Third Party & Independents Archives

September 14, 2007

Racist Anti-Immigrants

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) conducted a forum aired on C-Span on July 24. The thrust of it was political deception and strategy to support illegal immigrants and immigration reform in this country. Ladies and Gentleman, La Raza has become a very sophisticated political advocacy group rivaling Karl Rove’s effective deceptions.

To see the streaming video of this NCLR forum, click on this C-Span link, and scroll down to the link entitled: National Council of La Raza Panel on Immigration Reform. Cecelia Munoz a VP at NCLR, stated there is a policy in place, a "defacto enforcement strategy ... of very harsh laws... essentially hounding illegal immigrants".

As you listen to this 90 minute forum, you will witness a transposing of 'illegal immigration' references to 'immigrants' as a whole, many times. They are supposed to be a non-partisan organization, yet, they clearly advocate for Democrats. Comprehensive immigration reform is their issue, and it includes amnesty for illegal immigrants here, and an open door policy for Latinos who wish to come here for the American Dream and employment in the future.

Monica Russo, a speaker at the forum, says Latinos need to show more outrage, and referred to the anti-immigrant crowd in America as responsible for the death of the bill in the Senate earlier this summer. She says Latino communities are targets of hateful ordinances against immigrants, legal and illegal, and they need to fight back.

Joseph Garcia, a Democrat from the New Democrat Network also spoke at the forum. He said: "What I could do, is, you know, call the Republicans a bunch of right wing xenophobes, we could call them racists, we could come up, as progressives, with a series of things and a good percentage of that might stick, but the truth is, there were some Republicans that were with us." It is clear the Democrats and La Raza have forged a plan to subtly and publicly label anyone and everyone who is opposed to enforcing our borders and halting illegal immigration, or opposed to amnesty for the illegal immigrants already here, as racists and xenophobes.

I was truly shocked as I listened to this forum; shocked to hear such brazen and public demonstration of Rovian strategy and deception planning by Democrats and the leadership of La Raza. And it appears to be working because the dead comprehensive immigration bill has been resurrected and is working its way through Congress as I speak.

NumbersUSA, a non-partisan advocacy group who helped flood Congress with faxes and calls to stop the Senate from passing the last bill, is calling for a new wave of faxes and calls to rain on the Senate to stop this resurrected bill coming up again for vote next week. Their site provides information and free faxing of your Senator.

In another La Raza forum session, their political gambit presentation was very powerful. They argued with film and ads, that their 12 million voters in 2006, a record for the Hispanic community, came out for Democrats and that is responsible in major part for the Democrat wins in 2006. In the same fashion they showed supportive Hispanic ads for GW Bush, who catered the Latino vote in the 2004 election, implying they swung the election for GW Bush in 2004. The message here is not to the public at large. The subtext message here is a clear warning to Democrats that if they don't champion Comprehensive "Illegal" Immigration reform, 12 million voters could swing the presidential race in 2008 for Rudy Guiliani, who is a friend of immigrants and illegal immigrants alike, as evidenced by his record as Mayor of NYC.

In this other forum an Hispanic community pollster name Sergio Benhindrex said voting is not enough, advocates must make themselves visible and noticed and he cited the activities of the 1960's as a suggestion as to how that might be accomplished. It's not a stretch that Mr. Benhindrex had some part in the demonstrations attended by illegal immigrants to shut down city areas during the last bills deliberation. Benhindrex said voting is not enough, because Hispanic voters are only 12 million strong, and the anti-immigrant crowd mainly in the South and upper Mid-West, are 25 to 30 million strong at the polls. He described these voters as lower economic classes according to his polling.

I support advocacy groups taking an honest message to the public for their consideration and review. But, what the Democrats and La Raza are cooking up is as dishonest as Rove's/Bush's reasons for invading Iraq, or Republicans advocacy for 'stay the course' using disinformation and deceptive statistics to deceive the public to their side on the issue. The last bit of respect I had for the Democratic Party, slightly edging out Republicans on ethical and responsible behavior, has just been lost.

If you are for amnesty for the current illegals and don't want a barrier at the border to dramatically slow illegals crossing and aid our Border Patrol in doing their job, then vote for the Democrats in 2008. That is fair and above board. If you are opposed to these, then vote for some candidate other than a Democrat in 2008 if this is a vital issue to you. That too is fair and above board. But, don't get sucked into the lies that to oppose these amnesty bills or, to be for a border barrier is to be racist and xenophobic. I am opposed, and I have fought racism and racial discrimination all my adult life, as any who have known me for a bit, will attest.

Make no mistake, Democrats are courting this vote for political strategy. They are targeting former Republican states like Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Florida, with large Hispanic communities, as Joseph Garcia said. He also said this is about securing a progressive majority for decades to come by locking in the Latino vote. In other words, Democrats are just as willing to subvert the laws and the Constitution's provisions for sovereignty as Republicans are to subvert our law in pursuit of their political aims. It cost the Republicans. Independent voters must now teach the Democrats, these actions and strategy to sell out American values and constitutional protections for political gain will be punished equally at the polls.

Posted by David R. Remer at September 14, 2007 03:08 PM
Comments
Comment #232858
  • DEMs have by far the lousy illegal immigration report cards. Just look through these ILLEGAL-IMMIGRATION REPORT CARDs. A staggering 98% of ALL of the F’s, and D’s are all DEMs. All of the A+ grades go to REPUBs. Personally, I don’t think either have done much on illegal immigration, but DEMs are truly delinquent, as evidenced by those report cards for all in Congress. Care to try to explain how DEMs are better on immigration? I guess you could say they’re better if the goal is to ignore existing immigration laws, eh?
  • Now, DEMS are trying to sneak it through again (hidden as earmarks in other BILLs).

    DEM politicians are either very smart or very dumb.

    It depends on whether enough voters give a damn.

    If enough voters care about this (and they might, based on the last BILL that was killed), then what the DEMs are trying to do again (another shamnesty BILL) it will cook the DEMs. They don’t seem to appreciate the fact that most Americnas are getting very angry with DEMs for their misplaced compassion, selling out Americans, and despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other.


  • Also, PORK-BARREL REPORT CARD GRADEs: DEMs report cards on pork-barrel spending are vastly worst than REPUBs. The 250 WORST pork-barrel grades ALL belong to DEMs. (NOTE: this table takes a few seconds to load; then click on the SCORE column to sort by GRADE; you’ll be amazed. I was.)

Just pay a visit to NumbersUSA.com and ALIPAC.US” and see who voters think are mostly responsible for illegal immigration: Democrats.

In reality, BOTH DEMs and REPUBs are pathetic on illegal immigration and pork-barrel, but in these two areas, DEMs are truly worse.

Why do our own politicians choose to despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other?

But, if too many voters keep rewarding irresponsible, sell-out, FOR-SALE, boutht-and-paid-for incumbent politicians with constant re-election, the voters have got the government they deserve.

Either way, the voters will eventually figure it out and the backlash will lose seats for Democrats. That should worry politicians since winning seats is all they care about; above all else; more than the nation and the nation’s pressing problems growing in number and severity.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 14, 2007 06:29 PM
Comment #232859

david

i hadn’t realized this piece of crap bill was about to be ressurected again. i wonder how these 12 mil. illegal aliens affected the outcome of the two forementioned elections? we need a some type of voter ID to stop noncitizens from voting, and that includes absentee voters. this to me seems to be the most likely way for illegals to vote. fill out the form and get a ballot mailed to you, who’ll know? my guess is many of them are voting, but try to prove it and your a racist. BTW i’m having trouble with the link on the C-Span site. from one racist xenophobe to another, nice job.

Posted by: dbs at September 14, 2007 06:30 PM
Comment #232860

Whether or not one is against illegal immgration or for amnesty/open borders, one has to view this article as objective and factual.

Illegal immigration is not high on my list of checks when deciding upon for whom to vote. I personally do not see the issue as as big of a problem as some make it out to be. That said, the leadership of this group is clearly pandering for votes in a very subvertive way, and it should be called out.

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at September 14, 2007 06:35 PM
Comment #232862

David’s right. Watch the racism accusations start to fly, among other excuses and myths.

Illegal immigration is not high on my list of checks when deciding upon for whom to vote.
What about the cost net losses to American tax payers ($70 Billion to $350 Billion annually).

What about crime (estimates ranging from 3.6 to 26 people murdered in the U.S. daily by illegal aliens? Even the lowest estimate is higher than the norm. That’s not hard to believe if you’ve been to L.A. a number of border cities lately. A policeman in my area was shot and killed a couple of years ago by an illegal alien. A Denver policemen was killed by an illegal alien. These are crimes that should not be happening.

The greedy employers must be prosecuted, and we must secure the borders. Otherwise, state by state will turn into what you see in L.A. Importing cheap labor that is impoverished, less educated, and diseased is not helping the nation. The U.S. already allows hundreds of thousands to immigrate annually. But we can not allow everyone to immigrate.

QUESTION: By the way, do you know how much the world population grows per day?

ANSWER: 249,000 per day (that’s 10,375 per hour; 173 per minute; 2.882 per second).

Anyone who thinks over population is great should ask China (pop. 1.3 Billion) and India (1.1 Billion) about all of the advantages of over-population.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 14, 2007 06:48 PM
Comment #232864

Well David on the one hand its good to see the Dems using the lessons re-taught most recently by Rove to get their points across. It will serve to bring the Country to the edge of internal war and beyond or will cause both sides to spurn those on both sides using these Rovian methods to win political battles. Hopefully its the latter. On the other hand its sad to see the dems use this approach on the illegal immigration issue. I lean to the Dems, especially for the next Presidential race, but this issue is a deal breaker for me. I was watching Clinton pandering to the illegals at the Univision debates on Lou Dobbs program and am hoping she … oh what the hell she wont. Anyway thanks for the excellent article and proper analysis on this issue.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 14, 2007 07:03 PM
Comment #232875

Good, David

I always wonder what part of illegal is so hard to understand. I can understand the human side of all this. People sneak into the U.S. to escape the crappy conditions of wherever it is they came from. They should not pretend, however, that they are being oppressed by America. They always have the choice of staying or going home, if they think things are better there.

I am against ILLEGAL immigration, whether it comes from Mexico, Poland or China. Of course, we cannot send all the illegals home, but just because we cannot do everything does not mean we can do nothing.

We all should reject the idea that being anti-illlegal immigration is racist. In fact, advocates of illegal immigration you mention are the ones acting the racists role. They assume all illegals are non-white and Spanish speaking. They are the ones dealing in stereotypes.

I would say openly that I do not want America to become very much more like Latin America. The United States is a better place to live than these places. Immigrant agree with me, no matter what they claim.

Posted by: Jack at September 14, 2007 09:19 PM
Comment #232891

Thank you Jack. Yes, most immigrants polled that came here legally agree with you.
Race does not matter.
Using race is a lame excuse that is especially insulting to those that have truly suffered racism in the past.
Playing the race card insults the immigrants that have come here legally.
Playing the race card is almost as despicable as the despicable politicians that despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other.

Of course people want to come here.
But we can’t let them all in.
They need to fix their own crappy countries, instead of trying to take advantage of our ERs, healthcare, hospitals, welfare, Medicaid, hospitals, schools, and even voting in our elections.

