Skip to comments.Fixing immigration fairly
Posted on 04/12/2005 4:05:42 AM PDT by Boston Blackie
Invoking symbols ranging from the Revolutionary War to Martin Luther King Jr., armed vigilantes are patrolling a segment of the Arizona-Mexico border and taking the enforcement of immigration law into their own hands. While they claim only to offer support to the Border Patrol, the Mexican government is on edge, human rights activists have flooded the area, and President Bush has distanced himself from the effort.
(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...
That's not fair skeeter! Why should ALL the associated costs and burdens that illegal aliens place on the already overburdened taxpayers be taken into account? It makes the job of spinning so much harder.....
My beef isn't with illegal immigration per se, it's with illegal immigration of people that possess sub-100 IQs. If we didn't have an offset from Asia, then we might be in trouble. However, if one were to return in 100 years or so, the bell curve spread will probably have the same characteristics as today, with the only difference being the ethnic makeup.
The US basis of law/culture/society allows certain individuals to excel. I think there will be enough inventiveness and economic growth to absord low-skill laborers. The pity was that we couldn't reach a new level of performance, but then maybe that's the way it has always been.
Unless you can effectively block out immigration like Japan, you'll be taking a step back for every step forward.
On the upside, I understand cash receipts from El Norte have surpassed oil as Mexico's no. 1 source of revenue. What a country.
Either you are a case study in subtleties or you have changed your views. A few posts ago you talked about how America will become more like Brazil and American culture as we know it will end. Now you appear to be saying we will muddle this mess and trend water through the dramatic demographic changes.
Its all idle speculation I know; and your concerns closely mirror mine. I do find it rather perplexing though.
Heh heh - PC old chap. Here's an example of both 'two-tier society' and 'we'll muddle through': There's a major street that runs through both Santa Ana and Westminster in Orange County. It's called 1st Street in Santa Ana and Bolsa Ave in Westminster.
Santa Ana is Hispanic and Westminster is Viet Namese. Both cities are largely immigrant communities, both experienced language barriers, both have had the same basic opportunities. The one big difference is that within a span of a mile or so, one community looks like Mexico while the other just finished a large street improvement project through the heart of 'Little Saigon'.
One community (guess which one) is a riot of commerce, while the other becoming a sleepy, dusty backwater. Now, where it gets interesting is who do the VN like to hire as their kitchen/grocery help?
That's what I meant by we'll carry on, but it will be a two-tier society. It doesn't have to be 'whites' sitting on top of the pyramid - it can be anyone who is more industrious and capable.
Very interesting analysis lemura.
I wonder though if even the Asians will be able to self-govern in the tradition of America's past system of governance once (let's say) the old guard is no longer dominant. Because of cultural differences that become more pronounced as the old structure fades away. Differences that led to the dissolving of the Rule of Law and thus the underpinnings of a free enterprise system conductive to economic prosperity.
The VN are hard-core Republicans; Chinese tend to vote Democratic, yet they too fully embrace individual initiative. The UC system is currently concerned about Asian 'over-representation' - they're something like 65% of the undergrad population.
The West was unique in that certain factors came together that enabled us to develop the society/culture that we currently enjoy. That being said, however, I don't think we have a monopoly on self-governance - these are principles that can taught/learned by anyone capable of understanding.
Those that 'get it' understand what it is and move quickly to adopt and adapt; those that don't merely replicate what they left behind.
At the local supermarket in Hanover Pk the #1 user of foodstamps, WIC, etc is white women. #2 is white men. Then Blacks. Then native born of Hispanic heritage, mostly Puerto Rican, not of immigrant ancestry. Eligible immigrants are last. I'm the guy that chooses to stand in the slowest line and observe others in all the lines. I'm the guy who speaks up to shame the foodstamp/WIC user.
Yes. There are some problems. Utopia is still out of reach. But the sky is not falling. Immigrants are not one of the four horsemen.
How many Hispanic voters were in your precinct? 2? I used to be a precinct captain in a heavily republican area during the same period. It was Phil Cranes' district. There were over 200 homes in my precinct and the rep/dem ratio of registered voters was about 70/30. Even though the democrat percentage was low that still meant numerically a lot of dem votes. Your story does not ring true given that hispanics, especially then, overwhelmingly vote democratic.
