Immigration - Fissures Everywhere

Mickey points out that Paul Krugman has wandered off of the Dem reservation on some immigration questions (I alluded to this earlier in mocking Krugman's attempt to pin the Jobs Americans Won't Do fallacy on Bush).

And even the Times, in an article devoted to cracks in the Republican immigration facade, spends an entire paragraph on the challenges faced by the Democratic Party.  Let's repeat their extensive analysis here:

But the issue is a delicate matter for Democrats as well. Polls show large majorities of the public both support tighter borders as a matter of national security, and oppose amnesty for illegal immigrants. Many working-class Democrats resent what they see as a continuing influx of cheap labor.

So, Dems are bucking the polls, their labor base, and impoverished native-born Americans (some of whom are black).  Can they continue this lonely heroism through November?  Or will a nervpus [OK, nervous] John Kerry, to pick a name out of a hat, suddenly realize that, like the French, the Mexicans don't vote in our elections?

In a related puzzle, the Times repeats this CW:

Pollsters from each party say Hispanics, like other groups, typically rank immigration lower in importance than other issues, especially education. But they respond strongly when they believe the rhetoric surrounding the debate demonizes immigrants or Hispanics, as they did when Gov. Pete Wilson of California, a Republican, backed a 1994 initiative to exclude illegal immigrants from public schools and services.

Many analysts say the backlash from Hispanics wrecked the California Republican party for a decade.

Well, I have always believed that, but why would a Jersey guy know anything about the Left Coast?  Dale Franks disputes the CW as revisionist history, but I welcome all viewpoints.

Some background on Prop 187 is here; a Federal Judge tossed most of it in 1998.

Dan Walters of the Sac Bee recycles the CW from 1994 and relates it to Arnold's current situation (And Arnold speaks!).

In 2003 Debra J. Saunders, writing in the prestigious Weekly Standard, attacked the CW.

MORE:  Is Frist part of the solution or part of the problem?

 

Comments

[steve sturm]

Tom: I, for one, think the battle over immigration is really a battle between those who are angry that immigrants (both legal and not) aren't assimilating into American culture as in the past and those who think there is nothing wrong with large blocs of Americans (defined for this discussion as people living in America) who prefer to wave Mexican flags. The Democrats have long run on diversity and multi-culturalism and thus are more than ready to defend the status quo. The Republicans, on the other hand, wouldn't have much problem with immigrants were they all speaking English and cheering for the right kind of football team, but won't come out and say so for fear of being called racist and zenophobic... so they advance arguments that fall apart under scrutiny (such as that our unguarded border presents a national security threat... which it might be, but they don't call for a wall along our border with Canada).

I've got (much) more here

[Barney Frank]

TM,

I'm a fourth generation Californian, which is a lot for California and I can tell you that the Republican party was wrecked long before prop 187. Sure we elected Republican governors but so does Massachusets. How are the Repubs doing in the Bay State otherwise? Dismally, just like they have here. Not only did 187 not wreck the Repubs, the GOP was only elected to a majority in the legislature in 1994 because of the nationwide landslide. Arnold supported 187 but still managed to be elected ten years later when the number of Hispanic voters was even higher.
In fact Arnold together with the more conservative Tom McClintock received over 41% of the Hispanic vote in the governors race compared to around 52% for Cruz Bustamante the Hispanic Democratic candidate. Bush got 39% in Texas for governor in 1998 and 31% nationwide in 2000. Using those numbers one could just as easily argue that prop 187 improved the Republican party's outlook in California.
The California Republican party is so inept, so devoid of principles and so leaderless that it doesn't need any pressure from any outside groups to fail. They are and have been utterly useless for decades all on their own.

[Appalled Moderate]

Some typos are felicitous.

I love "nervpus" as a description for John Kerry.

[maryrose]

AM
LOL.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

'nervpus John Kerry', deserves copyrighting.

[mariner]

" the Mexicans don't vote in our elections?"