The DEMs are really shootin’ themselves in the foot on this.

Why?

the SOLUTION

Posted by: d.a.n at September 14, 2007 11:47 PM
Comment #232897
I always wonder what part of illegal is so hard to understand

It’s not, that’s why the term ‘undocumented aliens’ has been created, to muddy the waters.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 15, 2007 12:37 AM
Comment #232898

Actually, it gets worse, they are using the term ‘Undocumented Workers’ now, so there is as little real examination of what is going on as possible.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 15, 2007 12:39 AM
Comment #232900

Doesn’t this article belong in the red colum with the rest of the righty elites who want to build and preserve their fortunes on the backs of the poor, iliterate, and unfortunate doing the only thing they can to try to improve their position in this life by coming to America. And you people want to kick them back into their poverty, illiteracy, and misfortune. Seems only Democrats have any comppassion left for humanity. Even indies and 3rd party folks have crossed over to the right.

But, Hillary will win anyway, and the Congress will be so Democrat after 2008, the righties will all have coronaries, and we san set this country back to being of, by, and for the people. Viva La Raza!

Posted by: Poncho at September 15, 2007 12:54 AM
Comment #232901

Isn’t it interesting that a group that calls itself ‘The Race’ is accusing someone else of racism? Ironic that…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 15, 2007 01:03 AM
Comment #232902
and we san set this country back to being of, by, and for the people

Notice how he left off ‘of the United States’?

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 15, 2007 01:06 AM
Comment #232906

Rhinehold, Yep. The subconscious often works against the conscious facade, to reveal true motives and beliefs.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 15, 2007 01:51 AM
Comment #232907

Pancho, I think your partisan slip is showing. I agree with you, Democrats are going to become the second coming of one party government in 2009. And with their open border, welcome the world’s strangers into our bedroom communities, policies there will no doubt be a number of more terrorist attacks on their watch.

And Democrats don’t seem to have a clue as to how they are paving the way back for Republicans. Now that is utter political stupidity and ignorance of the highest order, topping even Bush’s and Rove’s political mistakes, as this one should be so blatantly obvious with not so subtle hints coming from the Republicans on this very issue. But, because these hints come from non-Democrats, Democrats won’t listen. How very Republican of Democrats, don’t you think?

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 15, 2007 01:59 AM
Comment #232910

dbs said: “i wonder how these 12 mil. illegal aliens affected the outcome of the two forementioned elections? “

The 12 million number referenced by La Raza spokesperson pollster, Benhindrex, was a reference to legal American Latino voters. There is no way to accurately track illegal voters, but, with the checks and controls on voter rolls being reasonably effective, it is unlikely illegal immigrants constitute more than a few thousand votes. Illegal immigrants tend to shy away from documentation inspection, which occurs at voting stations in most districts in the nation, if not all.

But, it would be interesting to see Benhindrex’ data to see if he is including the Cuban voters in that 12 million, because Cuban voters are, by a large majority, Republican voters, not Democrat.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 15, 2007 02:10 AM
Comment #232912

Doug, Jack, j2t2, d.a.n, dbs, and Rhinehold, thank you for the complimentary, observant, or inquisitive comments. Much appreciated. Hoping not to be too presumptuous, but, if you are inclined, please visit the NumberUSA site (link in article) and fax your Senators on this issue. It’s free. This can be stopped again of objectors will only communicate their objections. The last dead Amnesty - no border protection bill is proof of that.

Poncho, thank you for an alternate perspective to debate. It is appreciated.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 15, 2007 02:14 AM
Comment #232931

David,

You know by now I’m farrrrrrr left on this issue, BUT I recognize that the majority of Americans want border security, they want immigration laws enforced, they’re sick and tired of the status quo!

I get it. And I know that neglecting these issues is leading to anarchy and vigilantism. So screw this whole idea of “comprehensive” reform! Start by enforcing the laws we have now and securing our borders.

Common sense tells me that securing the borders is going to require different strategies in different areas ………. but I insist that we always treat every human being as a human being first, no gun towers!!!!!! But, by all means let’s shut off the flow of undocumented immigrants.

Neglecting this problem has led us towards a potential third American genocide, and our elected officials are responsible. Anytime our laws are ignored or our security is denied there is the threat of vigilantism. We’re already seeing it.

At this point we don’t need new laws, we just need to enforce the laws we were supposed to be enforcing all along. I believe public opinion will shift in the next 10 to 15 years and we’ll welcome more immigrants, whether Hispanic or Vulcan.

Posted by: KansasDem at September 15, 2007 05:12 AM
Comment #232934

Dan,

Using race is a lame excuse that is especially insulting to those that have truly suffered racism in the past.

I agree. There isn’t much racism going on in the US anymore. Thing is, there are so many phony accusations of racism being thrown around these days Americans no longer recognize real racism when it happens.

Then there’s the fact that “Hispanic” isn’t a race in the first place…

Poncho,

Doesn’t this article belong in the red colum with the rest of the righty elites who want to build and preserve their fortunes on the backs of the poor, iliterate, and unfortunate doing the only thing they can to try to improve their position in this life by coming to America. And you people want to kick them back into their poverty, illiteracy, and misfortune.

And that’s somehow worse that being here in poverty, illiteracy, and misfortune?

What we want is for our immigrants to come here legally and become citizens. Their fortunes won’t improve otherwise. Perhaps you like the fact that people are illegally crossing our borders. Perhaps you like the fact that they are often forced to work for slave wages. Is this your idea of “improving their fortunes?” It’s not “the right” who want to “build and preserve their fortunes on the backs of the poor, iliterate, and unfortunate.” It’s people like you who have something to gain because you (think you) are benefiting politically from illegal immigration.

Posted by: Mark at September 15, 2007 07:59 AM
Comment #232935

makes me wonder…. how many illegal canadians come across and are not even noticed because they are white and often educated…..

it seems that we punish the poor under educated illegsls and ignore the ones that are more like, us the msinstream american.
i was once told by an illegal immigrant from canada that the number of illegals coming from there way outnumber the ones coming from our southern borders, yet i see very little or no mention of that fact anywhere.
why arent the neocons trying to build a wall on the northern borders? smells quite a bit like racism to me.

Posted by: john at September 15, 2007 08:54 AM
Comment #232937


If the only thing Americans are going to do about illegal immigration is cry about it they deserve what is happening. They have the nonviolent means to stop illegal immigration and to demand a better accounting on other issues as well.

Those who favor the illegal immigrants can get thousands in the streets to protest on behalf of their cause, whill those who favor legal immigration and the upholding of our laws can muster only 50 protesters.

Take your cause to the streets. Sit down, block traffic, shut down business. Nothing will get the governments attention faster or more effectively.

CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE will be more effective at influencing the government than voting. Organize yourselves and take to the streets. Shut down business for two days and I guarantee you will get the governments attention.

The polls show that a majority of Independents, Republicans and Democrats have a disfavorable opinion of illegal immigration. Many argue that the Democratic Leadership is backing illegal immigration in an effort to make the Democratic Party the main or only party by getting the illegals and their offspring voting for the Democrats. If this is true, I think it is foolishness because no one can predict the future voting preference of the illegals. A better argument by the Dem leadership would have been an attempt to save Social Security.

Posted by: jlw at September 15, 2007 09:26 AM
Comment #232939

Kansas Dem said: “Common sense tells me that securing the borders is going to require different strategies in different areas ………. but I insist that we always treat every human being as a human being first, no gun towers!!!!!! But, by all means let’s shut off the flow of undocumented immigrants.”

Sounds very reasonable and rational to me. If there is a cheaper option in some areas than a border barrier that will be just as effective, that would be a smart use of tax dollars. No gun towers, right! But Armed Border Patrol definitely, since they are going to increasingly become targets for armed traders/dealers and Coyotes at the border as we close up the borders to monitored ports of entry only.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 15, 2007 09:36 AM
Comment #232940

john said: “i was once told by an illegal immigrant from canada that the number of illegals coming from there way outnumber the ones coming from our southern borders, yet i see very little or no mention of that fact anywhere.”

Perhaps, because it isn’t a fact, at all? I do hear a lot of folks who believe the twin towers were demolished with explosives, as though two massive jets loaded with fuel were an insufficient cause of the collapse. Does the fact that numbers of people are promulgating this belief make it true, or supply any evidence at all that it is true? Of course not. Just because one hears something, or even reads something, doesn’t mean it is valid, especially in the absence of any evidence or logical justification, whatsoever.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 15, 2007 09:42 AM
Comment #232948

“how many illegal canadians come across and are not even noticed because they are white”

John,

Among others, about 1/16th of my ancestors ….. in fact those whose name I still bear. But honestly, there were no actual immigration laws then. The earliest actual immigration laws were targeted at limiting Chinese immigration in the late 1800’s.

I personally think xenophobia plays a large part in our fear of Hispanic immigrants, but I can see this boiling over into horrific violence if we, as a nation, don’t get a handle on the situation and the absolute majority has spoken loud and clear.

Posted by: KansasDem at September 15, 2007 10:19 AM
Comment #232951

here are a couple of links about illegal canadian immigration you may be correct that canadian immigration is not at the level as with our southern neighbors but it does exist. but canada not being a third world country or “emerging economy” it gets little or no attention. my point is that latin american immigration gets all this attention but no attention is paid to the northern problems ….


http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/04/12/human.smugglers/index.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/08/world/main524728.shtml

Posted by: john at September 15, 2007 10:37 AM
Comment #232952

i realize that the problem in the north is minor compared to the southern one i state only that it IS a problem

Posted by: john at September 15, 2007 10:38 AM
Comment #232954

We need to not only enforce the laws currently on the books, we also need to repair the damage caused by NAFTA and the other trade agreements that helped to cause the massive influx of illegal immigrants. The Corporate lapdogs that perpetrated these trade agreements need to recognize the error of their winner take all ideology and allow their representatvives to modify the trade agreements. The La Raza types should be involved in this fight if they truely have the interests of the illegals in mind.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 15, 2007 10:42 AM
Comment #232956

i say take all those immigration border patrol agents and use them to police the immigrants already here since they seem to do a piss poor job keeping illegals out anyway.

i work in an industry that is swiftly turning to that southern labor force. and it is affecting my pay directly. I am often reminded by managment in our company meetings that we are the last company in my city that is paying more than minimum wage and only accepts fluent english speaking, americans and that our company is the last offering benefits i.e. insurance, vacation, etc. and I should consider myself lucky. This is directly due to the fact that my peers in my profession are 80% hispanic and I have spoken to some. If not for the fact that I am fluent in their language I would not have been able to converse with them at all. They are shocked that I make double the wage they do plus full benefits including 401k and life insurance,while doing the exact same job.
the majority of illegal immigration is being driven by employers that are looking for a cheap labor force. so I say stop picking in the little guys and start coming down on the employers that create the stimulus that causes the problem. We need no more new laws to do so, it only takes enforcment of the laws we already have.

Posted by: john at September 15, 2007 10:56 AM
Comment #232957


If there were 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. from Canada, that would be more than one third of Canada’s population. Their economy would have collapsed and the rest of their population would be headed our way.

