Sunday, August 19, 2007

Illegal Immigration Storm Rising

Illegal immigration is repeatedly referred to as a Republican issue, maybe in the big public fights in Congress but I am finding a considerable amount of discontent within the liberal.progressive category. It doesn't get to be very high profile and Democratic legislators don't get publicly bombarded by Democrats, but there is a very real discontent with amnesty programs.

At least some of the resistance has its roots in history, Reagan's amnesty was not followed by employer enforcement and opened the gates - again, by demonstrating American impotence on the issue. The progressives who pay attention can see the degradation of wages surrounding the flooding of the labor market, we're talking about a lot wider effect than grass mowing and crop picking; the direct effect runs the gamut of lower blue collar wages from construction to light manufacturing and the indirect effect spread into the middle class. The effects on social services in some locales has been drastic and is spreading widely. The results of an illegal underground society have been making headlines, along with the impotence of local law enforcement. Racism is on the rise, using the cover of a legitimate issue and yet to come are the results of having a disenfranchised serf class living amongst us.

There are several beneficiaries to this mess, racist demagogues get credence, plutocrats widen the disparity of wealth with the worst victims disenfranchised, radical race based organizations - La Raza to KKK build their membership, and ludicrous positions like open borders or police state enforcement get credence in the face of impotence.

Perceived impotence gives rise to stupid legislation like the Kennedy/McCain mess. Employers laugh at "enforcement" and if it shows cry inability to find Americans to do the jobs - which is true, Americans won't do the jobs for those wages; which would be self-correcting minus the illegal flood.

Democrats aren't hearing a large backlash from Democrats and at least a couple reasons seem to be in operation. Democrats tend not to be racist (at least overtly) and recoil from having that label attached to them. This is one of the demagogic tools in the open borders crowd's arsenal, debase all opponents with racism. Another is an appeal to their sense of justice and fairness, it is quite factual to state that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are responsible individuals attempting to improve their and their family's lot with hard work. Another tool is the assertion of impotence to deal with the issue without the institution of a police state and the expense in resources. There is finally local and state inability to do anything in the face of Federal inaction, popular politicians attempt to defuse rising tensions with any tool at hand firing the heat from rabid anti-illegals and shoring the "Party" defences. It is flatly difficult to to push a Democratic local official to take an enforcement stance when he knows there is legally nothing to be done and local problems require action.

The last is possibly one of the most illustrative and the example of "sanctuary" day labor halls shows what local officials are up against. Cheating employers use day labor pools to cut costs in low skill employment by hiring off the streets. This creates a disorderly and potentially dangerous condition of prospective laborers gathering in one place in hot competition for jobs. The local populous will not tolerate these conditions and in face of real tensions the local officials establish a location for hiring, because quite simply they cannot legally do anything to remove the root problem - cheating employers and illegal aliens. This is a Catch 22 solution, it takes the mess off the streets but is exacerbates the problem of illegal hiring and gives ammunition to the opponents of illegal immigration. The real villains in this, Congress and BushCo and employers, don't get attacked, the attack falls on the local official and if that official is Democratic, the Democrats are forced to back their play, whether they agree with unfettered illegal immigration or not.

While I do not have a comprehensive plan to deal with the mess, and since nobody would do anything with one I developed; I will at least state unequivocally that the Democrats have to face up to this issue and deal with it in a real manner and if that does not address the very real problems facing us they will face a large backlash. The problem has been building since 1984 and Ronnie's refusal to do anything more than an amnesty, some - myself included - have been calling for action for over a decade but this issue is finally hitting its boiling point. The effects have become widespread enough that they are plain to many without demagoguery and politicians that ignore or try to gloss the issue are going to pay in the '08 election. Some on the left have called this a fake issue and wondered why this is now an issue. It is an issue, validly, and even if it were manufactured it would still have to be dealt with, but its validity is demonstrated by articles like this in McClatchy - scarcely a reactionary publication. Some Republicans have already paid for their positions and while that may seem a Republican problem it is not, much of the middle or Independent vote is concerned and upset and within the ranks of Democrats disillusionment is spreading.