I'll bet large numbers of them DO vote in our elections.

[SteveMG]

Anyone find a link or sources on polling data on what legal immigrants think of the current policies or the proposed changes?

In searching the various opinion organizations, I can't find much data on what this group thinks.

My guess - intuition if nothing else - is that they are pretty resentful (after having gone through the hurdles to become citizens) of the illegal immigrants and are probably supporters of harsher penalties than native Americans.

[clarice]

Everything I've seen indicates for the most part they are resentful. Many wait years in line to rejoin their families.

BTW, there were reported demonstrations in Mexico and Latam by Americans protesting unequal treatment there--no medical care, no chance to remain without an appropriate visa, no opprtunity to work...In Mexico Americans cannot even get title to land in certain desirable areas. Perhaps we ought to put a rider on the guest worker provisions that Mexico must allow Americans who wish to buy land wherever they choose and live as long as they like there.Maybe throw in free medical care.

It's not as outrageous as it sounds. Many areas of Mexico are getting depopulated , leaving little work for those who remain. Perhaps many US retirees on fixed incomes would find living there a good idea and the Mexican work force might find a way to earn a living at home.

[cathyf]

One thing legal immigrants are sensitive to is the creation of special legal barriers just for people who look hispanic. For example, if you penalize employers for being fooled by counterfeit work documents, then what happens when an employer is looking at a brown applicant with seemingly valid papers and a white applicant with seemingly valid papers? The employer minimizes the risk of counterfeits by hiring the white guy...

(I'm married to a guy whose 4 grandparents all came from southern Italy. As anyone who looks like a southern Italian, sephardic Jew, or arab Christian can tell you, looking like an Islamic terrorist causes all sorts of inconvenience in day-to-day life.)

Sure, life isn't fair, and to a certain extent everybody puts up with what life throws at them. But Americans especially are fair-minded to a fault (that's why we have a tax code which is life-threatening if you drop it on your foot) and we are easily outraged over excessive unfairness.

cathy :-)

[topsecretk9]

--nervpus--

I love freudian typo's

[emptywheel]

I think the discussions about whether Prop 187 wrecked the Republican party suffer from the same mistake that discussions about the current immigration debate do--they assume all immigrants are Latino.

Yes, Prop 187 was like an anvil around the CA GOP neck. But the large groups of Latinos in the state were not huge supporters of Republicans anyway--unlike, say, Cubans, they were not a reliable GOP block.

But other immigrant groups, notably Koreans, were. And a Korean whose child you have deprived of education will be just as furious as a Latino whose child you have deprived of education.

Ditto todays debate. Yes, the GOP has made enormous strides with the non-Cuban Latino community (though there is still a lot of variance between Latino populations). But I've seen about 60 friends and associates go through the INS process, including my own husband. NOT ONE of them has managed to go through the process without some enormous fuckup on the part of INS/BCIS, Latino, Northern European, South Asian, or other. In many cases, the fuckup resulted in the applicant "falling out of status." Temporarily. And eventually, they all ended up getting their Green Card. But the House Bill would criminalize and deport them in such a case.

I find Senator Martinez' comments on the debate probably the most interesting of all. If a Cuban Latino is concerned this will blow the GOP chances, it will blow their chances.

[boris]

some enormous fuckup on the part of INS/BCIS

I think fixing INS would be a big part of any reform. INS is not supposed to work under the current system.

[topsecretk9]

the Mexicans don't vote in our elections?

Then they should stop printing ballots and voter guides in spanish, hmong, vietnamese etc.

I am 6th generation (so my son is 7th!) Californian.

There was a time when border patrol agents were pretty aggressive 80-early 90's, I distinctly remember the agents driving up in vans waiting for the San Deigo train, round them off and deport. The night cook in a restaurant I worked in was deported in a spot raid, and in like a week and a half he was back at work. The freeway caution signs -- dashing family silhouettes -- is about the point I knew it was out of control.