Posted by: jlw at September 15, 2007 10:56 AM
Comment #232958

i couldnt agree more about NAFTA………… and WTO as well.

Posted by: john at September 15, 2007 10:57 AM
Comment #232964


Does anyone have a list of employers who have gone to prison for hiring illegal? As far as I know, there are none. When the chicken plant was raided in Ohio a few weeks ago, a member of management said he and the company were against illegal immigration but the could do nothing because the illegals had documentation. This is known as fabricating a defense becuse there are ways to check. More than 160 illegals were arrested, many from Africa. No one from management was arrested and the company was not displined except by the loss of a large portion of their workforce which they can replace the same way they got the workforce that was arrested.

The raid in Ohio was nothing more than a publicity stunt by the Bush Administration.

Posted by: jlw at September 15, 2007 11:15 AM
Comment #232967

read fast food nation the beef industry as a whole are very large employers of illegal work forces.

Posted by: john at September 15, 2007 11:27 AM
Comment #232968

David,

Speaking of “coyotes” ……. this whole open border to Mexican trucking is one of those things that just leaves me dumb-founded. You know darn well at some point they’ll basically run on a “pre-pass” system where there will be no cargo check at all.

And immigration aside, I’m sure you’ve read reports of gas pipeline bombings in Mexico. Do we honestly think for one minute that this won’t spread to the USA? The need to secure our borders goes beyond the immigration problem.

BTW, my comment about different strategies was poorly stated. My point actually is that in some locations we may need a wall, whereas a much less expensive fence may be fine in others, electronic surveillance in still others, etc.

Posted by: KansasDem at September 15, 2007 11:27 AM
Comment #232972
Doug, Jack, j2t2, d.a.n, dbs, and Rhinehold, thank you for the complimentary, observant, or inquisitive comments. Much appreciated. Hoping not to be too presumptuous, but, if you are inclined, please visit the NumberUSA site (link in article) and fax your Senators on this issue. It’s free.
David, tnanks! Yes, I am already a contributing member of BOTH NumbersUSA.COM and Alipac.US, and send FAXes and letters every week (about 5 this last week as the DEMs try to sneak another shamnesty through as earmarks in other BILLs).

Also, look at who has all of the F’s and D’s at the bottom of the IMMIGRATION REPORT CARDs list.

Is that mere partisan bias?
Some think so.
I don’t.

Again, I think BOTH DEMs or REPUPs have crappy records on illegal immigration, but this issue is likely to help REPUB politicians. If you visit ALIPAC.US (with 55.3 million page views), look at their list of politicians they are supporting. DEMs should take a close look at this list, and NumbersUSA.com’s list at grades.betterimmigration.com .

Actually, probably the best thing voters could do to send a loud and clear message to Congress is to simply stop rewarding irresponsible Congress persons with 90% to 95% re-election rates. That is probably the only thing that will truly get their attention. The reason Congress ignores the voters is because they have been conditioned to think they can do anything they want since they have a 90% to 95% re-election rate (since 1996). Notice the turn over. It’s really been quite small since 1996. Even the last election, while a bit more than the one previous to it, still shows over 90% re-election rates. That essentially rewards and conditions Congress to be even more irresponsible.

_______________ Senate ___________________________House_____
Congress__Years_____Total___Dems__Reps_Other_Vacant_Total_Dems_Rep___Other_Vacant
97th ___ 1981–1983 __ 100 __ 46 __ 53 __ 1 __ - __ — 435 __ 242 __ 192 __ 1 __ —
98th ___ 1983–1985 __ 100 __ 46 __ 54 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 269 __ 166 __ — __ —
99th ___ 1985–1987 __ 100 __ 47 __ 53 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 253 __ 182 __ — __ —
100th __ 1987–1989 __ 100 __ 55 __ 45 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 258 __ 177 __ — __ —
101st __ 1989–1991 __ 100 __ 55 __ 45 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 260 __ 175 __ — __ —
102nd __ 1991–1993 __ 100 __ 56 __ 44 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 267 __ 167 __ 1 __ —
103rd __ 1993–1995 __ 100 __ 57 __ 43 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 258 __ 176 __ 1 __ —
104th __ 1995–1997 __ 100 __ 48 __ 52 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 204 __ 230 __ 1 __ —
105th __ 1997–1999 __ 100 __ 45 __ 55 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 207 __ 226 __ 2 __ —
106th __ 1999–2001 __ 100 __ 45 __ 55 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 211 __ 223 __ 1 __ —
107th __ 2001–2003 __ 100 __ 50 __ 50 __ — __ - __ — 435 __ 212 __ 221 __ 2 __ —
108th __ 2003–2005 __ 100 __ 48 __ 51 __ 1 __ - __ — 435 __ 205 __ 229 __ 1 __ —
109th __ 2005-2007 __ 100 __ 44 __ 55 __ 1 __ - __ — 435 __ 202 __ 231 __ 1 __ 1
110th __ 2007-2008 __ 100 __ 49 __ 49 __ 2 __ - __ — 435 __ 233 __ 202 __ 0 __ —

To be fair, it should be pointed out that REPUBs had the majority (though small) from 1996 to 2006, and did not address illegal immigration until the very last moment in late 2006 … only when their poll numbers were looking dismal leading up to the 7-Nov-2006 election.

That is why the best thing voters could probably do is to send a loud and clear message to Congress by not continuing to reward irresponsible Congress persons with 90% to 95% re-election rates. After all, we [voters] have already been fooled too many times. Government won’t become more responsible until the voters do too. Until then, voters have the government that they deserve, and only the voters can change it … as long as they still have the right to vote and get an accurate vote-count.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 15, 2007 11:31 AM
Comment #232975

“the beef industry as a whole are very large employers of illegal work forces.”

I’d not been to Dodge City, KS in more than a decade until recently and you’d now honestly think you were in a border town. Yes, this area depends on immigrant labor in the meat packing industry, and these are not low-paid jobs. The advertised starting wage is around $13.00 per hour.

I can only imagine that it’s horrific work. The area dairies also employ many non-English speaking immigrants, and the flour mills. All very labor intensive jobs I’m sure, though I lack first hand knowledge.

I do tend to think we’ll find ourselves longing for the “good old days” if and when we choke off this labor supply. But that’s only speculation and personal belief. Only time will tell.

Posted by: KansasDem at September 15, 2007 12:07 PM
Comment #232976
BTW, my comment about different strategies was poorly stated. My point actually is that in some locations we may need a wall, whereas a much less expensive fence may be fine in others, electronic surveillance in still others, etc.
Yes, good point. Some people want to portray it as some sort of massive, expensive, oppressive, sinister wall.

All that is really needed is a fence, some barriers in some places (e.g. ditches to stop vehicles), cameras, technology, and border patrol.

Cost to construct: $8 Billion

Cost to maintain and populate with border patrol: $10 Billion annually

Cost (net losses) from illegal immigration: $70 Billion to $350 Billion annually

Savings to U.S. Tax Payers annually: $60 Billion to $340 Billion

There were some myths running around a year ago about how Americans profit from illegal immigration. Profit who? Tax payers? That myth has been debunked. Dozens of reliable studies have been done that show illegal immigration costs U.S. Tax payers at least $70 Billion per year. And that is based on a study that is a decade old. Some newer estimates place the net losses (that’s all benefits minus all costs) as high as $350 Billion. California alone reports net losses at $15 Billion.

But you don’t need a bunch of reports to determine the net losses. Even a few very simple (and conservative) calculations reveal the net losses to be substantial (i.e. on average, every state losing billions annually). Thus, we are now hearing that excuse (i.e. profit) much less now.

As each excuse is debunked, the immigration proponents increasingly resort to the last excuse left: racism

And it is quite effective. Claims of racism scare people, no matter how baseless they are. While racism may exist, those that try to use that excuse always fail to recognize that illegal aliens come from ALL over the world.

And that excuse should be rejected, just like the other lame excuses.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 15, 2007 12:08 PM
Comment #232977

david

where i live in southern cal. there is no checking of ID at the polls. they ask for your name and look it up on a list, then give you a ballot. i’ve been voting absentee recently and all i did was fill out a form sign it, and they mail them to me. i live just south of the city of santa ana, and it is @ by my estimates 80 ot 90% non english speakers. make no mistake about it they are voting in numbers that would boggle you r mind. all you have to do is look at the make up of the state legislature, and the local city gov’ts, and it becomes quite evident. it’s to easy to vote illegaly.

Posted by: dbs at September 15, 2007 12:22 PM
Comment #232985

I’m not for the big walls first.

I think we could solve this problem pretty easily with three steps.

1. Biuld that gates before the walls. Make sure they are very large and efficient so that US employers have no worries about getting legal guest workers/immigrants here in the US. There should be companies created to document who these people are. If you are a farmer here in Washington State there should be a service you can subscribe to that can prove to you that your workers are legal.

2. Once employers have NO excuse to hire illegals, because legals are so abundant, then have large fines for not using this fair affordable system. Clamp down on companies hard that hire illegals.

If you notice, by now all of the current illegals are struggling for work.

3. Create a fair system for those who came here illegally to go back and get in line and come into the country legally. I am not for amnesty. I am for an illegal needing to travel to their country of origin or what ever and get in line!! But the line needs to be efficient.

I would hope that in the end we would have a fair system. Also that if people jump ahead in line they would not find work here because the legal way is so user friendly. For instance if a farmer wanted to hire migrant workers, and a worker showed up, they would say, “I hire through xyz company, if you go there I’m sure they will place you here.” By going through xyz company the farmer can rest assured that they ahve no worries of legal action from the federal government.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at September 15, 2007 01:45 PM
Comment #232987

part two:

I don’t think you can fundamentally change the immigration issue with a wall. People will find a way around.

In the end, we have a wonderful country that is creating many jobs. People want to live here. I have to gripe whatsoever with immigration. I just want it to be legal and orderly. We need to know who is in our country and why.

Craig

Posted by: Craig Holmes at September 15, 2007 01:47 PM
Comment #233002

Craig,

Of course you call it a wall to belittle it.
That’s a common tactic.
It’s not a wall.
Also, even if it isn’t 100% effective at stopping all illegal aliens, it will certainly slow it down drastically.

BOTH (1)Border security and (2)stopping greedy illegal employers is the solution, because neither are 100%, but BOTH will acheive maximum effectiveness for the least cost. Especially since enforcement of the laws alone (to stop greedy illegal employers) could be more costly than securing the borders.

It is a barrier consisting of a fence, cameras, technology, and 153,000 (three shifts of 51,000) border patrol positioned every 621 feet. That will protect our borders from illegal aliens and terrorists too (which have already been reported to have crossed our sothern border).

That will save us at least $60 Billion per year.

  • ANNUAL NET LOSSES (COST) of ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: $70 Billion (maybe much more).

  • ONE-TIME COST OF FENCE/BARRIER: $8 Billion

  • COST OF LAW ENFORCEMENT TO PROSECUTE ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS: Unknown, but fines could finance it, and it would approach ZERO as enforcement and border security is achieved.
  • MAINTENANCE OF FENCE and BORDER PATROL: $10 Billion per year

    ANNUAL SAVINGS: $70 Billion - $10 Billion = $60 Billion.

