Comments

Are Congressional Republicans growing a spine? — 46 Comments

1. If an organism is brain dead, a spine just keeps the blood moving and the bile pumping. It is of little real use.

2. “But I have a tiny little bit of hope that this current verbal defiance won’t prove to be just empty bluster, as so many brave words have proven before.”
   Me too, but not much.
   In trying to decide why McCain so defiantly supports this garbage it occurred to me (in a bassackwards sort of way) this is how McCain and the RINOs then justify the moderate agenda they want to adopt. IMHO, this is designed as a kick start to a longer term goal of pushing the Republicans further left with subsequent liberal policies, and blurring the lines futher between the two parties. Carl Rove and his ilk have no use for conservative principles; they embrace what they see to be practical means to achieve an end. The end is to get as close to the political middle as possible, and reap the benefits of staying in office. The best way to ignore the conservative element is to dilute their impact. They don’t plan to lose any votes over immigraton reform; they will just push policies themselves that their newly manufactured base wants — big government, nanny state policies. It’s probably been stated before, but the RINOs are thinking they can out-democrat the democrats, because ultimately, it’s not about conservative principles to them, it’s about who gets to hand out the goodies and stay in power. They see a better chance to do that by forcing this through and then going hard left, than fighting for principles they don’t embrace.
   McCain is the lowest form of life. A natural born traitor. The only thing he truly hates is a principled conservative. He would rather suck up to Chuck Schumer, who openly works to destroy the Republicans, sabotage his own party, and back stab friends, than work to advance any conservative principle. The people of Arizona owe us all an apology.

3. The entire purpose of “Immigration Reform” is to shape the electorate into one one that will give the Democrats a permanent majority. They don’t care if the economic pie grows or shrinks because if they get their way they cut up the pie to their satisfaction. The leaders and the camp followers of the Democratic Party will get their share and the rest of us, the “greedy” ones who complain about redistribution, will have to make do with the crumbs.

4. I just heard this morning on ABC “News” that Boehner has said “progress Will Be Made” on the immigration issue, and that “it will have to be bipartisan.” So kiss that fight goodbye.

   More bad news: “Libyan Official Ties Morsi to Benghazi Attack”:

   http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/libyan-official-ties-morsi-to-benghazi-attack/

   Our men’s bodies were desecrated by these ghouls.

   This also helps explain why the Administration and HC were so eager to cover it up. Their man in Egypt attacking the American embassy in Libya? talk about a SNAFU!

5. Hello, Neoneocon’ers. Here for my periodic dropping in to see what is going on over on the other side.

   One thing I find odd about this blog post is the idea that illegal immigration is “obviously” a problem for American workers. The point is certainly debatable. There are a number of studies which point to a different possibility: illegal immigrants may actually bolster the American economy, providing goods and services by workers who work hard for low wages — i.e., it may be that WE are exploiting THEM, not the other way around. They also provide tax revenue and they spend money in the American economy, doing jobs that many Americans don’t want to do.

   It’s also the case that illegal immigration has steadily fallen in recent years. It is not the crisis that many portray. In fact, there are labor shortages in farm workers in a number of states, at least partially attributed to stronger enforcement of immigration laws and the lack of a guest worker program.

6. Mitsu,
   You miserable little lifeform. On you a notochord would look good. Enough of your “Stick in a thumb and pull out a plum and say what a good boy am I” political preening.

7. When I saw that word “notochord” I had to look it up. When I did (and viewed some images) I almost spewed iced tea all over my keyboard.

   Good one, Neo! For ‘some reason’ it made me flash back to that strange Jimi Hendrix song from the Band of Gypsys album, “Power of Soul” (I’m presuming here that all of my fellow geezers will well recall this tune and therefore will be able to supply the music — in their heads — as they read along):

   …
   With the power of soul
   Anything is possible
   With the power of soul
   Anything is possible

   Flyin’ too much today
   It’s so groovy to float around sometimes
   Even a jelly fish will tell you that
   I said floataion is groovy
   And he said
   And a jelly fish will agree to that

   Yeah, but that old jelly fish
   Been floatin’ around so long
   Lord he ain’t got a bone in his jelly back
   Floatin’ every day and every night
   Ridnin’ high is a risk
   Sometimes the wind ain’t right

   With the power of soul
   Anything is possible
   With the power of soul
   Anything is possible
   With the power of soul
   Anything is possible
   With the power of soul
   Anything is possible
   With the power of you
   Anything you wanna do
   [etc.]