There are good people who come here and embrace America, but because the problem has been allowed to go on the sentiment has radically changed over the years. No pressure has ever been applied to the Mexican government to change their sorta feudal corrupt government. That is why I find these protesters flying the Mexican flag truly repulsive, how can you celebrate the country that doesn't give a rats ass about you...where the protest and ire at your own country?

[topsecretk9]

oops, I'm 5th gen. - can't do math anymore

[Barney Frank]

I stand willing to accept evidence that prop 187 hurt the republican party. If someone can demonstrate that it caused fewer minorities (or majorities as the case may soon be)to vote Republican then perhaps I would change my mind. But it would also have to be demonstrated that a corresponding number of people weren't attracted to the Republicans by it. After all it passed 60/40.
I will admit the GOP has allowed itself to be painted as anti immigrant, but whether that turned into votes, I'm not so sure. More importantly that is a function of the imbeciles running the party in this state not 187, IMO.

[Rick Ballard]

emptywheel,

"it will blow their chances."

A bit of demographic data for a particular state or district would be helpful in making that determination. California, Texas, Arizona and New Mexico are the states bearing the highest cost regarding illegals and they also contain significant amounts of Latino voters. The only Senate race possibly affected could be Kyl in AZ. It might be a factor in the CO or CA governor races but it would be difficult to come up with a single Congressional district in those four states where a Latino 'swing' would mean a damn thing. This is just another DC smoke and mirrors moment - the announcement of the "solution" will put the issue to bed for the time being.

I agree with you regarding the INS on the paper side but they are neither much better nor much worse than many government agencies in mishandling the function for which they were ostensibly created.

[TM]

Some typos are felicitous.

I love "nervpus" as a description for John Kerry.

Looks like I'm stuck with it - oh, well.

Earlier today I mentioned a memory of some Dem program and came up with "flashgack" - also felicitous (in an "Animal House" sort of way), but I corrected it.

[clarice]

I'm going to steal flashgack, TM..I don't know when or how I'll use it, but it's too good to be ignored. (Sue me.)

[windansea]

FYI

I live in Mexico...to work here an employer must sponsor you as mine did...there's over 1 million americans living here, more than any other foreign country.

You can own beachfront property here now...but your deed is held in trust by a mexican bank...you pay a small yearly fee for this and you have all rights of ownership including being able to sell, rent or will the property.

There are pros and cons..pros being 10% income tax, lower cost of living, great food and climate, friendly senoritas etc and cons being it takes longer to get things done sometimes, but overall I love it. When my mexi friends complain about the money I make here I tell them alls fair in love and emmigration.

[cathyf]

Just a technical note: the usual comment upon felicitous typos is, "your freudian slip is showing, my dear."

cathy :-)

[Daddy]

Its interesting to consider how this entire immigration dialog might be altered if the predominant religion of Latin America happened to be Islam. Referencing the Dubai Ports Ownership hysteria as a starting point I suspect the decision to build a well patrolled wall along the southern border would be a bipartisan foregone conclusion. I suppose part of what I'm saying is that though we have a hell of a mess in the States with illegal immigration (of which I certainly have no idea how it's going to turn out), I'd much rather be having the problem with our south of the border immigrant populations, than the immigrant populations Europe is having to deal with. Let me then be the first to thumb my nose at France and say, "Our American illegal immigrants are way better than your lousy French ones". I write this from the Philippines, where the twain meets.

[Neo]

This is one of those "futures" projects that is a page out the labor movement's playbook.
The Democrats are banking on getting new voters from the new block of millions of now-illegal immigrants/aliens. In the meanwhile , if they piss off some of their base .. so what .. where sill they go ?
The whole thing resembles a typical "closed shop" that so many labor unions long for. No overtime, even if the membership wants it, because the alternative is more workers and therefore more dues collected.

[clarice]

But there base of bases is the Black vote which is IIRC vehemently opposed to this...and for good economic reasons.