    THE SOLUTION

    Seems like a no-brainer. But, if the American voters continue to blindly reward corrupt, FOR-SALE politicians (in league with greedy owners of corporations) with constant re-election (90% to 95% since 1996), then Americans will get what they deserve.

    But there is hope perhaps?
    There is growing evidence that millions of voters are getting very angry about illegal immigration. Look at the 53 million page views at ALIPAC.US. Remember the millions of FAXes, phone calls, and letters that killed the DEMs first attempt to push through the first SHAMNESTY BILL? Yes, more Americans are getting angry.
    But not angry with the impoverished illegal alien simply lookin’ for a job.
    They are getting angry with the truly despicable incumbent politicians that despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other, as the greedy owners of corporations rake in the profits, and slumbering voters pick up the net losses of $70 Billion to $350 Billion per year).

    They are starting to understand that the greedy owners of corporations (the puppeteers) and their puppets (bought-and-paid-for politicians) are selling Americans citizens out, and despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other.

    If voters repeatedly reward bought-and-paid-for politicians with continual re-election, then Americans will get exactly what they deserve. Americans are already starting to feel the consequences of so many manifestations of unchecked greed. Slumbering voters better wake up before it is too late.

    The last amnesty of 1986 quadrupled the problem (grew from 3 million to 12 million).

    Do voters want to see the problem quadruple again?

    If the answer is yes, then keep right on pulling the party-lever and repeatedly rewarding bought-and-paid-for politicians that are selling them out for a buck every chance they get; despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other.

    We will see. If voters are still more worried losing seats for THEIR party, than illegal immigration and the nations’ other pressing problems (growing dangerously in number and severity), then those problems will continue to deteriorate (even accelerate). And the majority of voters will only have themselves to thank for it; for being duped into literally rewarding corrupt, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians that are selling them out; proving that we have essentially sold ourselves out.

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 15, 2007 03:32 PM
    Comment #233003

    By the way, that $60 Billion in savings (above; i.e. $70 Billion - $10 Billion annually to maintain and patrol the border) did not even factor in the cost of crime, disease, millions of displaced jobs, and voter fraud.
    SOLUTION:

    • (1) Secure the borders

    • (2) Enforce Existing laws.

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 15, 2007 03:41 PM
    Comment #233031

    “…righty elites who want to build and preserve their fortunes on the backs of the poor, iliterate, and unfortunate doing the only thing they can to try to improve their position in this life by coming to America…”

    what a load of manure. my friend, you clearly can’t see the forest for the trees. it is they that support illegal immigration who wish to exploit an underprivileged people for their own personal gain - be it financial or political.

    the ‘righty elites’ - those of the true right - are the only ones that appear to be thinking of anyone but themselves. the dem’s in dc will kowtow to the illegals for votes, and the corporate neocons shall suffer them for cheap slave labor.

    these insidious “compassionate” few wish to pay illegals a mere pittance to do american jobs - an amount which, while more than they might make for an equivalent job in mexico, is far, far less than they would be entitled - nay permitted - to make if they were *legal* american citizens.

    thus, they ultimately will never be wealthy by the american standards to which they aspire, and will ultimately find themselves no better off (but likely instead worse) as a culture/nation - and in the interim, an ever increasing number of americans will fall short of our current standard of living, being unable to find a decently paying job.

    rather than bettering mexico, the purported mexican loyalists would bring america down to the same level.

    there are only three reasons which i can see for supporting illegal immigration; financial greed, political maneuvering, or a level of ignorance bordering stupidity.

    Posted by: diogenes at September 15, 2007 10:16 PM
    Comment #233041

    Fear is the path to dark side.

    La Raza seems radical to me, but NumbersUSA no less so. They’re two sides of the same coin: people unwilling to work out an modus vivendi that will benefit both sides. They want the solution all to themselves, and don’t care about provoking another battle with their declared arch-nemeses. This won’t work.

    First, lets clear something up: most Democrats are not all that enthralled with illegal immigration, and southsourcing. One of the biggest contributors to the Swift Boat campaign, Bob Perry, is a big homebuilder down here. The Bush administration’s numbers on prosecution for immigration labor offenses were actually less than Bill Clinton’s.

    Second, lets drop this talk about a wall on the border. Globalization is a reality, and that means easy movement across borders. New technology is also a reality: Jets and powerful modern sea vessels make land barriers practically obsolete. Worse, many illegal immigrants don’t even bother to come in as illegals. About a third simply overstay their welcome on their visas.

    What we need is strong internal enforcement of our laws, especially on employers, whose willingness to hire these people creates the opportunities that draw people over the border. What we need is to reduce the overly high fees associated with immigration nowadays, so that the people who want to seek opportunities here do so under our supervision, rather than in the shadows of the black market of illegal labor.

    Finally, we need to stop approaching this subject with the kind of obnoxious, arrogant zeal we’ve been using on each other since 9/11 on these kinds of issues. Whatever solution we make for this problem, we have to make together; otherwise it will not work. Law works best when its authority is accepted by all. That requires dedicated enforcement, yes, but also the willing submission of those who are supposed to follow the law. This is not a battle to win, with the other side to be vanquished and conquered, it is a discussion that will be best concluded when we reach a mature, negotiated settlement on the issue.

    Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 15, 2007 11:55 PM
    Comment #233053

    Stephen D. said: “Second, lets drop this talk about a wall on the border. Globalization is a reality, and that means easy movement across borders.”

    There you have it folks, the central theme of the Democratic Party on illegal immigration. Their intent is not to protect and defend our borders, but, to change the laws so the borders can legally remain wide open to the rest of the world without a care or concern for overpopulation, terrorists, or United States sovereignty.

    Thank you Stephen, for so eloquently and succinctly stating the Democrat’s position. It is clear that after Democrats take control in 2008, we citizens of America will have to defend our homeland, homes, and backyards on our own. I hate vigilantism, but, Democrats apparently love it, because they are going to leave Americans with no choice in the matter regarding national defense.

    Republicans were right all along. Democrats haven’t a clue what national security means.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 16, 2007 08:13 AM
    Comment #233054

    Craig said: “I don’t think you can fundamentally change the immigration issue with a wall. People will find a way around.”

    You said it, you didn’t think!

    A wall will halt about 90% of the traffic. The other 10% you refer to as getting around it, under it, or over it, will become a matter for the Border Patrol.

    Take a box 6’ wide and 6’ long. Divide it in half with a wall with one small 2.5 sq. in. opening in the center. In one half of the box, stuff it with 20 hungry mice. In the other half put a plate of cheese. Now, would it be possible for a single person to control the mice and prevent them from ever reaching the cheese? Of course, because only one can come through the opening at a time.

    Now remove the wall in the center of the box. Can one person prevent the mice from reaching the cheese. NO. Absolutely not.

    The border barrier is not a 100% effective solution to halting illegal immigration, but, only about 90%. But, it is absolutely the first step in giving the Border Patrol the ability to deal with the problem by funneling illegal immigrants to only a few openings along a couple thousand miles of border. Leaving the border wide open, makes the efforts of the Border Patrol futile as I have demonstrated with the mice box.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 16, 2007 08:25 AM
    Comment #233059
    Isn’t it interesting that a group that calls itself “The Race” is accusing someone else of racism?

    If you understand Spanish as used in this context at all, it means “The People”…these “people” are mixed race…Spanish, Indian…

    I don’t care what your Spanish dictionary says, that’s not the usage here…it’s an idiom, not a strict word-for-word translation.

    Posted by: Rachel at September 16, 2007 10:35 AM
    Comment #233062

    I could understand that when we were a nation of 50 million people immigration was good for the interest of this Country. I dont understand why with a population of over 330 million it is still a good thing. The American people curtailed runaway population growth during the past few decades by a variety of reasons yet we are still subject to the overflow populations from those people and cultures that chose not to curtail runaway population growth. As the new influx of immigrants,legal and illegal, continue to flood this country the melting pot has failed and we are now being faced with complete cultural changes. Why? I would suggest that now is the time to debate both legal and illegal immigration. We simply dont need it anymore. Why crowd ourselves into a country with shrinking natural resources and devolve into cultural chaos? We cant seem to control immigration so why not stop all immigration until such time that it is able to be controlled.

    Posted by: j2t2 at September 16, 2007 11:13 AM
    Comment #233064
    Stephen Daugherty wrote: First, lets clear something up: most Democrats are not all that enthralled with illegal immigration, and southsourcing.
    Really?

    Then how do you explain the following?

    Stephen Daugherty wrote: ALIPAC is the more level-headed of the two … Neither [NumbersUSA.com and ALIPAC.US], though, shows considerable connection to the party structure… Well, I’d find myself in agreement with ALI-PAC more than NumbersUSA,

    Interesting. So ALIPAC endorses almost no Democrats … just like NumbersUSA.com, and BetterImmigration.com. Yet you agree with one, but not the other?

    The fact is, BOTH DEM and REPUB politicians have failed miserably to do anything about illegal immigration for decades. BOTH despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other.

    The sooner enough voters understand that too many voters are repeatedly rewarding bought-and-paid-for politicians that are despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other, and selling out Americans every chance they politicans get, then they will (hopefully) stop doing it. If not, then voters will get what they deserve; they have the government they deserve.

    Stephen Daugherty wrote: Second, lets drop this talk about a wall on the border. Globalization is a reality, and that means easy movement across borders.
    Notice how they call it a wall.

    Why do they do that? After all, it is not a wall. They call it that to make it sound oppressive, evil, and expensive.

    It is a barrier consisting of a fence, ditches in some places, border patrol (three shifts), a road, cameras, and technology. Not a wall.

    A barrier by itself and enforcement of existing immigration laws by itself are not sufficient.

    BOTH:

    • (1)Border security and

    • (2)and stopping greedy illegal employers

    … is the combined solution, because neither are 100%, but BOTH will acheive maximum effectiveness for the least cost.

    Also, even if either or both are not 100% effective at stopping all illegal aliens, it will most certainly slow it down and reduce illegal immigration drastically.

    Now, about cost.

    It won’t cost anything.
    In fact, it will save money.

    It will actually SAVE American tax payers at least $60 Billion per year. Border states (e.g. California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas) will save the most since they are the hardest hit. Especially California.

    • ANNUAL NET LOSSES (COST) of ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: $70 Billion (maybe much more).
    • ONE-TIME COST OF FENCE/BARRIER: $8 Billion
    • COST OF LAW ENFORCEMENT TO PROSECUTE ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS: Unknown, but fines could finance it, and it would quickly approach $ZERO as enforcement and border security are achieved.
    • MAINTENANCE OF FENCE and BORDER PATROL: $10 Billion per year
    • _______________________________________________
    • Therefore, ANNUAL SAVINGS: $70 Billion - $10 Billion = $60 Billion (excluding the one-time initial $8 Billion).