A very large portion of the voters are not willing to provide Mexico and other plutocratic racist countries with a safety valve at the expense of Americans. Taxpayers will hold still for some wasteful spending but telling them that they must subsidize plutocrats and corrupt foreign governments will upset them no end. If anyone thinks that Republican candidates will not appeal to this they live in a fantasy world. There is no reason whatever for Democrats to need to appeal to the racist xenophobes, but it is necessary to address the real issues at hand. Americans generally have an inherent sense of fairness, but it takes little to offend that sense - the Kennedy/McCain mess offended it, there is a balance to be struck between reasonable treatment of long term illegals and a total disrespect for law and legal employees - and for that issue - the suffering of legal employers. There also are methods of dealing with largest proportion of illegal aliens, the more recent arrivals, without creating a police state. If one wishes to address such an issue one needs to proceed logically, and the starting point is the reason people engage in an illegal activity, crossing a border without permission. They do not cross that border to sight-see or otherwise vacation, they cross for the improved economic conditions available to them. While some form of control must be provided for the border the actual root cause must be addressed and that is economic. It is not realistic to think that the US can somehow improve the corrupt racist xenophobic plutocratic government of Mexico (and others) short of an invasion, the problem must be most directly attacked domestically and that involves employment and social services short of emergency care. Children born in the US are citizens and must continue to be so, but that need confer absolutely no benefits on the parents - the ability to breed is not somehow a legal entitlement. The ordinary law enforcement contact with illegal aliens occurs at the local level, for the federal government to deny authority and funding for these contacts is ludicrous and encourages illegal activity. It must be recognized that some contacts are very serious and involve people with little to lose and when those people are simply cut loose their behavior is encouraged, that is the most serious outcome, the less serious is the demonstration of simple impotence of law enforcement.

Does this currently rise to the level of crisis? Not in the sense of widespread civil disorder and property damage, but we are rapidly approaching a tipping point in ability to deal with it at all and worse yet the onset of the damages of all the natural outcomes of the creation of a serf class. History holds lessons regarding this type of situation, and the outcomes are universally nasty. Let's see if we can't avoid repeating previous stupidities engaged in here and other countries.

12 comments:

DD877 said...

Don't Forget Senator Kennedy was involved in the debate in the 1960's And his arguments are the same now as then.

Chuck Butcher said...

He may actually have had a point in the '60s, 2007 sure ain't the 60's, personal experience...

Steve Culley said...

Good time to say that I joined the Minute Man Civil Defense Corps back in January ( I think, date?) and as you know invited the state director to speak here.
I joined that group because they focus on illegal immigration across the board and openly say they don't want racists. The local paper made it seem that concealed weapons were sort of mandatory but in actuallity the weapons permit requires a back ground check.
One of my main concerns with the federal government's absolute refusal to enforce immigration laws, in addition to potential terrorism, is a never ending, rapid population growth and the resulting loss of feedoms that comes with trying to mitigate the problems caused by too many people. Witness the fight over ATV's currently going on here in NE Oregon.
The democtratic controlled Oregon legislature was abscent with out leave on this issue last session and now it's up to the citizens to rectify that. There will soon be some initiatives to repeal 181.850 that prohibits the police or any Oregon agency from cooperating with immigration authorities. Another will deal with the Real ID Act and driver's licenses. As a memeber of Oregonians For Immigration Reform I will do my part.
Sorry, but this invasion will have to end. Failure to enforce our laws only sends a message that illegal immigration is fine with us. And it is not. Those politicians who were on duty since Reagon's amnesty bill and failed to defend our country from mass illegal entry will sooner or later pay a price at the polls. I notice more and more democrats calling in to talk shows or emailing saying that they are changing their registartion to independent because of this issue.
You are right Chuck, they are going to have to get involved and off the fence. The public will make sure it happens.

Steve Culley said...

Just logged on to La Raza's home page. There you can learn that Hillary Clinton and Obama will bring back GWB's comprehensive amnesty plan as soon as they enter the White House. GWB is truley a uniter. He got all the leading democratic presidential contenders to side with him.

Chuck Butcher said...

La Raza is FOS. I'd not take their word that the sky is blue.

jer999 said...