8. Mitsu. I used to work WITH illegals. the only gringo on all Hispanic work residential construction crews. We all worked for subcontractors who had classify you as “contract labor”. Short term, temporary, whatever it’s classified as, it’s a loophole. They aren’t paying taxes like a typical employer. I paid taxes because I had a real SS number. None of the illegals paid taxes – they would make one up, and that was good enough for the subcontractor. And everyone gets paid cash. That’s how business is done, and that includes farming. But it’s hardly exploitation, and it isn’t how they view it either. Most prefer cash, and no responsibility to the government — not their own and not ours.
   But a very simple way to do what you suggest would be to enforce the labor and employment laws on the books. In other words, enforce the requirement for a valid social security number and ID. That doesn’t happen. Legal buisness is more expensive, and that’s why American workers aren’t perferred. Lots of them would do that work, but the availability of cheaper labor is irresistable. When your government looks the other way, it’s very profitable to hire illegals.
   Once you legalize all the illegals, they will be out work, as long as there are more illegals available to hire. Unless the goverment actually cracks down on these businesses that rely on them, the contractors and employers who operate in this system will simply get illegal help — there’s no reason to change, they aren’t going to take a huge pay cut. And that includes the Hispanic owned business, which are the majority – they will hire illegal help in favor of naturalized citizens that suddenly cost their businesses a lot more money.
   Many Republican politicians are bought and paid for by this industry, and that’s why there’s no call for enforcement. You can take this to the bank – unless they strictly enforce labor law AND illegal immigration/migration, millions of people who used to have a job “Americans won’t do” will end up unemployed, their jobs lost to the next wave of readily available cheap, illegal labor.

9. Well, Mitsu, there are two levels of illegal immigrants. There are those who come for jobs and to send money home, and there are those who plan to get ahead and coming illegally is easier than jumping through immigration’s hoops (and that’s not only the US but in Mexico and Canada, which also have requirements for people wanting to immigrate).

   A case in point: One of my former students (I am an ESL volunteer instructor) came to me with a newspaper article about the DREAM act. I believe it was the NYT. He was so angry that there were tears in his eyes. The reporters had, of course, looked for an example of a good candidate for the Dream Act and found a teen who had been accepted to Columbia but couldn’t attend because her family came illegally. She pointed out that she had $30K saved for university.

   My student said (and I translate from Spanish), “If she saved that, then her family didn’t need it.” He was so angry because he and his wife didn’t have anything close to that in their bank accounts. Their son was taking some community college classes and working full-time, living at home and contributing his paycheck to the family. They paid taxes under their own names – and even then, they were aware that they had started their stay here by taking more out of community services and public education than they had put in.

   As for the lull in illegal immigration – the US can’t build policy counting on a trend. The slowing of American economy is a contributing factor, but there are outside variables: Mexican politics and perception of border-crossing.

   During the administration of Vicente Fox, the policy was to rely on remittances from immigrants so that Mexico could continue to push off obligations to its own citizens; e.g. free public education. Not only were there official documents advising illegal immigrants how to avoid detection while living in the US aka “while awaiting your paperwork” (translation from Spanish), but Fox himself spoke of the need Mexican citizens who had used false (or stolen) Social Security numbers to be able to draw SS benefits. (He falsely equated it with Australians who legally worked in the US.) After his presidency, Pres. Felipe Calderé³n turned to fighting corruption and drug cartels, and his emphasis was on the US stopping the demand for drugs (fat chance there, no?) It remains to be seen what Enrique Pena Nieto’s presidency will be, but PRI (his political party) don’t have been almost the entire 20th century and not a great track record.

   Another reason for fewer immigrants is that South and Central Americans know the dangers of crossing Mexico. Just a few years ago, there was a documentary called “Sin nombre” (Without a name) that followed the lives of several immigrants trying to cross Mexico. It really opened the eyes of young people in Honduras and Ecuador who thought the worst that could happen is that they’d be detained by US border agents. It chronicled the abuse by Mexican authorities, assaults and murder by gangs, and the general indifference that Mexico has to people who aren’t Mexican (I could also mention indigenous tribes, but that would take PAGES). More recently has been a Romeo-Juliet popular film about a Mexican gang member and a girl trying to cross Mexico on a train. Very poignant, and also reinforcing the idea that crossing Mexico simply isn’t worth it.

10. Paul in Boston wrote:
    “The entire purpose of “Immigration Reform” is to shape the electorate into one one that will give the Democrats a permanent majority.

    Let me elaborate. Permanent Democrat majority means increasingly Leftist policies (like Obamacare), higher taxes, a flatlined economomy, endless regulations and obnoxious politicians like King Barack, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi who won’t even pretend to care about the other side. All of this for as far as the eye can see.

    Whatever the number of illegals currently is, after they’re naturalized and bring in parts of their families via chain migration, we’re up to a huge number (at least 25 million), 75% or more of whom will vote Democratic.

    Currently, this country is very closely divided between Dems and Repubs, conservative/libertarians and lefty, big-government types. The scale is teetering back and forth. Guess what happens when you push your big thumb onto the Left side?

11. Where I live there are lots of Mexican immigrants, some legal, some not. I’ve gotten to know quite a few of them, partly because I speak Spanish. Individually, these are good people. I like almost every one that I know personally.

    The problem is that almost all of these people carry a toxic attitude towards politics. They don’t get the idea of this country. It’s understandable. From their background, they believe that (corrupt) government is all-powerful, individuals are powerless and nothing can get done absent big-government intervention. This is why I firmly believe at least 75% of them will vote Democrat.

12. Speaking of growing a spine/notochord [off-topic otherwise]:

    “We write to express concern that in your recent decision to delay implementation of the employer mandate, you have unilaterally acted and failed to work with Congress on such a significant decision. Further, while your action finally acknowledges some of the many burdens this law will place on job creators, we believe the rest of this law should be permanently delayed for everyone in order to avoid significant economic harm to American families,” the senators write.