[clarice]

*thEIR* base of bases....

[clarice]

La Raza objects:
"A Hill rat just passed along an alert that went out from the D.C. office of La Raza today warning its allies about the Alexander citizenship bill, S. 1815.

But first. Here's Senator Alexander talking about the bill on the Senate floor:

Joined by Senators Cornyn, Isakson, Cochran, and Santorum, I have introduced S. 1815, the Strengthening American Citizenship Act, that is indispensable to any comprehensive immigration bill. This legislation, that I plan to offer as an amendment at the appropriate time during this debate, would help legal immigrants who are embarked on a path toward citizenship to learn our common language, our history and our way of government by:

• providing them with $500 grants for English courses;
• allowing those who become fluent in English to apply for citizenship one year early (that is, after four years instead of five);
• providing grants to organizations to offer courses in American history and civics;
• authorizing a new foundation to assist in these efforts;
• codifying the Oath of Allegiance which new citizens swear when they are naturalized;
• asking the Homeland Security Department to carry out a strategy to highlight the ceremonies in which immigrants become American citizens; and
• establishing an award to recognize the contributions of outstanding new American citizens.

Now to La Raza's concerns. Among them, in the e-mail I'm looking at, the La Raza staffer warns: “while it doesn’t overtly mention assimilation, it is very strong on the patriotism and traditional american values language in a way which is potentially dangerous to our communities.”

So, "patriotism and [A]merican values"—by which I'll assume they mean learning English and knowing basic history--are “potentially dangerous” to Hispanics?"

http://corner.nationalreview.com/06_03_26_corner-archive.asp#093835

More "dangerous" to La Raza than to Hispanics, I think.

[Rick Ballard]

Clarice,

The 'black base' is of little functional utility to the Dems. It's the same thing I mentioned above but worse regarding House seats. The Black Caucus is a study in futility - always dependable and therefore easy to ignore.

This fall, the only states where black voters may play a decisive role would be PA - and Lyn Swann's entry in the governors race makes that problematical and Maryland, which might be interesting. I don't think that Michigan is actually in play, Senate or Governor. Otherwise, it doesn't matter whether they show up or not - and the DNC knows it and shows it. The black vote couldn't hold Southern seats for the Dems and the gerrymandered black Congressional districts get to pay for that fact.

Brilliant strategists. Not.

[clarice]

Well, that's a job for R/S/S, isn't it? Lots of well-placed radio ads thanking the Dems for their support in getting the immigration Act paced by folks with Spanish accents..

The Black vote BTW will probably also play a role in the Md Senatorial Race and in Blackwell's run in Ohio.

[maryrose]

I'm guessing in Ohio in the May primary the Black vote will be pivotal. Petro is also a good candidate so it will be a real horse race.I'm not sure whom I will vote for yet.

[larwyn]

Clarice,
Hope you'll put the comment on the Raza email and Sen Alexander's amendment up at AT. Needs widest distribution.

Goddess,
Re: Nevpus and Flashgack
Have you already appointed one your servants to record the secret language of TAC for posterity?

I would sign on for duty - but old betsy (a 97 Gateway) sends me messages every day that my hard drive is full. I am the 5th of my family to use it. Not lazy just not equipped.

[larwyn]

Maryrose,
Lorie Byrd of PoliPundit has post up of interview with "24" writers. Movie in the works.

Dems must have decided that

Bush, the Jack Bauer President

wasn't a good fit with
Real Security

Let's hope they go back to Plan k?
"6 & 60 in 06"!

[clarice]

Larwyn--what about recording the lingo in an actual diary for reference and future use?

No--I didn't send it in--editor's busy and afternoon posts are not likely to make it onboard..

[larwyn]

Clarice,
I do jot them down - but I jot everything down now. And that is as good as no jotting at all.

