprising to hear that the new immigration bill is just business as usual. Nothing will change. Two of the largest home builders in our country habitually call in INS rather than paying their workers their final paychecks at the completion of a stage of suburban building. I am aware of this occurence now in 6 different states. I’ve been tracking it for a book I intend to write. These companies (or rather their sub-contractor foremen) then just hire whole new workforces of undocumented for the next phase. Anyone who has bought a new home in the last ten years has likely benefitted from the exploitation of undocumented laborers.

I believe in this country and I believe we can succeed, we can help our neighbors succeed, and we can do so without resorting to the nefarious and exploitive manuevers we have been guilty of in the past. That is what I mean by not acting like a super-power.

Posted by: RGF at May 24, 2006 6:25 AM
Comment #150916


At what point do you advocate that the effect of historical developments subsiding to current policies? The problem with relating all current events to past events is that the present actors on the stage never take top billing. Mexico, like every other country, has a history which set the background for the present, but the situation in Mexico has changed dramatically in the past decade with the advent of a two party system and the development of oil reserves as a source of revenue. Increased industrial development has dragged our southern neighbor into, well, at least the industrial age. At some point, Mexico must accept responsibility for its development and future by ditching the ethos of the villians in the spaghetti westerns.

Posted by: goodkingned at May 24, 2006 2:00 PM
Comment #151003

Countries should start taking responsibilities for themselves and for their future instead of keep blaming others in the past. Many of the poor and troubled countries have been so for very a long time and are mainly due to its government and its people. No matter how much outside aid is given, the situation would not change because the country itself changes. Numerous countries around the world go through hardship and crises. The U.S. (oppressed as colonies) went through a hard won independence. It later solidifies its independence in the War of 1812 (for 2 yrs) when the British invaded and burn the Capital. The U.S. went through a horrible and devastating Civil War, the Great Depression (global), and two World Wars started by other countries. As for Mexico, it has benefited much from the U.S. for the past several decades. As long as its government remains the same, improvement cannot be expected.

Posted by: Daniel at May 24, 2006 4:48 PM
Comment #151007

I meant to say:

No matter how much outside aids are given, the situation will not improve because the country itself needs to change.

Posted by: DANIEL at May 24, 2006 5:07 PM
Comment #151329


> >> Dear President Bush:
> >> I’m about to plan a little trip with my family and extended family,
and I
> >> would like to ask you to assist me. I’m going to walk across the
border from
> >> the U.S. into Mexico, and I need to make a few arrangements. I know
you can
> >> help with this. I plan to skip all the legal stuff like visas,
> >> immigration quotas and laws. I’m sure they handle those things the
same way you do
> >> here. So, would you mind telling your buddy, President Vicente Fox,
that I’m
> >> on my way over? Please let him know that I will be expecting the
> >>
> >> 1. Free medical care for my entire family.
> >>
> >> 2. English-speaking government bureaucrats for all services I might
> >> whether I use them or not.
> >>
> >> 3. All government forms need to be printed in English.
> >>
> >> 4. I want my kids to be taught by English-speaking teachers.
> >>
> >> 5. Schools need to include classes on American culture and history.
> >>
> >> 6. I want my kids to see the American flag flying on the top of the
> >> pole at their school with the Mexican flag flying lower down.
> >>
> >> 7. Please plan to feed my kids at school for both breakfast and lunch.
> >>
> >> 8. I will need a local Mexican driver’s license so I can get easy
access to
> >> government services.
> >>
> >> 9. I do not plan to have any car insurance, and I won’t make any
effort to
> >> learn local traffic laws.
> >>
> >> 10. In case one of the Mexican police officers does not get the memo
> >> Pres. Fox to leave me alone, please be sure that all police officers
> >> English.
> >>
> >> 11. I plan to fly the U.S. flag from my house top, put flag decals on
> >> car, and have a gigantic celebration on July 4th. I do not want any
> >> or negative comments from the locals.
> >>
> >> 12. I would also like to have a nice job without paying any taxes, and
> >> enforce any labor laws or tax laws.
> >>
> >> 13. Please tell all the people in the country to be extremely nice and
> >> say a critical word about me, or about the strain I might place on the
> >> economy.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I know this is an easy request because you already do all these things
> >> all the people who come to the U.S. from Mexico. I am sure that Pres.
> >> won’t mind returning the favor if you ask him nicely. However, if he
gives you
> >> any trouble, just invite him to go quail hunting with your V.P.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thank you so much for your kind help.

Posted by: kevin at May 25, 2006 4:04 PM
Post a comment