    Senate Republicans:
    Permanently Delay the Implementation of Obamacare
    The Weekly Standard
    4:36 PM, Jul 10, 2013

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/senate-republicans-permanently-delay-implementation-obamacare_739212.html

13. It is a wildly radical concept I suppose but why don’t we try enforcing existing immigration laws before passing new law?

    You know:
    Build the fence;
    Secure the border;
    Prosecute and deport those here illegally;
    Deny the franchise to non-citizens;
    Prosecute and fine employers who treat illegal immigrants as a tax-payer funded subsidy;
    And deny tax-payer funded benefits to those who choose to violate our laws.

    And mitsu, I recognize and respect your right to hold and express any opinion. I would ask you to recognize that many who visit here do so as a temporary escape from the pervasive cultural rot to be found elsewhere.

14. Neo

    Plus, since President Obama has made it clear he won’t enforce parts of laws he doesn’t like, why trust him to enforce anything he doesn’t like in this one or any other one?

    I can picture the POTUS replaying Lucy and the Football .”If you pass the Immigration Bill, I’ll enforce EVERY part of it.” After the Immigration Bill is passed: “Just like an Evil Stupid Republican to expect me to do something which is against all my core principles.”

    Mitsu, I live in an area with a lot of illegals. There is a grocery store patronized by a lot of illegals- who invariably make their purchases with food stamps. Very seldom does an English speaker use food stamps to pay for food at this grocery store.

    I don’t like being played for a sucker. ¿Me entendés?

15. I agree with kaba: enforce the existing immigration laws, coupled with much more effort at securing the border than the current Administration is willing to put forth. Do that and perhaps five years down the line, we do something about the immigration laws.

16. People like Mitsu choose to ignore that society becomes more lawless when laws are purposefully not enforced. Illegal aliens have broken the law. They are criminals. And as others have noted above, they harm those who want to play by the rules.

    A neighbor folded up his roofing and general repair company about 10 years ago. He refused to hire illegals and instead paid his workers a fair wage. He struggled on for as long as he could and then gave up because he could not compete with contractors who were more than willing to use illegals. Those contractors factor in $X per hour per worker when they submit their bid and once they win the job they actually pay the illegals $X – 25 to 50% per hour. They are paid in cash. They don’t pay taxes and a goodly portion of what they make crosses back into Mexico and is not spent in the local economy.

    I’m positive Mitsu believes she is a wonderful, compassion liberal. In reality, she promotes lawlessness.

17. parker:

    Mitsu is a he, not a she, as far as I know (haven’t done the DNA testing 🙂 ).

    Mitsu has come round here for years. His shtick is to seem reasonable and to exhaust those who try to respond, because he either misunderstands or moves the goalposts.

18. Gerard, I (and lots of us who knew you back in the day) really hope your current persona is one incredibly long-running performance art piece, like you used to do in the old days. But maybe not.

    As for “misunderstanding” or “moving the goalposts”, I’m never doing that intentionally. It’s not a “schtick”. As I’m sure you know from all your family friends and relatives, Neo, there are lots of us who sincerely believe what we’re saying, and aren’t engaging in any sort of “schtick.” I’ve thought long and hard about most of these issues and I have come to conclude I’m closer to the left side of the political spectrum than the right, though I have my disagreements with the knee-jerk left on numerous topics. I suppose the one thing that separates me from most of those more on the left is that I actually find it worthwhile and interesting to engage with people on the other side from time to time.

    Going back to the topic, let’s address a few points.

    First of all, with respect to fake Social Security numbers — one thing you might not realize is that that money doesn’t get refunded to the employers or the employees even if the SSN is fake. The government keeps it. What happens is the money goes into the Social Security coffers but isn’t credited to the illegal immigrant. So, we get the taxes, but they don’t get the benefits. For example:

    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2008-04-10-immigrantstaxes_N.htm

    Illegals also pay property and sales taxes. So it’s not true they pay zero taxes (again, see article above). It is probably the case that their taxes don’t fully cover the cost of the government services they use, but that’s disputed as well (I won’t bother to post links).

    That’s not to say I approve of the current situation; it’s not great. But my point is that when people come here it isn’t a zero-sum game. Mexicans coming to the US actually contribute to economic activity in a variety of ways. It’s not that they just come and “take” stuff from us. They also work, build things, work on farms and so on and that benefits the rest of us. It may take some jobs away from some Americans but it also creates jobs through their economic inputs. That’s really my only point here.

    If they were given a more formal legal status, and if we created a guest worker program, then it is likely their wages would rise, and that would also increase the wages of Americans who wanted to do similar work. The immigration reform bill actually has various provisions to ensure that people currently working illegally have to compete on an even playing field with American workers. So this could well be a net plus for American workers.

19. ” His shtick is to seem reasonable and to exhaust those who try to respond, because he either misunderstands or moves the goalposts.”

    Yes, I’ve seen he-she-its posts occasionally over the few years I’ve read your blog. I’m sure he-she-it returns to read responses to he-she-its posts intended to agitate. People like Mitsu have an insatiable need to stroke their egos. Community agitators need to be endlessly reminded that there are those who will resist their ideology to the bitter end. We who will resist number in the millions. This is their secret nightmare.