[Lew Clark]

In the near future, when I head across the border from the northern Mexico state of Tejas to the southern US state of Oklahoma to find work, I promise to speak English and not wave a Mexican flag!

[larwyn]

Clarice,
Per yr post from LaRaza email:
"while it doesn’t overtly mention assimilation, it is very strong on the patriotism and traditional american values language in a way which is potentially dangerous to our communities.”

Is the lower case a in american a Clarice typo or just another clue to the real feelings of these people?

Picky? Don't think so - the EU is trying to de-capitalize Jesus.

[larwyn]

Should have typed:
....the eu is....

[clarice]

larwyn--it was a straight clip and paste...

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

'Perhaps many US retirees on fixed incomes would find living there a good idea....'

They do already. Lots.

I've been invited by a Mexican I've befriended to go there, and he'll build me a small house to live in on the 76 acres he owns. On a hill overlooking the Pacific Ocean about midway between Acapulco and Puerto Vallarta.

[clarice]

Sounds good..

[kim]

Oh to be Mexican and not considered american by the gringos.
=======================================

[kim]

Hey Daddy, not only thatty, but the tongues we speak are very much aleek.
===================================

[Jim Rockford]

No 187 was popular. It PASSED. With something like 67% of the vote. So was Pete Wilson who had a 60% approval rating in 1998. Pete Wilson rode 187 from trailing 20 points (against Kathleen Brown) to winning by 15 points.

Hispanic Voters increased from 11% to 13% from 1994-2000. OK, not insignificant. Not massive either. That means that 87% of voters in California are NOT Hispanic. Hispanics comprise according to 2000 Census 12% of the population, and 4% of voters in the 2000 election.

What killed the GOP in California was the loss of about 2 million, mostly White, married voters with families. Plus the influx of around a million dot-com liberal yuppies, very rich, very socially liberal.

Conclusion: GOP voters left California for other states (which got more Republican) while Dem voters left other states for California.

[stephen]

Barney Frank:
I stand willing to accept evidence that prop 187 hurt the republican party. If someone can demonstrate that it caused fewer minorities (or majorities as the case may soon be)to vote Republican then perhaps I would change my mind. But it would also have to be demonstrated that a corresponding number of people weren't attracted to the Republicans by it. After all it passed 60/40.

Dale Franks is only looking at one election. Heck, half of Latinos supported prop 187 when it first became publicized. Latinos turned on it when the debate seemed to focus more on the Mexican part of Mexican immigration. Wilson proved that you could win an election with a highly mobilized white base, but demographics were changing under his feet and the numbers no longer favor that strategy. The tragedy was that it set an example for the 1998 election. Dole saw that Latinos were not needed to win an election, so Latinos were largely ignored in the 1998 presidential elections. This gave Democrats an opporuntity to consolidate Latino voters, which they have. Registration numbers show that Latino registrations strongly favor the Democrats now where California Latinos had given large voting numbers to Reagan, which had shrunk up until Bush.

The point is, rather than building on the Reagan administration, the following decade crippled the Republican Party's ability to reach out to the growing Latino electorate. A recent study showed that in 2004, foreign born citizens in Los Angeles were more likely to vote than native-born citizens in Los Angeles. this means, in my view, that while the 187 debate was a successful short term strategy for the Wilson campaign, it was a failed strategy for the long term benefits of the Republican Party. It motivated the incoming Latinos to go out and vote and it dejected the 2nd generation Latinos, who are more likely to give a sympathetic ear to the Republican Party. Does anyone seriously think the Republicans have a chance to take back the legislature in California without a mobilized Latino population? Wont happen unless you can really get whites motivated, but year after year, the Latino groups grow stronger and more organized and more partisan, and year after year, the Republicans give Latinos more reasons not to be Republican. Its unfortunate, because as Reagan believed, Latinos are indeed natural Republicans. They just dont know it yet.

George Will's article
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/will1.asp , I think, is a step in the right direction. I just hope the knee jerk reaction of the small but loud jingoistic Republican base isn't provoked so easily this time by kids running around with Mexican flags.