    Do you know what the intere$t alone on the $9 Trillion National Debt is per month? Over $33 Billion per month (that’s almost $400 Billion per year on interest). So we can stand to start saving $60 Billion per year. We need to stop those NET losses of over $70 Billion per year (not to mention the crime, disease, job displacement, and voter fraud). Consider the cost of these many burdens being shifted to tax payers (another type of REGRESSIVE tax, like our current REGRESSIVE tax system, inflation which is another form of REGRESSIVE tax, and now all kinds of sales taxes that are all REGRESSIVE):

    We can be enriched by legal immigration. But, we are not enriched by uncontrolled, massive, immigration (legal or not), because it creates chaos and societal disorder. Illegal immigration is not an issue about race, color, ethnicity, class, or nationality, since illegal aliens are of many races from many nations. Those trying to make a race, color, ethnicity, class, or nationality issue of it do so because all of their arguments are weak and unsustainable excuses and common tactics to divert attention away from these serious problems and burdens:

    • Crime is a serious issue, but only part of the many issues costing U.S. tax payers a net loss of $70 billion per year; some estimates place losses much higher;

    • burden on education systems;

    • burden on healthcare systems;

    • burden on hospital systems; 84 hospitals closed/closing in California;

    • burden on welfare systems; over 32% of illegal aliens collect welfare

    • burden on Medicaid system;

    • burden on Social Security and Medicare systems;

    • burden on border patrol systems; ever increasing numbers are needed;

    • burden on insurance systems; illegal aliens can/will not pay for damages they cause;

    • burden on law enforcement systems; costing California billions per year;

    • burden on prison systems; 29% of state and federal prisoners (Sep-2004) are illegal aliens;

    • 2.3 million displaced American workers; partly because half of all illegal aliens that don’t pay taxes, and greedy employers that don’t pay unemployment taxes, Social Security, Medicare taxes, etc.;

    • voter fraud; burden on voting systems;

    By the way, the net losses to American tax payers may me MUCH larger than $70 Billion annually. It does not even include the untold cost of crime (cirmes that should have never occurred), disease (One illegal alien in Santa Barbara, California infected 56 other people with tuberculosis as reported on April 24, 2004, by the Santa Barbara Press-News, “Anatomy of an Outbreak”), job displacement, and fraudulently voting in our elections.

    Democrat politicians very badly want to give all illegal aliens AMNESTY. Why? Votes. Democrat politicians are soliciting voters. It’s that simple. Right this minute, Democrat politicians are trying to sneak another SHAMNESTY through via earmarks on other BILLs.

    The American voters are watching and learning.
    That is why NumbersUSA.com and ALIPAC.US (with 55 million page views) are not endorsing Democrats. And neither will I. I will never vote for any politician that refuses to support the most fundamental duty of the Federal Government: to protect our borders and its citizens.

    The sooner we can get (both) existing laws enforced and the borders secured, the sooner we can start SAVING at least $60 Billion per year.

    Could YOUR state use $1.2 Billion per year?
    Then stop illegal immigration.

    Also, beware of ALL the lame excuses used by immigration proponents:

    • EXCUSE # 01: Tradition:
      MYTH: As George Bush said: “We are a land of immigrants”. We can not pull up the drawbridge now, unless we dismantle the Statue of Liberty. Otherwise, we are all hypocrites.
      TRUTH: This is a common ploy. Yes, we are a land of immigrants. Mostly legal. We are enriched by legal immigration; not by massive, uncontrolled, illegal immigration. You would not allow large numbers of uninvited persons to come live in your home, use your food, utilities, and space. So, why would you let them come into your community, uninvited, and use your schools, hospitals, ERs, Medicaid, welfare, highways, and vote in your elections?

    • EXCUSE # 02: Economics:
      MYTH: The U.S. will crumble without illegal aliens. We need immigrants to pay the Social Security of the Baby Boomers when they begin to retire. Immigrants do jobs citizens won’t do. Who would pick our produce? Who would make the beds and wash the dishes?
      TRUTH: This is another common myth, since illegal aliens are costing U.S. tax payers a net loss of at least $70 billion per year. $70 billion will pick a lot of vegetables and fruit, eh? Guarded and electronically monitored fences along all U.S. land borders would cost about $10 billion per year. How does that compare to the $70 billion per year in net losses to U.S. taxpayers?

    • EXCUSE # 03: Humanitarianism:
      MYTH: You are selfish to put the needs of poor citizens ahead of more desperate people in other nations, by denying them entry into our country. The U.S. is obligated to share with others. Large-scale immigration is a significant way for the U.S. to help the impoverished people of the world.
      TRUTH: It is also selfish to forget to show compassion for your fellow citizens that go without because illegal aliens have stolen from and burdened our welfare, Medicaid, education, healthcare, hospital, E.R., Medicare, Social Security, law enforcement, prison, insurance, and voting systems. Also, without the sovereign right of nations to control their own borders and immigration, people in places where things are not as good will always descend upon places where things are better, ruining it for everyone. We can be enriched by controlled immigration, but massive, uncontrolled immigration (legal or not) is a recipe for disaster, chaos, increased crime, racism, resentments, and societal disorder.

    • EXCUSE # 04: Diversity / Racism:
      MYTH: Increasing diversity through immigration is necessary to be true to our civil rights principles. Opposition to illegal immigration is racist. We are obligated to accommodate millions of immigrants per year because our strength is our diversity; the diversity of immigrants made America great. And, Christopher Columbus was the first illegal alien, and we stole the land from the Indians.
      TRUTH: That is the old stand-by. You are a racist. However, race has nothing to do with it since illegal aliens are of all races from all over the world. Diversity is good, but massive, uncontrolled, illegal immigration itself leads to racism due to chaos, resentments, increased crime, societal disorder, and increased competition for a slice of a shrinking pie.

    • EXCUSE # 05: Irredentism:
      MYTH: We have no right to secure U.S. borders, because U.S. borders are illegitimate to start with. The U.S. really belongs to the Indians and other neighboring nations, to start with.
      TRUTH: This is another lame argument. If you want to use that logic, we should all give back all of our nations to the original inhabitants, or their ancestors. This lame argument is just one of many that demonstrate how weak all of the pro-illegal alien arguments really are.

    • EXCUSE # 06: Cornucopianism:
      MYTH: The free market and technology will save us. We are the land of plenty. Besides, we need illegal aliens to grow out of our massive debt problems. They will become new tax payers, and we can grow our way out of debt.
      TRUTH: Even if that were true, does it justify exploitation of an under-paid under-class? To attempt to remedy our own debt problems? This simply does not make sense, since illegal aliens are costing U.S. taxpayers net losses of over $70 billion per year. Besides, how can importing massive numbers of uneducated and impoverished improve the economy. 32% of illegal aliens receive welfare. 29% of all incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails (nationwide) are illegal aliens. How will technology resolve that?

    • EXCUSE # 07: Globalism:
      MYTH: We live in a global economy now, requiring new global solutions. Securing the U.S. borders is futile, since it is inadequate to deal with globalization.
      TRUTH: This is a complete non-sequitur. Secure borders and a global economy have little (if anything) to do with each other. Nations have the sovereign right to secure their borders, and that is necessary, because without it, massive numbers of people from places where things are not as good would invade places where things are better, ruining it for everyone. We can not immigrate our way out of our fiscal and economic problems. Especially with increasing competition abroad, growing corpocrisy and corporatism within government, and an increasingly irresponsible, elitist, bought-and-paid-for, look-the-other-way government.

    • EXCUSE # 08: Practicality:
      MYTH: It is not possible to deport 12+ million illegal aliens.
      TRUTH: There is no need to deport illegal aliens. We can help deport those that volunteer to be deported, but once the magnets are eliminated, illegal aliens will leave voluntarily. They should not be starved out. So, we should be provide $500 (per person) and pre-paid transportation to each illegal alien volunteering to leave the U.S. That may cost as much as $12 billion, but it is a one-time cost, and it is still miniscule compared to the current annual losses of $70 billion (and climbing, year after year).

    Stephen Daugherty wrote: Fear is the path to dark side. La Raza seems radical to me, but NumbersUSA no less so. … Second, lets drop this talk about a wall on the border. Globalization is a reality, …

    Interesting. Stephen, what party do you belong to? But that’s not important, eh?

  • Posted by: d.a.n at September 16, 2007 11:33 AM
    Comment #233067


    The main culprit of the illegal immigrant problem is the wealthy elites and especially the Mexican elites. They have created a slave labor market in Mexico which produces much profit for themselves. However, they have a major problem. The pions are breeding to much and there are to many of them. They have found a winning strategy. Send as much of their excess labor as possible north to the United States. Excess population goes north and yankee dollars go south.

    The last thing that the Wealthy elites of Mexico want is for us to close our borders and send the illegals home. It,in all likelyhood, means revolution in Mexico.

    Viva la Revolucion!

    Posted by: jlw at September 16, 2007 11:41 AM
    Comment #233075

    jlw, Edward Abbey had the solution many decades ago. Meet all illegal immigrant wannabe’s showing up at the border, hand them a rifle, 10 boxes of ammo, a how to manual on revolutions, and a one way ticket to Mexico City to join the others who preceded them at our border.

    The solution is not to degrade America with low education, low income, large family, blue collar illegal immigrants, the solution is to show those people wanting to come here how to make their own homeland rise to our standards, thus eliminating their desire to leave in the first place.

    If they say, ‘I don’t want to fight for that’, we must say, ‘But we already fought for that, and we are going to hold onto our winnings. If you aren’t willing to fight for justice and liberty in your homeland, why should we permit you to enter ours?’

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 16, 2007 12:46 PM
    Comment #233078

    j2t2 said: “I dont understand why with a population of over 330 million it is still a good thing.”

    The reason you don’t understand is precisely because it is NOT a good thing to overpopulate our nation beyond what it already is.

    It is lunacy to argue the way to save Soc Sec and Medicare is to balloon our work force. That simply re-creates the demographic problem we now face in 60 years just when we weathered the last retirement balloon.

    Insanity. Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. —Einstein

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 16, 2007 12:53 PM
    Comment #233087
    If they say, ‘I don’t want to fight for that’, we must say, ‘But we already fought for that, and we are going to hold onto our winnings. If you aren’t willing to fight for justice and liberty in your homeland, why should we permit you to enter ours?’
    Well said.

    Of course, you will now (probably) be called selfish, greedy, and lacking compassion (EXCUSE # 03).

    What is interesting is the logic-disconnect due to partisan loyalties. Some people say we “are not all that enthralled with illegal immigration, and southsourcing”, but they still support those the perpetrate it, some even choose to find a way to defend it and justify it; no matter how ridiculous it becomes. Again, getting votes and gaining seats for THEIR party is all that is important … above ALL else … distracting from the consequences and other serious issues facing the nation; also growing dangerously in number and severity.

    It would be nice if more voters could say:

    • You know what? That ain’t right and I’m going to see what I can do to change it”.

    • You know, I’m a Democrat, and I don’t approve of the Democrat party trying to get illegal aliens’ votes just to get more seats.

    • You know, I’m a Republican, and I despise the Republican party trying to continue the inflow of cheap labor for greedy employers.

    • You know, I’m a [PARTY], and I am sick and tired of bought-and-paid for politicians selling-out their fellow American citizens, and despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other.
    Instead, too many get all bent and contorted out of shape trying to fit it this inconvenient truth into their philosophy. Like trying to force a square peg into a round hole, it doesn’t work. Not without breaking something. Not without painful consequences.

    Most Americans (71%) polled want it stopped.
    For example, a Polling Station poll asked: President Bush wants amnesty for illegal aliens. Do you agree with the President?