    Being a gentleman for the most part, I refrain from revealing my inner berserker here or elsewhere. When/if that day comes that I can no longer restrain my inner berserker you should stand back Mitsu. I may be getting old, I’m not getting dumb. And my skill set will surprise you. There are millions like me; old, middle aged, and young. Keep pushing and we will rock you. 😉

20. Oh, give me a break, parker. “Community agitators”? Do you really think your life is immeasurably better just talking in an echo chamber only with people who agree with you? You do realize that there are also “millions” who are on the left side of the political spectrum in this country, as well? What are you really suggesting here, that we should all just stick to talking only with people we agree with?

21. Bravo, bravo!!! Mitsu, you have confirmed my take on your narcissistic personality. Linking to an article in usatoday is perfect in regard to your reference to ‘echo chamber’. Look, a squirrel!

    PS – You get no break from me, ask Obama for an exemption. 😉

22. Mitsu, contract jobs that pay cash do not take out income tax. They pay you cash. When you’re a real citizen with a real SSN, it behooves you to pay the taxes you owe on that income to avoid trouble with the IRS or your state revenue department; that income is supposed to be reported by the employer. (I know something about this, since I do contract work and pay hundreds every year to my accountant to make sure my taxes are done right.) Do you for one second think that someone who gave a fake SSN is going to calculate the tax he or she owes on it and send it in?

23. >Linking to an article in usatoday

    So, USA Today is part of the vast left wing conspiracy now? I’ll bet they’ll be surprised to hear that. It’s about as bland a middle-of-the-road paper as there is.

    >gave a fake SSN

    You’re just speaking about anecdotal evidence. According to the CBO, about 6 million illegal immigrants file income taxes:

    http://www.cbo.gov/publication/41645

    As for the Social Security issue, if you don’t believe that socialist rag USA Today, how about Bloomberg Businessweek?

    http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2006-04-06/econ-101-on-illegal-immigrantsbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice

    Anyway, my point is really just that the perception that Mexican immigrants are just coming here and taking our jobs and resources in return for nothing is not accurate. There are countervailing forces at play, like with most things.

24. Hey, it’s back.

    Don’t worry, there’s plenty of black mail material to silence the Republicans, one way or another. I mean, there’s plenty of gold left to pay for the provocateurs arriving here soon as well.

25. The work illegal immigrants are hired to do is worth something, but it isn’t worth what a legal worker at the minimum wage costs the employer. It follows that if the federal government cannot close the US-Mexico border (and to be honest, that may well be impossible) one thing it can do which would end illegal immigration is to abolish the federal minimum wage; for then the legal price of unskilled labor will fall to parity with the black-market price, and the illegal immigrants lose their advantage over legal workers.

    It’s really quite amazing just how well the minimum wage law serves Democratic interests. It prices unskilled citizens’ labor out of the legal market, so they must rely on governmental largesse to survive and therefore vote only for politicians who will give them the largesse; and since the work they would have done still needs doing, people learn to accept a permanent underclass of illegal workers who are paid pittances by private employers and survive only from the government’s largesse. Absolutely everybody in the system learns to hate businesses and love the government, just as the Democrats do – and that includes the businesses themselves! – so everybody believes the Democrats’ promises, and Democrats get voted into office where they keep the system going …

26. Immigration reform would likely raise the wages of most illegal immigrants — they work for low wages partly because they are limited to working for employers willing to hire them, which drastically reduces their market value not necessarily because of a lack of inherent ability to work at higher wage jobs. The last time we passed immigration reform most of the illegal immigrants moved into higher-wage occupations (paying more taxes, increasing their contribution to the economy, etc… as one might expect).

    It seems to me that increased border security combined with some difficult but not impossible path to legalizing these immigrant populations would tend to increase the wages of all workers, regardless of minimum wage constraints.

27. Mitsu:

    Definition of “shtick”:

    “Shtick” is derived from the Yiddish word shtik (שטיק), meaning “piece”; the closely related German word Sté¼ck has the same meaning. The English word “piece” itself is also sometimes used in a similar context. Another variant is “bits of business” or just “bits”; comic mannerisms such as Laurel and Hardy’s fiddling with their ties, or one of them looking into the camera shaking his head while the other one would ramble on…

    In common usage, the word shtick has also come to mean any talent, style, habit, or other eccentricity for which a person is particularly well-known, even if not intended for comedic purposes.

    I made no commentary on whether you are sincere or not, because I cannot see into your heart. But your shtick—your style and habit for which you are quite well-known on this blog—is as I described.

28. Haha, okay, Neo.

29. It makes me crazy that the Repubs are trying to employ the same tactics the Dems do: essentially, “Let’s promote tribalism”. They separate people by this or that characteristic, and then find some way to pander to them as a bloc, with the understanding that “hey, you {insert group name here}, keep us in power and we’ll be sure you get a little sumpin’-sumpin’ in return.”