Steve Culley: I'm from Wash. and could not believe that your state is that far gone.
This is not a slam,because
our State has two female senators that more or less tell screaming constituents
to "F@@K off" to any messages about"ILLEGALS".

Personally, I think they
are paid off for their votes by lobbyists.
They surely must have noted that AMNESTY is not desired by anyone with any sense at all.

This situation certainly
is reminiscent of the Fall
of the Roman Empire,three
of the 'consensus' reasons
were :
Disrespect of the LAWS, Invasion of their Borders, and Political Instability ( Congress).
"Civilazations die from suicide, not murder"...

Most Americans have become masters at ignoring what is so obvious.....
As long as they are warm and comfy, they couldnt care less whats happening, until it is far to late.

Why is it that 'minorities'
seem to RULE our lives?

I think personally that the first 'giant step' is to secure the borders, then start to work on two very important situations.

The first of these is to address 'ANCHOR BABIES'.

The MAIA ( mothers against
Illegal Aliens) Says that they have found in the Congress Law Library some
thing that say, that the 14th Amend Sect. 1 was
'never' to give birth rights to 'Illegals', but was used to give birth rights to the slave babies because We 'FORCED' them here.
However, The Illegals
'invaded' us and broke laws doing so,
and this must now be changed to "JUS SANGUINIS".

Thirdly, There MUST be term limits for Congresspersons, as with the Pres.

We could desire to have the limits be set at 20 years tops..5-four terms,
"if re-elected".

We have to many old "rags"
in Cong. that have outlived their usefulness, and are now foolish old men.
Examples are two that quickly come to mind are T.KENNEDY, J.MURTHA, et.al

Kennedy was around for the 1986 AMNESTY which Pres. Reagan said that after he did it,that AMNESTY was the most 'un-favorable' act that he approved....

That being said, I bid you all a peaceful future ???

Chuck Butcher said...

Congress is responsible for chaos? So out of one side of your mouth you spout rule of law and from the other BushCo is immune?

If you mess with birth citizenship why can't your's be targeted? They need not be anchors, that is a separate issue.

I notice your problem with long serving Congressmen seems to be Democratic...the R's have an edge on that one.

There's a big difference between you and Steve Culley, he stops to think about it and approaches it from somewhere other than a partisan rant.

You're right, civilizations commit suicide, first by apathy, second by abandoning law, third by becoming so divided that they lose their common ground.

Bettybb said...

I have voted 20 plus years for a Democrat, worked prescincts, phone banked and raised money. I have told the Democratic party no more due to the illegal immigration issue. And believe me, I am not a alone. There are many, many, many democrats who are considering walkling away from the party this election over this issue, if there is a viable alternative on the right.

And yes all Dem candidates are for amnesty.

Steve Culley said...

You are right Chuck about making sure the anchor baby thing is written lawyer proof. The second amendment was clearly meant to keep the populous armed as a deterent to tranny but the left wing now says it was only for the national guard, which didn't exist when the consitution was written.
The 14th was meant to give birth right to slaves and the American Indian. It should be simple. If you are born to at least one American citizen you are American. But if you just hop the fence and give birth that should not make your off spring American. Should be simple.
The republicans saw a lot of defections over Bush, McCain ,Kennedy comprehensive amnesty. There is absolutley no reason to believe that the democrats won't suffer also.
I've said for awhile now that the real battle isn't between democrats and republicans it's between Americans and globalists. The SPP meeting, North American state, is being touted as just good trade but I think, as do a lot of people, much more is going on. GWB's open borders agenda could be explained by SPP. No need to defend a border if you want it to go away.
Many republicans were turned off by McCain and Linday Grahmnesty and I think an equal number of democrats were really pissed at Ted kennedy over the whole sale amnesty they tried to ram down our throats.
Both parties leave a lot of Americans with no place to go. Could be the beginning of a permanent third or fourth party system.

Steve Culley said...

The La Raze site has Hillary, in her own words doing an interview, Obama is text

Chuck Butcher said...

Too bad for Hillary to be starring on a criminal website.

Anonymous said...

SORRY CHUCK I MISSED YOUR DISSING OF THE BROWN POWER THING...keep it up