I find it appalling too, but where do these poor kids find the money and time to find these flags? The union leaders and Latino "leadership" are feeding this to them in an attempt to provoke this debate into a racial one. If that happens, Republicans may indeed repeat the "victory" of Pete Wilson.

[ajacksonian]

What to do, what to do... I could just copy and past a bunch of my material here, but that would just eat up space. So I will give links and meta-analysis! Yes!! That always snoozes people as they don't want to follow the links, do lots of supposition on what I use as the basis for my reasoning, rant and rave at my conceptions, and then squeal when I point out they are going from false premises and haven't actually *read* the basis for the meta analysis.

Or it will be ignored.

Either way, its faster, so let me begin:

The electorate today and how it could easily change with a few choice words inserted into the vituperation located here

The need to change the nature of the debate from immigration to Secessionist slavery cities here.

My first views on Transnationalism and Jacksonianism here. Foundation of the Republic on individualism and not Groups is here.

My first bit of intemperance to get past those trying to slap on Group labels and denigrate based on that and instead look at actions and their outcomes here. And then more just today here. Which has left me tired...

All of this looks at the Transnational Progressivist agenda for destruction of the Nation State based upon individuals and its working to give Groups more rights than individuals and replace rule by individuals with a form of social collectivism group rule with an elite group, the Progressives, over the other Groups. I relate this to Transnational Terrorism which is attempting to do the same thing via actively attacking States via non-State methods and asymmetrical warfare. This explains the Moderat Muslim silence phenomena which I do here.

So you have now eaten up your previously useful time and read a whole lot, or have decided to skip the intro and get to the meta-analysis.

Right!

Simply put: the social fabric of our society is being torn at by individuals that are condoning illegal activity, by those conducting illegal activity and by those not willing to stand up for National Sovereignty. The outcome of this are cities and municipalities breaking with 6 Articles of the Constitution and quite some number of Amendments and forming their own City-State enclaves for the exploitation of human labor, which we call coerced servitude or slavery. These areas have effectively declared secession from the Union by such activities.

Mexico has given considerable number of instances on a frequent basis for the US to respond via showing Casus Belli and us Jus ad bellum to require the stoppage of such or to use any action necessary to save the Sovereign territory of the United States from incursion. Note to all of those worried about your rights: a foreign country crossing legal boundaries of Nation States at will endangers your rights by reducing the effective territory where your rights can be enforced.

Also, low skill jobs today will not necessarily be here tomorrow. A permanent illegal underclass without work will turn into a nasty situation very quickly if not addressed now.

If you enjoy your freedoms within the Territory that is called the United States, then you should be properly appalled that sections of the citizenry have effectively declared non-enforcement of Federal law and have decided to take control of: foreign policy, immigration and naturalization, ruling upon treaties between Foreign Nations, treating with Foreign Agents and trafficking in illegal human labor and using either direct or indirect coercion to do so. Frankly I do not want to have to fight a Second Civil War over Slavery. I should think *once* was enough for the Union to wise up. And as this would of necessity embroil Mexico, this would turn into a very nasty war in which the United States may not see a need for a land or people of Mexico. This would cause a drastic increase in military spending above the peacetime level it is now at with about 5% of GDP directed into that area. A doubling of that percentage would give the world the idea that the US sees itself in a Global World War against enemies foreign and domestic and it would be quite correct in that assumption.

Again, please do note that I am speaking here about actions taken and their consequences and I, quite truthfully, do not give a damn about intent. *Compassion* to Groups and seeing Group struggle for rights above those of the individual will tear the Constitution into shreds as it is *not* a Group rights document or plan for governance.