    Seems to me that they should DIFFERENTIATE themselves from Democrats; something on the order of “Our position is: We don’t play the “hyphenated-American” game. We are all Americans, period. We don’t favor one group over another. We believe government should respect and uphold the rights of ALL citizens –equally– without regard to race, religion, ethnicity, or whatever. It should be obvious that when government favors some, it necessarily DIS-FAVORS others; and that’s no way to build a strong nation. We stand for the God-given rights of INDIVIDUALS. What draws people to America is the glorious idea –enshrined in our Constitution– that EACH PERSON is equal before the law, that EACH PERSON has the opportunity to speak his mind, pursue his goals, and worship his God, without undue interference from government. We are the party that wants to PROTECT citizens’ rights by LIMITING the size, scope, and power of government.”

    (I know, I know . . . pipe dream, etc, . . . )

30. My daughter voted for Obama because after watching the third debate she could not see any difference between Obama and Romney. I wonder if any Republicans have figured out they will lose support if they mimic the Democrats?

    Anyway
    1) get immigration bill passed, with Republican support.
    2) do not enforce the parts that obligate stronger border security.
    3) reduce requirements for citizenship.
    4) obtain permanent Democratic party majority.
    5) institute numerous social programs because in the patronist culture that is what popular leaders are expected to do in exchange for votes (see Peron, Chavez).
    6) eliminate 22nd Amendment setting Presidential term limits.
    7) Obama re-elected President for life.
    8) prison camps set up for Fox News viewers.

31. Mitsu! time to come home now. Sorry folks, sometimes my better half gets away from me.

32. “Immigration reform would likely raise the wages of most illegal immigrants – they work for low wages partly because they are limited to working for employers willing to hire them, which drastically reduces their market value not necessarily because of a lack of inherent ability to work at higher wage jobs. The last time we passed immigration reform most of the illegal immigrants moved into higher-wage occupations (paying more taxes, increasing their contribution to the economy, etc… as one might expect).”

    1.) They are not illegal immigrants, they are criminals. Why do you prevaricate? They are criminals because they broke the existing laws on the books, laws pertaining to legal immigration. 22+14 = 36 or in your case: 1+1=2.

    2.) Those who hire illegal aliens are breaking the law. However, they pour money into campaign war chests so they are given a pass by both dimwits & repulsives.

    3.) Quoting bloomberg is like quoting CNN. You are a dupe or an agitator and you think all who stand firm in opposing your agenda are idiots. Just like your messiah and his clown czars.

    4.) Haha, okay, Neo.

    You are a lame running dog lackey clutching your little red book.

    5.) The country doctor rambles, the red queen is talking backwards, beware of Mobile when you get the Memphis blues. We know which way the wind blows without the assistance of a weatherman.

    6.) Get a real life.

    7.) Find somebody to love.

    8.) Procreate. Its fun.

    9.) Love your children.

    10.) Enjoy your fleeting years with your grandchildren.

    11.) The above is all you get to cherish.

    12.) As you draw your last breath, know you have lived an honest life.

    13.) Continue as you are and draw your last bitter breathe and realize you are alone and no one cares about you.

33. Ah, Mitsu you live and breathe the bitter dust of your ill content. Choke on it he-she-it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ceRg_rxXQ_E

    Drive us down and we will rise from the ashes. This ain’t 1865. Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. What you dream on is what you get back beyond your wildest expectations.

34. Anytime legislation is drafted by a “Gang” of any size, said legislation should be consigned to an incinerator, and members of the “Gang” forbidden to draft any legislation for a period not less than 12 months.

35. Having read the documents, it’s clear by the numbers that it took into account the illegal workers who left a paper trail – ones on payroll, even if using false or stolen Social Security numbers. It doesn’t account for the cash-only workers (most prevalent here) or the children registered for school with fake numbers (physical green cards are not usually required as long as there’s a number filled out on the form, just like health plans). Even the report mentions that illegal aliens are “problematic” users of health care.

    As for the last Amnesty – the unintentional consequence was an increase in regular illegal immigration (as opposed to the fluxes following natural disasters such as Hurricane Mitch). Amnesty didn’t fix the problem, or we wouldn’t be having this conversation again.

36. Parker-
    2b. Those who employee illegals do so because it’s cheaper and they can. As soon as they’re legal, their services will no longer be needed, so long as they can hire more illegals.
    2c. Many of them know this and will not apply or sign up for citizenship.
    2d. Unless the government commits to stop the influx or deport illegals immediately (after amnesty), the economics illegal labor will continue to drive the count higher. Nobody will hire a more costly, legal employee if he doesn’t have to.
    Maybe people in the northern states aren’t aware of this, but most of the businesses that hire illegals are Hispanic owned. And many if not most are also a cash operations, who rely on illegal help. Unless the government enforces existing laws, it is a ridiculous notion that this whole economy and way of life are simply going to evaporate because these guys are all here to be part of the American dream. They couldn’t care less. It’s all business and money.
    Natural born Hispanic business owners favor illegal labor. They will hire an illegal over a natural born Hispanic because he works for less. Thats why they vote democrat and will unless the democrats start enforcing laws. The non-Hispanic owned businesses rely on the same things, and republicans from these southwest states know this as well- they rely on those businesses for campaign funding.
    Americans are getting screwed by both parties – it’s all about economics, and people like Mitsu have a poor understanding of what they actually are. Our representatives know these things- they’re just jerking everyone around.