And why were you pushing Bush in 80' when Reagan, a true conservative, was on the ballot? You strike me as kind of a RINO. The kind I used to come across in the party, usually at GOP get togethers. I remember thinking back then, "what kind of republicans are this"?. Talking to a RINO was like talking to a democrat.
As a landlord I have had over 800 immigrants in my apartments in the past.
Well that explains a lot....if true.
I have found jobs for over 100 that were not my tenants, plus many that were.
You found jobs for over a 100 hispanics and then some huh. Hmm, What kind of jobs were they Spintree? Were you fronting for employers of Illegal Aliens? Sounds like it. Again, if true.
I have been part of organizing hundreds in political action on slum housing, police protection, etc.
Lost me there. It really is hard to take you seriously.
I guess we will find out soon enough!
I'll add that while there is no question as to the industriousness of Asians, their cultures are somewhat resistant to embracing notions such as human rights, diversity, and tend to be ethnocentric. This can adversely impact self-governance. And while Asian nations like Japan seem to have taken to democracy quite well, much of that I believe is due to America's strong influence on Japan.
The question is whether a religiously diverse country like India can become a "big Singapore" or "big Hong Kong" or will it become a "Yugoslavia".
The Hanover Park area I refer to is Schaumburg Twp precincts 10, 19, 22, 36, 38, 51, 86 (Cran's area). They averaged about 20 Hispanic voters per precinct. Only one 3d generation Hispanic lady in precinct 86 voted Democrat. Your implication is right in that Hispanics have a relatively low voter turnout.
Hispanics are neither naturally Republican or Democrat. In Mexico, PAN of Vicente Fox is the party of the Catholics and small businessmen. PRI is the party of labor unions and big business (Think of the Warren Buffets, Bill Gates and George Soros of Mexico). PRD is the party of the intelligentsia, TV and newspaper reporters and academics.
Prior to the first election of Fox, whcih was the first ever national defeat of PRI, polls were done of Mexicans in Chicago. 70% of Mexicans in the city supported PAN's Fox. 20% PRD. only 10% PRI. In the suburbs, 90% of Mexicans supported PAN's Fox. 9% PRI. Under 1% PRD. That is much more pro-PAN than Mexico itself. Thus Mexican immigrants are not "typical" Mexicans. At least in Illinois, they are more favorable to Catholic values and small business than the "typical" Mexican who remains in Mexico.
Just as whites in the city vote different from whites in the suburbs, so Hispanics in the suburbs are more "Republican". In the '60's the Republican Ogilvie organization of which I was a part reached out to Hispanics while the Democrat machine was very racist, especially ward committeemen Biesczat and Keane in my NW Chicago area. The result was that Hispanics in my part of the city, led by Hispanic businessmen, were more Republican than Poles in the same area. That included both Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and especially Cubans. Now granted, a lot of those Hispanic Republicans were Rockefeller Republicans. The only elected Hispanic officials were a Republican Alderman and a Republican County Superintendant of Education. But when Ogilvie put in the income tax and Conservative Democrat Dan Walker ran and governed as the most conservative Illinois governor in my lifetime, and Nixon seemed anti-Hispanic to the Hispancis, the many Chicago Hispanic Republicans switched to Democrat. A lot of that was due to the political skills of Democrat Ward Committeeman Dick Mell in positioning himself and the non-Biesczat.
In recent times Republican Gubernatorial candidate Jim Ryan has been the #1 anti-Hispanic politician in the Spanish media, especially LaRaza. This is due to his intentional framing of Rolando Cruz, who Jim Ryan knew to be guilty of nothing more than being a pothead and habitual liar. I am not aware of a single Hispanic who voted for Jim Ryan in 2002, including my wife.
Although Hispanics are "conservative" they do not vote on ideology. Most of them vote based on "friendliness"... who seems the most friendly to them. The Jim Ryans, Pete Wilsons, Pat Buchanans, etal come accross as unfriendly by their "tone". Consider how many Hispanics in Californika agreed with Pete Wilson on the issue but voted against him when they had voted for other Republicans in the past. Why? Peter Wilsom came accross as "unfriendly".
In contrast consider Chcago's Democrat Dick Mell local. He has the political skill to be anti-Hispanic to a group of racists and 20 minutes later go to a group of Hispanics and appear pro-Hispanic. And for 30 years both groups have stayed loyal to Mell. That illustrated that political skill wins a lot more votes that being right ont he issues. I vote ideologically. But most people, especially Hispanics factor in a lot more friendliness than ideology.