By properly addressing issues, being unafraid to call those that perform actions names based on those actions and not upon ideas or race or economic status or any such thing, this makes those individuals supporting such actions *accountable* for those actions. Individuals *are* accountable for actions in this Republic, no matter how sweet their intent may be. And it is disgusting when I see people wanting to tear the social fabric to shreds being aided and abetted by those saying the intentions are benign. Those saying such are giving aid to those performing the actions.

In each of my posting I deal with further economic realities, but note that these things are in flux and that We The People by supporting non-viable agriculture are exacerbating the problem at PUBLIC EXPENENSE.

Once the action and accountability names stick because the names go with the actions, the attitudes towards those performing those actions will change drastically. Once Sanctuary Citie are addressed as Secessionist Slavery City States, where will the American public go? Enforced service and sub-minimal wage with the ability to threaten down to ZERO wage will not enthrall the Black Community in this nation, nor many other legal immigrants who spent time and money to get through the system legally.

Calling Acts of War by their proper name and demanding that they be stopped by another Sovereign State that has oversight of those performing the actions is a first step. Border defenses and militarization of same becomes a necessity. That is how you defend a Sovereign Nation: you enforce the rules between Nations. And as the military is not being asked to make decisions in this, their job would be to close the border with force while regular and more passive defenses are established.

All illegals of all colors and all nationalities and all races need to be put to work on building those defenses, turninging boulders into finely graded gravel or sand and then deported. They are here illegally no matter what their intention. They have broken the law as individuals for their own reasons. They are *not* Citizens. And if a country has given us Cause for War they can be considered as civilians caught up in combat if they actually try to cross a militarized border.

This is what Nation States *do* to remain Nation States. Any other answer is seeking to change the basics of our civil order, give groups precedence over individuals and undermine the Republic of Free Persons. If they want a Group rule state they may very well go somewhere else and form one up. That is not the foundation of this Nation and the Constitution does not allow for such. It speaks greatly on *persons* and *Citizens*, not on this Group or that Group.

And do not even *think* of trying to label my thoughts and then tar and demean me with your damn label. Doing so gets you the label of someone trying to perform thought control upon me and I reject that. Address the problems, look for solutions within the frameworks that have developed within this Nation and amongst Nations and then put those solutions to work. Labels on thought is Authoritarianism at work, and I reject that. Labels on actions are attributes to that action and its consequences and are fully and completely legitimate especially when upheld by a court of law.

The first is the Law of Rules, and allows for denigration based on labels applied by those that wish to stifle dissent.

The second is Rule of Law in which a perpetrator of actions is held accountable for them and if a label be denigrating it has been justly applied.

Call things for what they are by their actions and then be properly aghast by what that label means in a larger context.

[Barney Frank]

Stephen,

Couple of quick comments.
If 187 was a killer for the GOP in CA how did Arnold who supported it win?
How did he and McClintock receive a higher percentage of the Latino vote in liberal CA than Bush did nationwide?
The GOP couldn't win a majority in the CA legislature prior to a sustantial latino vote.
I believe a sustained sincere appeal to the positive social and moral values that latinos AND blacks hold, as opposed to the historical lip service, would pry enough of them away from the dems to make life easy for the GOP. Unfortunately the GOP doesn't seem to know how to act when life is easy.

[kim]

Be grateful that the shredded sleeve of social fabric apparently ravelling raggedly now can be knitted up by coreligion and cognate languages. Don't forget the music.
================================

[ajacksonian]

kim - I would be more hopeful if more people did not seem to be joining in on the unraveling instead of the reknitting... that does not seem to be the case, however.