37. I respect Mitsu’s engagement here. I’ve done the same on left-heavy forums, not on this issue but on an equally provocative one. The tone of the responses I’ve received there are similar to the tone of the responses to Mitsu here.

    The benefit isn’t winning or losing a debate. He’s right that the discussion ought to diversify and deepen all of Neo’s readers’ understanding of the issues. So keep the reasoned, informed rebuttals coming.

38. If the government were going to enforce immigration law AFTER we get a new one, would they not also be enforcing immigration law before? Even if they really were sincere this time, which I do not believe for an instant, why are they waiting?

    Amnesty is bad for working Americans. especially Black people. I have heard some of them complain that “construction work has been taken away from us.” There is a tendency, encouraged by Leftist publications, like, yes, USA Today, for Black people to believe that The Man, or mean ol’ Republicans or White people in general, have, for reasons of pure meanness, deprived Black people of their former jobs. This is, after all, part of the general strategy of blaming Republicans for the consequences of Democrat policies. With a very willing lapdog media to carry the water, this works most of the time.

    Those of us who live in the altogether too real world, know what is happening. We see businesses close, driven out by cheaper contractors who use illegal labor. We see services diminished at establishments, such as fast food, which can not compete with any who use only legal labor, so the damned drive-though intercom, nearly incomprehensible in the best of circumstances, is covered by a non-English speaker, the Lone Star Cards used by people who must have the instructions in Spanish, the various services, like health care and public education which must be delivered in Spanish, as if that were normal, or as if it were normal for people born here not to speak English. We know the score. We know that illegal immigration serves the purposes of certain powerful groups, and they are trying to make sure that they get to continue on the same path. We know that some politicians, like the wretched liar Obama, will continue to mouth platitudes, often self-contradictory ones, at that, to cover what they are doing, and to keep a sufficient percentage of low-information voters in line, especially at the polls. We know that we are not racists, as in believing in the innate inferiority of a particular ethnic group, or, by some extension, in the continued exploitation of some group or other. We’re mad as Hell, and trying not to take it any more.

39. I used to hear young black girls looking for their first jobs in retail call my boss’s office complaining that they couldn’t get a job because they couldn’t speak Spanish. Contractors don’t hire workers who can’t speak Spanish with their fellow workers, a constant problem for the Haitians looking for work.

    Oh, and don’t neglect the cost of worker’s comp to a business and the benefit of under counting your work force for this purpose.

    I understand that the massive complexity of the Senate immigration bill contains not only vast amounts of pork, but an amnesty for employers who have been found to employ illegals in defiance of e-verify. You can understand the attraction to big Republican Donors. New Party, any one?

40. Like I said above, I’m not saying I’m in favor of illegal immigration. I’ve only been making the simple point that there are economic benefits as well as costs associated with illegal immigration. I’m also making the point that illegal immigration has been steadily decreasing and is at a low point today, already, due both to increased enforcement and laws targeting illegals.

    I was just listening to a radio show where a libertarian was arguing that there should be more free flow of labor across borders, and our current immigration laws are too restrictive.

    As for the argument that immigration reform would mean illegals would prefer to remain illegal so they can get those low-paying jobs they’re getting now — that’s contradicted by the evidence. Past amnesty laws have shown that former illegals have transitioned to legal status and become productive members of society for the most part.

    As for USA Today and Businessweek, okay, fine, they’re all socialist, apparently… how about the Cato Institute?

    http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/illegal-immigration-will-congress-finally-solve-it

    They seem to be in favor of immigration reform as well. Or are they also leftists?

41. Strangely enough, I am reminded of this post from way back.

    http://neoneocon.com/2008/01/19/collateral-damage-vietnam-style-sound-familiar/

    Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be.

    But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.

    She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.

    She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.

    She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.

    She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom.

    The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force….

    She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit….

    [America’s] glory is not dominion, but liberty. Her march is the march of the mind. She has a spear and a shield: but the motto upon her shield is, Freedom, Independence, Peace. This has been her Declaration: this has been, as far as her necessary intercourse with the rest of mankind would permit, her practice.

    It is perhaps ironic that Mitsu’s allies have generated tyrannies both abroad as well as domestically situated in the heart of America.

    Intentional or perhaps merely duped into unintentional consequences of the ignorant?

    I suspect Fisher may well have suffered from a clinical illness.

    I hesitate to respond to many of the comments above, however, since, unlike Neo’s writing, they are so far over the top as to rival the 9/11 Truther’s level of paranoia. Liberals are not mentally ill, they are not trying to convert the world to Islam, they do not reject reason or critical thinking. The idea that all liberals are somehow allied with our enemies is just as bizarre and crazy an idea as the idea that Bush ordered the attack on the WTC.

    Go out and meet and talk to people on the other side, get to know them. You will be surprised to find they’re not as different from you as you think.-Mitsu

    I’m a bit too tired to talk up the Leftists totalitarian wannabes here now, so I just dig up the past and substitute it for our “liberty”, so to speak.

    But to bring us back to the present: the reason I and most liberals oppose the Iraq war is not because we want the enemy to win: it is because we think the war is a weak response to a serious threat, and it endangers our national security. You’re welcome to believe that we’re wrong about this – but just because I and others think Bush is hurting our national security and you think he is helping it by invading Iraq doesn’t mean that we don’t agree with you that national security is paramount. Only far leftists would disagree that our national security isn’t one of the most important things.