      Number polled = 9,174 Margin of Error +/- 1.0%
    • … . . Yes … No … Undecided
    • REP … 10.9% … 81.3% … 7.8%
    • DEM … 27.6% … 60.1% … 12.3%
    • IND … 16.5% … 72.5% … 11.0%
    • Overall Percentages:
      • 71.2% do not
      • 18.4% believe amnesty is a good idea
      • 10.4% were undecided

    However, if blind partisan loyalties continue to trump border security and enforcement of existing laws, then those voters will ultimately be who suffers the consequences. Not those that abuse vast wealth and power to exploit others. Not the crooked politicians that have now got theirs on the backs of others. The voters will suffer. And perhaps they should. Otherwise, how will they ever learn.

    Why do undeserved partisan loyalties occur?

    • Because, like water and electricity, it flows along the path of least resistance.

    • Because it is easier to pull the party-lever than do the real work to research the candidates.

    • Because it is easier to let THEIR party think for them.

    • Because doing the work to study the candidates, research the issues, and find the truth is work. Work is hard. Hard work is pain. People naturally want to avoid pain, but fail to understand that a little pain now will avoid a lot of pain later.

    • Because politicians tap into the voters’ laziness and use it for their own nefarious purposes (e.g. cheap labor; exploiting others; cheating other; avoiding work by stealing from others; even finding ways to legally plunder others (e.g. illegal immigration, eminent domain abuse, voter fraud, etc.))

    • Because the cheaters are always looking for ways to seduce voters into wallowing in the circular, divisive, distracting partisan warfare. The tap into the voters’ laziness to achieve it. Voters even reward them for it with perpetual re-election; at least until it becomes too painful.

    • Because politicians bribe voters with THEIR own tax dollars.

    • Because too many voters are one-issue voters; making them easy to manipulate. Republicans may be doing that now with illegal immigration, because they had a decade to do something about it, and didn’t until the last minute when they saw their demise on the horizon.

    • Because absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    • Because many politicians are experts at fueling the partisan warfare to divide the voters so that a majority can never exist to remove them from office.

    • Because many politicians are experts at pitting the voters against each other (much in the same way they are not pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other).

    • Because of a lack of virtue, education to understand these fundamentals of human nature and ways to deal with them more effectively to create government that is more responsible and accountable too.
        Responsibility = Power + Virtue + Education + Transparency + Accountability

    j2t2 wrote: I dont understand why with a population of over 330 million it is still a good thing.
    j2t2, you are right. Most people would agree. But too many choose to look the other way when THEIR party does things (BOTH DEMs and REPUBs) contrary to their beliefs. The end result is what we have today.
    jlw wrote: The main culprit of the illegal immigrant problem is the wealthy elites …
    Yes.

    NOTE: There is nothing wrong with being wealthy.
    But there is something very wrong with those that abuse vast wealth and power to control government.
    And that is the problem we have, and an electorate that largely fooled into complicity.
    And guess who will eventually suffer the painful consequences the most.

    By the way, only a very, very tiny 0.15% (300,000) of all 200 Million eligible American voters make 83% of all federal campaign donations (of $200 or more).
    How is the remaining 99.85% of all 200 Million eligible American voters supposed to compete against that?

    • Especially when most voters (90% of the time) vote for the politician that spends the most money?

    • Especially 40% to 50% of voters don’t even care to vote?

    • Especially too many voters pull the party lever; many not even knowing who they are voting for

    • Especially when ?

    • Especially when most voters don’t even know who their state and federal senators and representatives are, much less their voting records.

    • Especially when too many voters think the problem is the OTHER party.

    • Especially when too many voters think THEIR politician is grand. Most voters believe MOST politicians are crooked, but they think that THEIR politician is great. Look at the voters that re-elected Rep. William Jefferson. And it wouldn’t surprise me if the voters of Idaho re-elect Larry Craig … giving new meaning the word Idaho .

    • Especially when so many voters bitch and complain and give Congress a dismal 18% approval rating, but repeatedly re-elect and reward the very same incumbents, giving them a cu$hy 90% to 95% re-election rate (since 1996).

    • Especially when few (if any) voters can name 10, 20, 50, 100, or 268 (half of 535) in Congress that are responsible and accountable. But then, perhaps that’s because there aren’t any?

    • Especially when most voters blame Congress and the President, but fail to understand that the voters (the largest group of 200 million eligible voters) have the government that they repeatedly re-elect and reward. They have forgotten their most basic and fundamental duty; the one simple thing they were supposed to do all along, without regard for party; stop repeat offenders; don’t re-elect them.

    Too many simply don’t seem to care, or don’t know what to care about.
    But they will eventually, when failing to do so finally becomes too painful.
    Politicians are selling us out with new legislation every year.
    Jobs are leaving the country in droves.
    Politicians are despicably trying to raise H1B Visa limits (or import other guest workers; or voting for a fence, but cleverly forgot to include any funding for it) every chance they get (including my Senators from Texas: Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn).
    Politicians are despicably pitting American citizens and illegal aliens against each other, and American citizens against each other.
    Voters will be much less complacent and apathetic when they are jobless, homeless, and hungry.
    Hopefully, they won’t wait too long.
    Already, some painful consequences are already in the pipeline:
    • as the massive $9 Trillion National Debt grows by billions per day.

    • as Social Security (already $12.8 Trillion in debt) surpluses continue to be spent elsewhere.

    • as 77 Million aging baby boomers will soon be expecting the entitlements (become eligible for years at a rate of 13,175 persons per day).

    • as 77 Million aging baby boomers are forced to work longer, and bankrupted by ridiculous, gouging medical costs.

    • as entitlements and benefits are reduced and eligibility ages are raised to avoid collapse of the entire system.

    • as healthcare declines in quality and rises drastically in cost; and becoming more dangerous too (195,000 people killed annually by preventable medical mistakes).

    • as the younger generations have forced to pay higher taxes; remember who is most conscientious about voting? Senior citizens. They will not give up their entitlements so easily; pitting generations against each other. Again, Americans are being pitted against each other by the greed and irresponsibility of the politicians that voters repeatedly reward with re-election.

    • as our energy vulnerabilities are strained by China (1.3 Billion people) and India (1.1 Billion people) compete for oil and resources,

    • as the world population grows by 249,000 persons per day,

    • as jobs continue to leave the country.

    • as unnecessary war rages on in Iraq.

    • as the REGRESSIVE tax system (ridiculously complex by design; making it ripe for abuse) continues to increase the disparity of wealth (1% of the U.S. population now has 40% of all wealth; up from 20% in year 21980).

    • as the REGRESSIVE money system perpetuates inflation; like a REGRESSIVE tax on the people. The poorer you are, the more tax you pay (i.e. REGRESSIVE).

    • as the REGRESSIVE sales taxes increase (as they have for decades; so many taxes it boggles the mind; 45 different sales taxes and fees of all kinds come to mind).

    • as the public education system declines in quality and grows in cost; exacerbating all of the above, since an educated electorate in a voting nation is paramount; forcing most people to learn the hard and painful way instead.

    Live and learn.
    Or don’t, and suffer.

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 16, 2007 02:36 PM
    Comment #233106

    All kinds of taxes

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 16, 2007 07:59 PM
    Comment #233111

    David R. Remer-
    For a person who’s not a Democrat, you claim a great deal of insight into what we really think.
    It’s the same B.S. I get from Republicans for not supporting their war. I’ll tell you what I tell them: your approach doesn’t work.

    I’ve made it quite clear that we need much better internal enforcement of immigration laws. If you want to piss me off further by alleging that I’m lying to you, go ahead. No border in the world has perfect security, nor will any sufficiently large artery of goods and people be perfectly sealable. The people crossing these borders are just as intelligent as us, are motivated, and have people on the other side willing to do what it takes to gain their services.

    What we’re doing here is not border security, it’s population security: knowing what non-citizens are in the country, and making sure we have control over how they enter, how they stay, and how they become citizens. If you neglect the internal element, then after these people are past the border, your wall is a billion dollar boondoggle. As it is, a third of illegal immigrants get legitimate entry into the country, and simply overstay their visas. No wall can get those people. Neither can it get in the way of people who somehow manage to get on a jet, or who enter by boat. The Wall might control a certain route, but by itself it could not stop it. In that sense, it’s a pointless, fearful response. It’s a psychological placebo for those made phobic about foreigners by 9/11.

    If you take care of it, it’s an after thought, as a reasonable amount of border security, complemented with this, can probably take care of our problem. Moreover, since most of the people we’re really worried about come into this country from overseas, internal security is probably more important to national security than some wall on the southern border. Let’s also not forget the fact that we have the world’s longest continuous border with another country on the northern border, and nobody’s seriously considering bricking that up.

    Good internal enforcement will provide the disincentive for those looking to get into our country illegally. We should match that by making it easier for people to legally immigrate. This will route more of the immigration through proper channels, and leave people less motivated to seek what they desire, work for better wages than at home, by illegitimate means.

    On the subject of overpopulation? historically, the growth rate we’re experiencing now is on the low side. We grew by about 13% over the last decade. This is slower than the 50’s and 60’s, much slower than the early part of the 20th Century, and much, much slower than growth rates of the 1800’s.

    As I pointed out before, the kind of stronger internal enforcement I suggested would do a much better job at getting the terrorists trying to sneak into the country. As for Sovereignty, the whole point is to have greater control over your territory, and that is precisely what I suggest and support.

    Lastly, let me address your general approach. I personally feel very angered about your willingness to vilify me and cariacture in a highly inaccurate way what my real position is.

    Politics, when it functions right, is about communication, collaboration, and cooperation, or rather how we get past our competing, contrary, even contradictory desires to come to the common policies and initiatives that come out of our government.

    If we’re unwilling to reach out to others, to reach moderate compromises and happy mediums with other groups, then we encourage a class of people who cater to our radical views and unswerving partisan sentiments to our face, then turn around and make their own backroom deals. No government can work for long without compromise. Either Americans ease up on the ideology, ease up on the easy, sensationalist sloganeering, or they get caught in dilemmas built of equally irrational alternatives.

    Why do you feel it necessary to beat me up? Perhaps you and I see the same thing. I’m just telling you that your methods likely won’t work, not that measures to minimize illegal immigration shouldn’t work. I think you wouldn’t find improved internal enforcement objectionable. I just don’t think much of this grandiose idea of ensuring border security by a wall. If you want a historical precedent, just recall this: The Great Wall of China, greatest wall the world has seen, didn’t stop their illegal immigrants from coming in.

    Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 16, 2007 08:29 PM
    Comment #233136

    Stephen, dispense with the staw man arguments. Saying border barriers cannot provide complete security after I already stated that it could only be as much as 90% effective, is a straw man retort, getting us no where.

    You said: “I’ve made it quite clear that we need much better internal enforcement of immigration laws.”

    That is exactly the same reasoning as ‘Let all the prisoners out of our jails and prisons and just impose better internal enforcement of our laws on the streets of America.’

    What a ludicrous and illogical argument: Let them cross the border, all we need is better internal enforcement of immigration laws.