[kim]

Time is a great healer; and it wounds all heels.
============================

[Ron]

Lets talk about Illegal Immigration.
But first, lets make this perfectly clear... (Its a damn shame I even have to spell this part out).
I don't care who you are or where you are from. IF you are not here legally then get the hell out. Go home and get in line. Come back legally and I will be the first to meet you at the bridge, the airport, where ever your port of entry is and say "Welcome to the United States of America".
Current laws being discussed in DC are not going to "criminalize" you. You have already done that to yourself. That's why you are called an ILLEGAL.
Marching in the streets with flags from other countries offends me. If that flag really meant that much to you then why are you here? Your use of that flag tells me a lot about your real intentions.
Don't waste your time calling me racist or bigot. I can read the signs you carry during your protest. Everytime you shout "La Raza" that's racist and bigoted. Besides, You know nothing about me and who I live, work, play, pray, or live my life with.
This is not about race or ethnicity. Its about Citizenship. Its not about respect, or your dignity, or your rights. Its about the LAW.
Its not about human rights. The fact that you are not shot down in the street, or thrown in prison, demonstrates that your human rights are preserved. This is'nt Cuba or China.
Now, here are my proposals.
1. You will have up to 6 months to conclude any and all business you have in the US and then you must leave.
2. You will pay for your own way home. You paid your way here did'nt you?
3. When you get home, if you wish to return, you will have to go thru the legal channels to do so. You will have to go to the end of the line. (Good idea to go home sooner then later if you want a better place in line).
There will be two lines, one for those who wish to come here to stay and become citizens and a second line for those who wish only to come here to work for awhile. (We could set up a third line called Stupid Criminals. That should help speed up the process in the other two lines).
4. IF you do not leave within the 6 month window and you are found here, you will be deported and there will be no line for you to stand in. No legal return possible. Caught here again and it will be 5 years in a new prison. This prison will be built in Montana, or North Dakota, and will be run in the same traditional manner as prisons in Mexico and other third world nations. Won't that be fun?
5. You have children who are born here and are now citizens? No problem. You can take them with you or leave them here with a guardian. You have 6 months to arrange that.
If you choose to take them with you, they will still have a choice to be made when they turn 18.
Speaking of choice... No More dual citizenship. If and when you get citizenship you will have to make a choice. On the bus or off the bus. What your old country offers is null and void.
6. Guest Worker Programs. They will protect you and they will protect the Nation. You can earn a fair and in most cases a higher wage and will have job safety and employee rights. You can also pay your share of taxes and social security. These programs will be a win win.
7. Culture, traditions and history. If yours are so great then stay home and enjoy them. If YOU want to pass them on to your children that is ok with me. Don't demand that we do it for you.
Don't even think that we will except any and all of your culture, traditions and history. Americans have a great tradition of picking and choosing that which, for whatever reason, we want. We will continue to do so.
Try to learn what we have to offer. We were a diverse group of people long before you got here.
8. Language. Schools will be in English. Other languages will continue to be offered as electives. What you speak at home is your choice. If the idea is to give your children a greater opportunity then don't tie their hands behind their backs.
All legal documents and procedures will be in English. This includes voting and legal proceedings. If you think you need translator services then you can pay for it. History shows that this system, while difficult at times, works best in the long run.
9. Leave the political, social, economic problems of your homeland behind you. Or go home and work at fixing them. Don't bring them with you and Don't try to fix them from here.
10. In support of number 1. above: Effective immediately on the day that the 6 month time period starts, Employers caught hiring illegals will be fined $10,000 a day, per day, per illegal. The investigation and enforcement can be performed by local, state or federal law enforcement and the fines collected will stay at that level of government .
Now is a good time to take a good look at how many people we let in every year. I don't know what the current numbers are and I havent heard anyone give any numbers. But I am willing to guess that those numbers have not been looked at for awhile. We also need to look at who we allow in and establish strict requirements. A guest worker program that allows a sufficient number of people in for set periods and then requires them to leave and re-apply needs to be implemented. The number will be based upon what the US needs, not Mexico, or any one else, needs or wants.

[clarice]

Well, some of those proposals are unworkable..I'm sure most Americans do not want to do a full field investigation on the immigration status of odd jobbers they hire--like the Sat night babysitter or the guy who comes around to shovel the walk in snowstorms.

Here's a great piece by Rick Moran, who is always worth reading.http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/03/28/a-slap-in-the-face/