    You guys are confusing a disagreement about policy with an advocacy of the enemy.-Mitsu

    Well, they did always say Afghanistan and killing Osama was more important. Or maybe not.

    Maybe finding people who draw guns in school is more important. Finding them and locking them up. Boston bombers… can always ignore those and let the citizens catch them for us.

    To bring us back to the present, now that they have realized their dream of downgrading Iraq in preference for their domestic and foreign allies… where exactly are we again? Are we promoting freedom overseas? Do we even have any freedom at home to promote?

42. The problem here is that candidate Obama made it quite clear that he believed Afghanistan was a crucial war and most of his comments indicated a willingness to ramp up the effort there as we wind down in Iraq. I happen to agree wholeheartedly with this which is part of why I supported Obama. However, there are many liberal Democrats who think that we ought to be winding down in Afghanistan now, so Obama has pressure from the left, including from Joe Biden, to ratchet things down.

    I think this would be a mistake. The threat of terrorism against the United States is real, it is significant, and it deserves an exceptionally strong response. A lot of the problem I see in thinking about this issue is people get stuck in “hawk/dove” discussions, when the real issue ought to be effectiveness in securing our nation. In other words, I support and supported a strong effort in Afghanistan and Pakistan because I believe that’s where our main security challenges are. Candidate Obama expressed this view on many occasions, even suggesting that if Pakistan did not do something about their frontier provinces we’d do it ourselves.

    My feeling is that Obama’s basic inclination is to go forward with McChrystal’s recommendations. He’s essentially saying, just going after Al Qaeda isn’t sufficient because if the Taliban are left in place Afghanistan will remain unstable, and that will be a breeding ground for more terrorism against us in the future. I agree with this. However, Obama’s own advisers and many within the Administration will probably be arguing against this view. Many of them are suspicious of Petraeus as well, though I think they shouldn’t be – Petraeus, I believe, is secretly rooting for Obama to succeed, not only because it’s his patriotic duty, but because I think he respects Obama (again, based on various reports I’ve read regarding his interactions with Obama).

    My hope and prediction is Obama will go with his initial instinct and ramp up in Afghanistan, despite pressure from the left and from within his Administration. I hope I am right!-Mitsu

    http://neoneocon.com/2009/10/06/obama-and-the-generals-decison-making-on-military-matters/

    >Progressives

    You’re again talking about the far left, not liberals. Liberals (such as myself) have supported quite a few military operations we’ve engaged in, including the war in Afghanistan (initially) and the operation in support of Kosovo, to name two. I personally supported the first Iraq war, as well, along with many of my liberal friends – but not the second (again I don’t want to re-argue that one).

    Obama is a pragmatic liberal, not a member of the far left. There are very few national politicians who are part of the far left; the closest one can think of might be Dennis Kucinich, but he is a marginal figure within the party.-Mitsu

    “Let’s just assume, however, that Obama’s heart is at least in the right place, and that he wants the US to succeed in Afghanistan”

    That presumption is erroneous in that he does not believe in using US military might to achieve success.

    That is why his behavior appears to be ‘confused’. His instincts are to search for a ‘solution’ that does not rely on force. He envisions some kind of Afghan strategy that uses the military as police and, arrests the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

    Obama’s military ignorance and liberal-philosophical obstinacy prevents him from understanding and thus accepting the military reality that police forces of necessity are only truly efficient in an urban society and cannot be successfully implemented by occupying military forces. Additionally, a police force cannot deal adequately with organized terrorist and quasi military opposition.

    The biggest problem for Obama’s desired strategy is that with the Taliban and Al Qaeda using Pakistan for refuge from pursuit, only low level fighters can be apprehended.

    So the conflict will inevitably drag on until the majority of Afghani’s ultimately decide that the Taliban is the winning side and then, the war will be lost.-Geoffrey Britain

    Just as a side note, I’m digging up some historical comments to better understand what people’s views on certain topics were. Not merely Mitsu’s views are of import.

    Mitsu wrote, “What would possibly motivate anyone to take up such a position?”

    Your premise is slightly flawed Mitsu.

    He isn’t interested in seeing a STRONG United States defeat anybody.

    Haven’t you heard his speeches abroad?

    Besides ‘capturing’ OBL — Obama isn’t interested in being in Afghanistan. So therefore it is my belief that he will figure out a way to move our strategy — losing Afghanistan but working ever harder to capture the one man.

    What kind of success will that be?

    It can be said that he is the head and that the body will die. Or it can be said that will strengthen the Taliban’s anger and when it does control the country will reconstitute with even more forces.-Baklava

    As people die in even greater numbers than before in Afghanistan… the Left and their Democrat fodder, cum self proclaimed liberty fighters, are dining on Obama’s vacation left overs.

    Not everyone was right in using logic and their analysis-conclusions…. just that some were closer and others weren’t even near the sun. (Whispers: they were out touring vacations with Obama)

    Using Mitsu’s stated logickal resources:

    Far Left=socialist, communist baddies
    Obama does not = a Leftist
    Obama = pragmatic liberal
    Mitsu=liberal

    Conclusion?