    Unbelievable! Enforcement of our immigration laws BEGINS with halting illegal immigrants at our borders to the extent possible, and a border barrier does this by raising the cost of attempting to circumvent the barrier, raising the risk of attempting to circumvent the barrier, and dramatically reducing and slowing down the numbers attempting to cross giving our Border Patrol more effective resource utilization in detection and interdiction.

    Then, and ONLY then, should we rely on your so called ‘internal enforcement’ to address the ones that make it across illegally anyway.

    I would suggest that if you are getting pissed off, it is a sign of frustration at the failure of your own argument to make a sale to the public when you say things so contrary to common sense as: “Second, lets drop this talk about a wall on the border. Globalization is a reality, and that means easy movement across borders.”

    Your Rovian tactic of referring to a wall as in Berlin Wall, is a pathetic attempt to appeal to emotion, rather than reason. The fact is, the Berlin Wall effectively kept the populations in the East, in the East. And that was a political wall designed to keep people in the Eastern Bloc by those in control of the Eastern Bloc. A very different situation than protecting a nation’s sovereignty, wealth, economy, wages, and security from invaders outside its borders.

    My arguments have always called for an effective border barrier, which means already existent impassable mountains in some areas, fencing and patrolled roads in other areas, cameras and motion sensors in very remote areas unlikely to see vehicular or foot traffic. Your simple stated reference to a ‘wall’ is just that, simplistic and inadequate in this age of technology and multi-faceted solution sets to a particular problem.

    But, you don’t want to acknowledge any of that. That would run contrary to your comments biased and blind defense of your party’s inadequate position on the illegal immigration problem which holds out such promise for growing the democratic voting rolls and securing permanent one party power.

    But, just as happened to Republicans, if your party achieves one party dominance, it will just as surely lose it again, on the back of such blatant disregard of America’s real problems, in deference to policies designed to acquire and keep power at any cost to America and her future.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 17, 2007 04:29 AM
    Comment #233137

    Stephen D. your statistics on population growth too are incredibly illogical and falsely informed.

    Population must always be measured in the context of the carrying capacity of the environment that sustains it. Not just the physical environment, when discussing human population, but, also political, sociological, economic, and psychological.

    Allow me to depict what I mean so simply, that anyone can grasp the concept. Were the American Indians before the arrival of the colonialists in any danger of tapping out the resources that sustained them? Obvious answer, NO!

    Today, our existing population has already depleted our own natural resources for fossil fuel, forcing us to extend our power over the Middle East to protect and defend our dependency on their oil flows to our country. Our existing population has already exceeded the maximum capacity of our health care delivery systems to the point that more than 80,000 Americans die each year as a direct result of medical malpractice. Everywhere in America, consumers are buying bottled water out of justified fear that our existing above ground and below ground water sources are contaminated. Our our existing population of children has already broken our capacity to deliver quality education and life preparation skills sufficient to insure that 90% of those who enter Kindergarten will lead intelligent, educated and productive lifestyles after graduating from high school. In fact, only 71% will even graduate. And of those who do, a significant percentage will not have the skills necessary to lead productive middle class lives. Our consuming numbers in America account for 25% of the contribution to global climate change. And you argue for more consumers?

    These are but a few examples of a much larger set, of how our numbers are exceeding our capacity to resource the needs of these numbers. And you as a Democrat propose expanding population even more. I say, let’s get our ability to support the numbers we have adequately before asking to increase those numbers by even one more. Let’s stop putting the cart before the horse.

    Let’s stop voting for these politicians who continue to create more and graver problems than they solve.

    You said: “For a person who’s not a Democrat, you claim a great deal of insight into what we really think.”

    I was a Democrat most of my adult life. But, I don’t have to know how Democrats think. I only have to look at the products and policy results of their thinking. When Democrats argue against border security, they argue against national security. I don’t have to know their thinking to understand open borders are open to terrorists as well as poor immigrants seeking work. I don’t have to know their thinking when they, as a party of Congress with sufficient numbers to halt Republican’s elevating the national debt from 5.65 trillion to 9 trillion in 7 years, refused that responsibility.

    You know a person (party) better by the consequences of their actions, than their explanation of them.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 17, 2007 05:06 AM
    Comment #233141

    Once again, we see how hard it is to try to fit a square peg into a round hole.
    The contortions and frustration is what happens when people try to twist and reshape their philosophies to fit THEIR party’s position.

    Notice how they call border security a “WALL”.
    It’s a sign of a weak argument.

    It does not matter that it is not a wall at all.
    It is a barrier(e.g. fence), a road, border patrol, and technology.

    But they want to make it out to be a symbol of oppression. So, why do these people lock the doors of their own home. Why not let illegal aliens come stay with them a while, eat their food, use their home, perhaps even invite a few friends?

    It also does not matter that the cost of securing the borders and enforcing existing laws would actually SAVE American tax payers a LOT of money, since greedy illegal employers and their bought-and-paid-for politicians are shifting massive costs and burdens (over $70 Billion to $350 Billion annually) onto tax payers via burdens on tax payer funded resources (e.g. schools, hospitals, ERs, prisons, law enforcement, welfare, Medicaid, voting, crime, disease, job displacement, etc.).

    Thus, without border security, I suspect greedy illegal employers will continue to do what they’re doing. Thus, border security has other added benefits in this age of terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    Then they say things like:

    “No border in the world has perfect security …

    It does not matter that it would be 90% (or more) effective. Gee, if it isn’t perfect, what good is it? So, that is another lame argument.

    And combine border security with better enforcement of existing laws, and the two things together would be even more effective. Makes sense to me. Saves money. Enforces existing laws. Stops the theft of services and burdens being shift to tax payers, and stops crime and disease.

    Then they will say, “You can deport 12 million illegal aliens”.
    Well, you don’t need to.
    Eliminate all of the magnets, and they’ll leave.
    And those already in our prisons can be deported.

    Then they say we should make it easier for immigrants to immigrate.
    Never mind that hundreds of thousands already immigrate annually. They seem to think we should let more in faster. Hmmmmm … well that totally ignores the societal chaos (and history) that results from rapid and massive immigration. And why do we want to emulate China and India? We should ask them about all of the advantages of over-population. What’s up with these motivations to grow the population larger? The world population is growing by 249,000 people per day (that’s 10,375 per hour, 172 per minute).

    There’s all sorts of excuses, but so far, they don’t hold up to close examination. Look closer and you will see reasons why some want to maintain the status quo. They want:

    • cheap labor [mostly REPUBs]

    • and they want votes [DEMs]

    Most voters want border security and illegal immigration stopped.

    Thus, the DEMs are going to lose votes.
    And it’s looking (from the looks of it at ALIPAC.US and NumbersUSA.com) that Republicans are winning over voters on this issue.

    Not that Republican politicians are really likely to address illegal immigration. But its fairly certain that Democrat politicians won’t.

    And, when I look at the voting records, it’s obvious that Democrat politicians have a clear motivation. They want those votes. That is why they want so badly to pass an AMNESTY BILL as soon as possible. It does not matter that the last SHAMNESTY was defeated. They are trying to do it again. And the FAXes, phones, and letters are starting again. If Democrat politicians keep trying this, they are going lose a lot more votes than the 12 million or so votes DEMs would get from illegal aliens (not all of voting age even).

    Thus, I think what the DEMs are doing is pretty stupid. They better start paying attention to the 200 million voters already here, now. Congress’ dismal 18% approval rating should be telling Democrat politicians something. But they do not seem to be listening.

    I will not vote for any politician (regardless of party or [non]incumbency) that isn’t serious about border security and enforcing existing laws. At the moment, that looks like most (if not all) Democrat politicians.

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 17, 2007 08:13 AM
    Comment #233142

    David,

    “Your Rovian tactic of referring to a wall as in Berlin Wall, is a pathetic attempt to appeal to emotion, rather than reason. The fact is, the Berlin Wall effectively kept the populations in the East, in the East. And that was a political wall designed to keep people in the Eastern Bloc by those in control of the Eastern Bloc.”

    So are we to assume that the orders to “shoot on sight” anyone even approaching the “wall” had nothing what so ever to do with the “wall’s” effectiveness?

    Dan,

    There are some here that are so immersed in their own opinion they feel the need to belittle anyone that differs with their particular form of logic.

    I have no political affiliation. I think that both of the parties in power think only of the interests of their own parties, and not of the American people they’re supposed to serve.

    That said, I also think that the fence, wall, barrier, what ever, is a panacea that will only give the illusion of security, and while it will may stop a goodly percentage of those that would come here to do honest work, it isn’t going to stop, or even slow down those that are less than honest.

    Whatever “barrier” that is constructed needs to be agreed upon by the masses, not by the few.

    Whatever “barrier” that is constructed is useless unless our government begins to enforce the laws that are allready on the books.

    Whatever “magnets” that are put in place to lure illegals out of this country are useless unless those that are hiring these illegals are made an example of.

    You may, of course, belive what you wish. Wishing it true however, doesn’t make it true.

    Posted by: Rocky at September 17, 2007 08:58 AM
    Comment #233144
    Whatever “barrier” that is constructed needs to be agreed upon by the masses, not by the few.

    A wall was ordered built by both the congress and senate and was signed by the President. It is now a law. I’m not sure how better to identify when something has been agreed upon by the masses…

    Whatever “barrier” that is constructed is useless unless our government begins to enforce the laws that are allready on the books.

    Everyone you are arguing with has stated this very thing, especially d.a.n. And, remember, the building of the ‘wall’ is also a law on the books that needs to be enforced as well.

    Posted by: Rhinehold at September 17, 2007 09:19 AM
    Comment #233150
    Rocky wrote: Dan, There are some here {hmmmmm … who could that be?} that are so immersed in their own opinion they feel the need to belittle anyone that differs with their particular form of logic.
    “form of logic” ? Or opinion? You are using two different terms interchangebly. There’s a difference between logical and what is opinion.

    Some of these “forms of logic”, or “opinions”, or excuses deserve careful examination and debate.
    That is, critique the message, not the messenger.

    Especially since we are discussing laws that will affect all of us.

    Rocky wrote: I have no political affiliation. I think that both of the parties in power think only of the interests of their own parties, and not of the American people they’re supposed to serve.
    And that is exactly why I question repeatedly rewarding the same incumbent politicians with re-election.
    Rocky wrote: That said, I also think that the fence, wall, barrier, what ever, is a panacea that will only give the illusion of security, and while it will may stop a goodly percentage of those that would come here to do honest work, it isn’t going to stop, or even slow down those that are less than honest.
    Again, few (if any) things are 100% effective.

    And characterizing it as stopping “those that would come here to do honest work” sounds benevolent and compassionate, but overlooks the many burdens and costs that it shifts to American tax payers. These shifts of costs are by design. American tax payers are losing; not profiting from illegal immigration. It is yet another type of REGRESSIVE tax being imposed on the majority of Americans (along with other things that are like REGRESSIVE taxes on Americans, such as a tax system that is so abused and complex that it is essentially a REGRESSIVE tax system, and incessant inflation which is like a REGRESSIVE tax).

    NOTE: I do not hate the illegal alien that is simply looking for a job.
    What I find truly despicable are some of our own politicians that choose to pit Americans citizens and illegal aliens against each other by refusing to enforce existing laws, by importing cheap labor, by constantly trying to raise H1B Visa limits, and trying to pass another SHAMNESTY like the one in 1986 that quadrupled the problem.

