Posted on 05/05/2010 5:39:39 AM PDT by Kaslin
In their desperation, President Obama and senators with large Latino populations in their states (like Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev.) are seeking to polarize Hispanic and Anglo sentiment over the issue of illegal immigration. In his frequent messages calling for a higher Latino and black turnout and his condemnation of the Arizona immigration law, Obama is trying to recapture over immigration the voter approval he lost over health care.
Arizona acted as it did because of a lack of federal enforcement of federal law barring undocumented immigrants. With a porous border, they felt that they were left no choice but to pass a law allowing potentially intrusive searches to ferret out illegal immigrants.
Because this law could subject American citizens of Hispanic origin to undue scrutiny and perhaps to needless trips to the police station, the Arizona law antagonizes the jump ball in the immigration debate -- Latino-American voters. If there were a real national identification card, the requirement to produce papers might be less intrusive. But, as it is, with the burden of proof on the citizen (or the illegal immigrant), the law is bound to raise tensions between Anglo cops and Latino citizens.
But being forced to support or oppose the Arizona law is a false choice. It reflects the unimaginative politics of confrontation that jeopardize race relations and elect demagogues like Barack Obama. (Obama's share of the white vote was the same as John Kerry won in 2004. He was elected only because of a 3 point increase in black turnout and a shift in Latino votes to his corner. He won because of race, and now he schemes to keep control of Congress by using the immigration issue.)
The real answer is not to round up Latinos in the streets of Phoenix and hope to catch illegals in the net. Nor is it even to pretend that we can stop determined men and women from crossing the border by more guards, more troops and better equipment. The answer is to dry up the will to cross the border in the first place by stopping employers from offering jobs to undocumented workers. If there were felony penalties -- jail time -- for hiring illegals, they would not be hired. And, if there were no jobs, there would be no illegal immigration.
The Republican position on illegal immigration should be to demand tough employer sanctions, including jail, and coupling that program with a vigorous guest worker program to bring needed workers in legally, pay them a living wage and then escort them out when they are no longer needed. The United States, in need of a younger population to pay for our current and future retirees, should also raise the allowed levels of immigration.
Both parties are hypocritical on immigration. Democrats, controlled by unions, want Latinos to vote but not work. Republicans, controlled by agribusiness interests, want them to work but not to vote. The answer is to stand up to union and to agribusiness pressure and take tough action to stop the hiring of illegal immigrants.
If there were no jobs for illegals outside of guest-worker programs, there would be no need for amnesty. They would all go home of their own accord or wait until they got legal status.
We would need a foolproof, biometric identity card to speed identification of those eligible for employment to accompany the sanctions against hiring illegals, but this is a small price to pay for an answer to so pressing a problem.
But Obama will not take the step that could end illegal immigration. Why? Because he wants immigration. He seeks to reshape the partisan balance in America by increasing the number of Latino voters and marrying them to the Democratic Party by provoking Republicans who just want law and order to appear as racist to Hispanic-Americans.
His is a game of great duplicity and racial opportunism. But good legislation can defeat his designs and solve one of our most pressing domestic problems at the same time.
Ping
How should it be handled? With 50 caliber machine guns along the border. IMHO.
So, Arizona passed a bad law when they said they are gonna check status, and do something about it. But what we need is a law that says you have to have a ‘good’ status to get a job. We have that law, we just don’t enforce it. But Arizona enforcing their law is bad.
We need to deport illegals. We need to increase legal immigration. Still go with background checks, medical, etc. But let them come if they are here to work, not to steal benefits from the entitlement class...that is just wrong...(trying to learn ‘liberal think’)
These idiots just don't get it - we don't NEED any flippin' guest worker program. We have 10% unemployment. We need to get rid of the illegals now so that a few Americans might get the jobs instead.
These illegals are nothing but a drain on this country's resources. We pay for their kids' schooling. We pay for the medical care. We pay them disability. We pay them unemployment. We pay them welfare while they work for cash under the table. And yet, they pay little or no taxes to speak of, and they perform no task that Americans cannot perform.
We need to make legal immigration easier, and illegal immigration much harder.
It’s quite easy, we just have to make hiring illegals more expensive than hiring US Citizens.
Now how to do that?
First we have to realize, government can’t be everywhere and we should let the free-market solve the problem.
In Anti-trust cases, any judgments result in triple damages. This is a strong deterrent to businesses to avoid monopolistic practices. We should give illegals the same option, if an employer violates any wage/overtime/safety rules the illegal immigrant victim can sue for damages at 10x’s the amount a US Citizen would get. Win or lose, the employer would have to pay the illegal’s lawyer’s fee.
Now with that threat hanging over an employer’s head, Jose is going to have to show a US Passport in order to cut grass.
Positive points for skills in short suppply, countries of origin with good track records on bilateral agreements, etc. Negative points for low skill sets or skill sets with high unemployment, countries of origin with high numbers of illegal immigrants and demonstrated hostility toward the United States, etc. If the positives exceed the negatives, you get in line for approval, starting with those with the highest score.
Even non-immigrant friendly countries like Japan can process such visa applications within 2-3 months because the system is orderly. I know. I've been there.
‘Calling a thing by its right name is the beginning of wisdom”
Is there some part of the term ‘illegal immigrant’ that is unclear?
THAT is a good place to start the discussion.
THEN, (and it should have been done all along) begin to actually ENFORCE the existing immigration laws.