    It’s kind of hard to tell what people self identify with and lecture them about who they are, since that’s kind of meaningless without me and them being in the same interrogation chamber. But spoken logick is a different matter.

    Oh come on, you’re recycling ACORN and Bill Ayers as “proof” Obama is a leftist? I really don’t have time to go over every right-wing conspiracy theory, except to say: John McCain has attended ACORN rallies in the past, ACORN, for whatever problems it has as an organization, has in the past received funding from many sources, including Republicans, and the fact that Obama was associated with ACORN doesn’t mean a thing about him being a leftist any more than the fact that McCain attended an ACORN rally means he is a leftist. Same story with Ayers – give me a break. I have leftist friends, as I’ve often said, yet I am not a leftist.

    I’m not even going to get into the whole birther thing.-Mitsu

    Well, it’s not like ACORn or Ayers is important. Rules for Radicals were only for Leftists, not liberals. Right?

    Well, it’s not like I lost trust in anyone from 2008 onwards. It’s more like I never trusted them to begin with. And I advise people here… not to trust them or their allies again, if ever it was a case that trust was given. Do not give it now. Suspect. Armor up. Do not drop your propaganda or psychological guard.

    They are out to get you. One way or another.

43. “I was just listening to a radio show where a libertarian was arguing that there should be more free flow of labor across borders, and our current immigration laws are too restrictive.”

    I’m sure you did. I’ve heard libertarians argue to get rid of the Age of Consent and to allow unregulated siphoning of Great Lakes Water, regardless of the international agreements or effects on shipping lanes. There’s even a libertarian in my area who contributed to the spread of the emerald ash bore because he was going to defend his trees to the death from being cut down (they died and then were cut down – victory!).

    But other libertarians have common sense and have better things to do than call radio programs.

    Back to immigration reform – it would be great if the borders were enforced tightly.

    And for the Dream Act: It would also be great if the government were as strict with illegal immigrants as they were with First Nations people who came across the rivers (St. Clair and Detroit) for schooling and jobs. There was a sudden crackdown just a few years after the Homeland Security Act. Some of it was necessary; e.g. funding was cut off for Ojibwe and traditional craft classes after it was determined that only Canadian tribes attended. (It was a strange bureaucratic decision because American tribes left our area following the Great Fire of 1881, so there was no audience except Canadians.)

    But it was a bit problematic for students whose grandfathers belonged to the VFW and whose parents worked on the US side but who suddenly had to ask for acceptance into their American sister tribe (fat chance: the Chippewa share casino revenue with tribe members).

    As one put it to me, her son can’t get American college money because he’s “Canadian” but her nephew can because his father is a citizen of Mexico.

    So I would propose that if people are here illegally and come in under amnesty, they should not be allowed to get “points” on their college or work applications. In other words, they shouldn’t check “Hispanic” on documents in which they are competing against legal residents or citizens for scholarships, internships, etc. That would level the playing field between the NYT’s Posterchild and her $30K of illegally-gotten savings and my ESL student’s son whose parents (and himself) have filed taxes and paid license fees since they first got their greencards.

44. Ymarkasar I’m not entirely sure what specific point you were trying to make there, or whether you wanted me to respond. I would just reiterate that leftists and liberals are considered very different by leftists themselves; leftists generally tend to hate and despise liberals. I can dig up quotes but there are many. On my side, unlike you guys I don’t hate leftists; I think they are for the most part idealistic, and most of them are not, unlike Stalinists of old, interested in any form of totalitarianism. They do often advocate policies I disagree with; for instance they were largely opposed to the war in Afghanistan which I disagreed with. The list goes on. I applaud their interest in a more just society but I don’t agree with many of their policy positions.

    Back to immigration: I’d say the Cato Institute (strongly in favor of immigration reform) is hardly a random example of a libertarian calling some radio show. They’re pretty staunchly libertarian it seems to me. I don’t agree with them on many fronts of course but their analysis is quite cogent on this issue.

    I suppose it’s a bit of a lost cause but I come here and to conservative forums not to “incite” but simply to discuss policy. Unlike many of you and even many of my friends on the left side of the political spectrum I don’t think everyone on the other side is evil or trying to destroy America. I think there are interesting lessons to learn from both sides and extreme policy in either direction is likely to fail or be suboptimal. To me it is interesting to discuss where we ought to land in terms of optimal policy.

    I think nearly all Americans on the left or right are opposed to totalitarianism and nearly all believe in a robust pluralistic democracy. Yet we demonize the other side. I do believe the left is closer to optimal policy than the right but I think principles of free markets need to be respected as well. I just come down more to the left on these topics than most of you here. I’m to the right of many of my leftist friends. And so it goes.

45. (That is I disagreed with their opposition to the war in Afghanistan at the outset. The situation there today is different; I think things are very murky now particularly with the drone program and so on. But that’s another topic.)

46. I wasn’t tying the Cato Institute to liberations. You brought up the libertarian on a radio talk show, which I thought was an odd choice of citation. So I responded to the oddness of it.

    As for the drawbacks of using paper trails in studies of an underground phenomenon, my point stands.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>