    Rocky wrote: Whatever “barrier” that is constructed needs to be agreed upon by the masses, not by the few.
    As Rhinehold pointed out, a BILL to build barriers has already been passed. Unfortunately, they didn’t allocate all of the money for it, and they still fail to enforce existing laws. The continual failure to plug all of the holes serves to allow illegal immigration to continue, and it is probably by design.
    Rocky wrote: Whatever “barrier” that is constructed is useless unless our government begins to enforce the laws that are allready on the books.
    I agree completely. Together, law enforcement and border security will provide the most effective solution, and it will save money, since the cost will be far less than the current net losses caused by illegal aliens.
    Rocky wrote: Whatever “magnets” that are put in place to lure illegals out of this country are useless unless those that are hiring these illegals are made an example of.
    Not sure I understand that statement. When I referred to magnets, it meant the magnets here in the U.S. that attract illegal aliens, such as jobs, welfare, Medicaid, healthcare, giving birth to children here to get a Blue Passport (i.e. chain immigration), K-12 education, voting in our elections, no income taxes, etc.).
    Rocky wrote: … useless unless those that are hiring these illegals are made an example of.
    I agree completely. Greedy illegal employers must be prosecuted for violating the laws. If there really is a problem determining citizenship or eligibility to work here, then those issues need to be resolved.
    Rocky wrote: You may, of course, belive what you wish.
    I may? Thank you.
    Rocky wrote: Wishing it true however, doesn’t make it true.
    What exactly is “it”? A disputed fact? Or a difference of opinion? A law? Border Security? Posted by: d.a.n at September 17, 2007 10:07 AM
    Comment #233164

    Rocky said: “So are we to assume that the orders to “shoot on sight” anyone even approaching the “wall” had nothing what so ever to do with the “wall’s” effectiveness?”

    The Berlin Wall is irrelevant to the discussion of a border barrier on US borders, different border with a different purpose and government manning it. Our barrier will not come with shoot on sight orders.

    And no one is claiming a border barrier will be entirely impenetrable. If it reduces the numbers attempting the crossing from 1 million per year to 100,000 per year, our Border Patrol will have 90% less traffic to deal with, and therefore, will be 90% more effective at the very least.

    The border barrier dramatically drives up the cost for those thinking about crossing, diminishing the traffic by as much as 90%. Or do you not believe in economics of cost - demand ratios? Currently, one pro-immigration group complains of the current situation without a border barrier:

    There are numerous security measures that have been implemented at and around the Mexico-U.S. border throughout the years. As a result, it has become more difficult to illegally cross the border. The fees for a “coyote” easily run into the thousands per individual.

    Needless to say, a border barrier would drive that cost up prohibitively for as many as 90% of those who now cross annually. The added benefit of curtailing this traffic with a border barrier is, that of those still attempting to cross, the question is begged, where are they getting the money? Terrorist organizations? Drug runners? Slavers? By reducing the numbers coming across with a border barrier, our Border Patrol will be dealing with, and apprehending, a much higher percentage of dangerous illegal immigrants, who are now coming in, lost in the crowd as it were. This is a national security issue, and why effective border patrol and security is absolutely mandatory.

    Drug runners, slavers, and terrorists will not be seeking jobs from legitimate employers, which is precisely why internal controls of employers without a border barrier does not address the national security issue.

    The reason the barrier isn’t there now, is precisely because it WOULD be so damned effective. This is the reason so many power and monied interests have lobbied so hard, for so long, against it. Why else would our government have violated its own Constitution and laws on protecting and defending our borders unless it would be too effective in reducing their lobbyist’s and campaign donor’s access to cheap and illegal labor?

    Our politicians violate our laws 9 times out of 10 for money or political interests. No difference here. After the great amnesty bill of the Reagan administration, laws were passed authorizing effective border security. Those laws were ignored due to lobbyist and campaign donors with another agenda.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 17, 2007 11:29 AM
    Comment #233197

    Dan,

    “And characterizing it as stopping “those that would come here to do honest work” sounds benevolent and compassionate, but overlooks the many burdens and costs that it shifts to American tax payers.”

    You cannot deny that there are those that come here to merely do work. That don’t come here to be a burden on the system.
    Yes, there are those that will come here to take advantage of an “over-benevolent” system, but I would submit that the great majority of illegals are here to find work and provide a better life for themselves.


    Sorry David, irrelevant or not you brought it up.

    Posted by: Rocky at September 17, 2007 01:50 PM
    Comment #233201

    Rocky,

    They may not INTEND on becoming a burden to the system, but by being here illegally they are. If they just want to come here to work, they should go through legal channels like everyone else from other countries have to do.

    The reason they don’t, is that they don’t have to, they just walk across an open border and blend in. By enforcing our existing laws, which includes building a ‘fence’, they will be forced to follow the laws when coming here and become a contributing factor to society and not a drain by using resources that the rest of the country who are legally must pay for.

    Posted by: Rhinehold at September 17, 2007 02:01 PM
    Comment #233219

    Rocky, I brought the Berlin wall up to refute its analogy. It is not analogous to our border security issue. And no, Rocky, the first use of the word ‘wall’ came from Stephen D. I responded to his use of the word ‘wall’ as implicative of the Berlin Wall in instead of ‘fence’ or ‘border barrier’ which have always been my terms.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 17, 2007 03:42 PM
    Comment #233226
    Rocky wrote:Dan, You cannot deny that there are those that come here to merely do work.
    True. Some merely are looking for work, and I have acknowledged it.
    Rocky wrote:Dan, That don’t come here to be a burden on the system.
    But they are a burden. The evidence is the net losses of over $70 Billion to $350 Billion annually.
    Rocky wrote: Yes, there are those that will come here to take advantage of an “over-benevolent” system, but I would submit that the great majority of illegals are here to find work and provide a better life for themselves.
    I would not agree with the “majority”, since I believe the majority use our schools, healthcare, ERs, welfare, Medicaid, drive without auto insurance, use fake drivers’ licenses, use fake documentation, use a fake Social Security number(s), pay no income taxes, trespass our borders multiple times (putting and increased burden on our border patrol), and/or vote in our elections. Even a single (no children) illegal alien would find it difficult to NOT violate and/or abuse one or more of those things. Also, the job they have may be a job that an American would do. Job displacement is a reality. And the illegal employers reap the benefits, while shifting many of the other costs to the American tax payers. I have observed most of this first hand (in Texas and New Mexico). I have also been a victim of a minor crime by illegal aliens who cut trees (they use them for fences) on my land in New Mexico. That is nothing compared to other Americans that have been the victims of much more serious crimes and infected with diseases (one illegal alien in Santa Barbara,CA. infected 56 other people with tuberculosis as reported on April 24, 2004, by the Santa Barbara Press-News, “Anatomy of an Outbreak”). A Dallas policemen (in my area) was shot and killed by a drunk illegal alien. Every year, many people are killed by illegal aliens that drive drunk. Homicides range from 3.6 to 26 per day. GAO reports show that 27% of incarcerated in Federal prisons are illegal aliens. The same GAO report # 5646 shows that within a study group of 55,322 illegal aliens in TX, AZ, and CA only, each illegal alien had been committed (on average) 12.5 criminal offenses. And those incarcerations are not for the first trespass of our borders which is a misdemeanor. Regardless of the whether the crime rate is higher or not, those are crimes that should have never occurred.

    Again, I don’t harbor hatred for the impoverished illegal alien looking for a job. But they must get in line behind those already in line, and hope to be one of the hundreds of thousands that we already allow to immigrate every year. We can not let everyone immigrate. We certainly are not helping our nation by importing the impoverished and less educated by the millions.

    However, I do despise those bought-and-paid-for polticians that despicably pit American citizens and illegal aliens against each other (whether the reason is for votes and/or cheap labor, and/or misplaced compassion).

    We seem to be in agreement on most issues except for the method to achieve border security.
    I think a fence, ditches in some areas, border patrol (enough for three shifts; about one border patrol (on average) ever 621 feet), some cameras, a road, and some technology is sufficient. Some areas are so remote and rugged, a fence is not needed … perhaps just some border patrols.
    No fence or wall will stop illegal aliens or terrorists 100%, but it provides a delay. It is easy to walk or drive across/through a border, but not as easy to walk or drive across/through a fence, ditch, and past border patrol without detection. But the border patrols job will be much easier if trespassers can be apprehended at the barriers, rather than finding them scattered across many square miles. The fence is really just a deterent and delay factor, like the locked door on the front of your house. Your door won’t keep anyone out if they are determined to get in, but the locked door may give you time to take other actions (e.g. escape, or protect yourself). By the way, I am not advocating mistreatment of apprehended illegal aliens. Get their finger prints (perhaps an iris scan or other biometrics) and deport them. If they are repeat offenders, then it becomes a felony. First time offenses are only a misdemeanor.

    At any rate, this problem will not be addressed if voters keep rewarding politicians for ignoring it (some even fueling it); essentially rewarding politicians for pitting Americans and illegal aliens against each other; competing for jobs, apartments, healthcare, education, welfare, Medicaid, elections, and other social services.

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 17, 2007 05:46 PM
    Comment #233228

    It is amazing how many people are scared to death of this “wall” becoming a reality…..sounds to me as it may be effective. People tend to fear change and if the people against it are so sure it wont accomplish anything anyways…why fight it? I mean, we have spent billions on stupider things with less meaning than this without a single cry of outrage. Just my opinion of course :o)

    Posted by: Traci at September 17, 2007 05:54 PM
    Comment #233230
    Traci wrote: I mean, we have spent billions on stupider things with less meaning …
    That’s a very good point.

    The war in Iraq costs over $10 billion per month.
    That is the cost ($10 Billion) an entire year for three shifts of 51,00 (per shift) border patrol to patrol our Northern and Southern borders.

    The pork-barrel, graft and waste for one year would is triple what $10 Billion annual cost for border securty.

    The D.O.E. spends $27 Billion annually. Hmmmmm … and look at all of the alternative energy sources they have developed.

    Just 10 days interest on the $9 Trillion National Debt is more than the $10 Billion per year for border security.

    But more importantly, the $10 Billion per year for border security would actually save American tax payers $60 Billion per year after subtracting the $10 Billion per year for border security from the $70 Billion in net losses caused by illegal immigration.

    Posted by: d.a.n at September 17, 2007 06:08 PM
    Comment #233586

    David,

    I didn’t see this article ‘till this morning. Very well thought out. The people who don’t respect our right to have a country or our own citizenship rights today won’t respect our right to keep a piece of property to ourselves tomorrow, and the arguments will be the same.

    Posted by: Lee Jamison at September 20, 2007 11:15 AM
    Comment #233924

    Thanks, Lee. And d.a.n, thanks for the rich set of data points.

    Posted by: David R. Remer at September 22, 2007 12:36 PM
    Comment #234796

    The Democrats have sold out their country for cheap votes and the Republicans have sold it out for cheap labor. The fact that there is not unanimous outrage at the sorry state of our borders and the tidal wave of illegal immigration is a disgrace and a good indicator of how perilous a state our nation, society and culture is in.

    Posted by: David M. Huntwork at September 29, 2007 12:27 AM
    Post a comment