But being forced to support or oppose the Arizona law is a false choice. It reflects the unimaginative politics of confrontation that jeopardize race relations and elect demagogues like Barack Obama. (Obama’s share of the white vote was the same as John Kerry won in 2004. He was elected only because of a 3 point increase in black turnout and a shift in Latino votes to his corner. He won because of race, and now he schemes to keep control of Congress by using the immigration issue.) “
Here's another one that wants to let illegals roam free and throw employers in jail (yes, he says that) so as not to offend Hispanics and blacks. Blacks are not going to turn out to vote to protect the rights of illegal aliens. Whatever the historical grievances( both valid and invalid) that multi-generation American blacks have, it is not the same history as illegals and they feel little or no commonality with them. The poor blacks have a huge unemployment rate and don't see Obama doing anything about it, except amnesty proposals to make their situation worse.
“So, Arizona passed a bad law when they said they are gonna check status,”
It’s not a bad law. It’s just a law that has been mischaracterized into something that might end up harrassing citizens about as badly as we get harrassed already by cops over other laws.
Apparently, immigration law is unique in that we are supposed to have laws but not actually enforce them against the ‘honest people’ that break those laws.
“Nor is it even to pretend that we can stop determined men and women from crossing the border by more guards, more troops and better equipment.”
Utter hogwash. First secure the border and while doing so end all aid to illegals, and stop the born in the U.S. equals automatic citizenship nonsense.
The left has used their manipulation of the language very effectively in the past to remove all "knowledge" associated with certain words, and thus to push their agenda.
Bum became "homeless"
Swamp became "wetlands"
Jungle became "rain forest"
Progressive became liberal became progressive (Wilson era, FDR era, current era)
They do this on purpose in order to HIDE the true meaning and knowledge accumulated to such terms.
I had a thought. How about a fence or a wall that is to slick so it is impossible to climb up and over and in addition the fence is impossible to cut
We DO NOT need a "guest worker" program. We need immigrants who want to become Americans.
Yeah, we've seen how well guest worker programs work in Europe. No thanks.
Beyond that, why will we need a guest worker program any time over the next 3-4 years with unemployment forecast to stay high?
Here is what nobody wants to address:
1) We don’t NEED 20 million illegals taking jobs from Americans PERIOD!
2) We CANNOT afford 10’s of billions of welfare checks, bankrupted hospitals, and schools full of non english speaking illegals.
3) Obama has given orders to ICE NOT to pick up any illegals when the BP, or cops call them. Try it yourself. Call ICE and tell them you have 4 illegals, and for them to come get them, then see what they say.
4) The feds will do NOTHING to stop the flow under Obama.
1) Heavy fines or jail time for hiring an ilegal. No exceptions. Yes there are jobs here for people from outside this country - but there is already a legal process to obtain temporary work VISAs. The system that works for French runway models in NY, and British Airline representives in a Seattle office, works also for apple pickers in Yakima - IF the rule of law is enforced.
If ilegals can’t find work they will return home, with the exception of those making their living in crime or living off the Government teet. See phase 4
2) Secure the border. We have been talking about it for too long. Do It.
3) Ban Sanctuary Cities. As long as there is a safe haven none of the other suggestions will work.
4) Gang crack down. Round them up and lock them up
Here is a list of the gangs operating in my county here in WA State. Your county may have even more.
HISPANIC GANGS
* Brown Pride Controlla
* Crazy Mexican Surenos 13
* Criminal Minded Locos Surenos 13 (CML)
* East Side Locos Surenos 13 (ELS)
* East Side Vatos Locos 13 (EVL)
* Evergreen Flats 13
* Florencia 13
* Little Valley Lokotes 13
* Loco Boy Surenos 13
* Locos Pandilleros Surenos 13
* Logan Heights 13 (Lakewood)
* Mara Salvatrucha 13
* Nortenos 14
* Old City Panama 13 (Lakewood)
* Rancho San Pedro 3rd Street
-Peewees
* South Side Locos 13
* South Side Playboy Surenos 13
-Conejos
-Rascals
-Wicked Bunnies
* Vatos Locos Surenos 13
* Varrio Surenos Lokotes 13
Only one thing missing, Dick: you've gotta shut the door, dam the river, stop the bleeding.
There has to be a wall, and not just a speedbump wall, either. I propose an appropriation of $17 billion (the original appropriation for relief and rebuilding of New Orleans, before it grew to $121 billion and counting, with few visible results) for building the wall. I propose hiring anyone who wants to work for $17/hour. Those illegals who work on it for at least two months would have to stay on the south side of it when their phase of the work ended; but would get first dibs on coming through the gates legally when it's fully built, for a path toward citizenship. That way, they would have some ownership in the wall. Those illegals in America who didn't work on it would be deported, as soon as the wall is complete.
The wall would be a double wall, with a 100-yard buffer in between the two walls. The walls would be electrified. The ground in between would be mined and heavily sensored. Overkill? No, effective -- which is the whole point; ineffective walls are worthless, which is why that's the only kind we've ever had. No sane person would try to breach my wall, especially with their families. Same principle as a burglar seeing a sign on one house that says "NRA" vs another house that says "Gun Free Zone". Right now we have the "Gun Free Zone" sign on our border. Literally. Under Bush, some National Guard were dispatched, with orders not to shoot. Which house is going to get robbed? Gun Free Zone.
If the land mines are too harsh for our sensibilities, then we could substitute an electromagnetic field which scrambles the brains at such a wavelength as to make them hate Democrats, Mexico, and love America, with an insatiable desire to vote conservative. That should take away ALL incentive for them to cross over, and for the dimowits to want them to. The last paragraph, I was just dreaming some sweet sci-fi. The wall stuff, though, I was dead serious. I have mentioned my proposal to several illegals, because they valued my opinion. At first, they were wide-eyed. Soon, they saw it as a solution to an otherwise insoluble problem.
how about “The Drug Thugs who tried to kill you back in Tijuana three months ago could be living next door to you in Poughkeepsie tomorrow”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.