Today's Boycott

There are so many things at play here. It is like trying to get a coherent action out of a committee. What many don't seem to understand is that we don't really have any good options. Personally, I'm for open borders, because it is the least worst option available.

Maybe if everyone could agree on a few basic premises, we could move forward.
1) 8-12 million people, whatever number you wish to use, are not going to be deported. While many desire this, the same people would not be willing to accept the consequences of doing it.
2) Immigrants are not by nature evil. There are a few evil immigrants, but there are also a few evil nonimmigrants.
3) If one desires to avoid flooding, one doesn't build a higher wall. Often to save a dam, engineers will strategically place holes in the dam. This relieves pressure on the part of the dam you don't want to break. As this applies to immigration, if we allow those seeking to come here for work through the wall, we can better protect against those seeking to come here to do terrorism.>

Dan, you're a Johnny One-Note on this point, and have no idea what you're talking about.>

1) 8-12 million people, whatever number you wish to use, are not going to be deported. While many desire this, the same people would not be willing to accept the consequences of doing it.

But if we a) crack down on employers who hire illegals, b) deport maybe 100,000 or so illegals in a high-profile way, and c) do a better job preventing illegals from entering the country, then in about 5-10 years we won't have 10 million illegals, but something closer to 2 million. a) and b) will cause many illegals to go home voluntarily, and c) will prevent them from being replaced. And none of the three is particularly difficult.

2) Immigrants are not by nature evil. There are a few evil immigrants, but there are also a few evil nonimmigrants.

Firs of all, so what? Almost everyone starts off any pronouncement on this subject with something to the effect of, "immigrants have made this country better...". Nobody is saying immigrants are inherently evil, including illegal ones. The question is, how do you keep out the drug traffickers, human traffickers, hard-core criminals, and terrorists if you have open borders? (Or if you pretend to have immigration laws, but don't enforce them and thus have no clue who is entering the country, with is the status quo.)

3) If one desires to avoid flooding, one doesn't build a higher wall. Often to save a dam, engineers will strategically place holes in the dam. This relieves pressure on the part of the dam you don't want to break. As this applies to immigration, if we allow those seeking to come here for work through the wall, we can better protect against those seeking to come here to do terrorism.

First of all, of course higher walls will prevent flooding. So will building a wall where previously there wasn't one. Second, once we get control of immigration (if we ever do), we can adjust the levels and process of legal immigration to accomplish what you are talking about. But the current situation is more like a major crack in the dam which needs to be repaired before we worry about fine-tuning the sluice gates.

I don't see how open borders can do anything to protect us against terrorists.>

Rod, could you tell me what makes you think that there is "no small degree of outright racism present" in those who oppose illegal immigration?

Just curious.>

I like your post, especially point 6. I would opt for slight increases in price for legal labor, and I'm a member of "the Right". Secure, controlled borders, a shared, national culture, and rule-of-law are well worth that small price.>

Well Ron V., please offer the solution that will remove 8-12 million illegals from this country in a reasonable timeframe and be palatable to the American people. Mike S. took a shot. The problem is not that this task would be impossible; the problem is that there is no one who will support what it would take to accomplish this. Hence, you have all this empty rhetoric. So please enlighten us.>

"I wonder how all the grassroots anti-immigrant folks would feel if they were showed how the low prices for consumer goods and services that they've come to expect as a constitutional right depend largely on the presence of the 11 million illegal immigrant workers they oppose?"

And I wonder how all the Mass Media Podpeople, who ought to be able to google, at least, hang onto this meme when the facts clearly do not support it?

No, I'll not do your homework for you, but I may just blog about the cluelessness of Mass Media Podpeople who repeat this meme. And yeh, a simple google turned up plenty of facts to refute it. Ya oughta try that sometime. Sure, you'd have to actually dig into the figures and sources, but the facts are readily available... if you do your own homework.

Oh, and the sly straw man, "the low prices for consumer goods and services that they've come to expect as a constitutional right" is not even worthy of refutation.>

MZ your rhetoric is the one that is empty (I don't understand why you would want to make an apparent personal attack) - if we take the money wasted on the healthcare, education of children of illegals, cost to incarcerate illegal criminals, etc. etc. it is more than enough to deport ALL of them. I would be willing to pay WHATEVER IT TAKES.

Read Glenn Reynold's blog - he has a two step plan to solve the immigration without forcibly deporting 8-12 million people.

You didn't respond to my statement about the Bush administration allowing this to happen to put us in this position in the first place.

And yes I would be willing to pay more for goods and services if it meant that NO MORE ILLEGALS.>

One thing I've noticed is "career creep" in the discussion of those jobs that supposedly Americans don't want to do, which require illegal immigrants.

Back in the 60s and 70s it was the prejorative "stoop labor" in the fields. Would you want to cut asparagus (a truly nasty physical job) eight hours a day? The answer was "no" even if the "braceros" program of the 50s wasn't all that great a thing.

Then in the 80's the jobs "Americans wouldn't do" became the slightly less prejorative "menial work" - like busboys, hotel maids, and janitors. (As an aside, my wife and I combined worked in each of the above jobs in summers during college and we survived with dignity intact, but never mind.)

Then the jobs became general floor workers in factories. Now it's even construction. The statement that Bush repeats ad nauseum about "jobs American's don't want" is becoming truly insulting - and I'm a GOP'er all the way. American's don't want construction jobs, framing houses, doing plumbing, electrical and drywall? These are classic, well paying blue collar jobs. Bush's statement is utterly ludicrous.

I wonder when the upper middle and upper class will finally realize that this "career creep" is a reality: "Joan, I know you're a great systems analyst, but you're out. We're hiring Diego here for $3 per hour." This is NOT a slam against Diego! But it will sure as hell make Joan a bit more skeptical, especially when she thinks about Bush and his "jobs American's won't do" line.

The fact is, the unstated part of that Bush sentence is "... at the wages employers can pay illegals."

I'm with many who say: #1 - build a big fence first, then #2 - deal with those in the country. See how many leave naturally in a year or so due to natural attrition. Then look again at the situation. Once the border is secure and the flow of new arrivals is significantly diminished we will have the good fortune of NOT having to rush through any plan. We can see what naturally develops over 12-18 months. If it ends up being amnesty for some, instant deportation for others (criminals, etc.) green cards/worker cards for others, fine by me. Stop the flow now, force employers to pay all workers prevailing market wages, see that happens.

It's interesting to me how many "gotta do something NOW" arguments sort of vanish if the border was secure.>

Rod:

The e-mail we get here at the paper, especially a Latina colleague of mine. It is filled with the most vile garbage. I don't agree with my colleague's viewpoint on the immigration issue; I think we ought to build a wall and get tough on enforcement. But I cringe to read much of the stuff that comes sailing across the transom.

Thanks. Kinda irritating that that sort of stuff still happens. I'm discovering that loathesome racism isn't tied to either side of the political spectrum; the hate mail that Michelle Malkin gets is often stunning in its idiocy.>

M. Z. - you haven't explained why a system that enforced the laws against hiring illegal workers would not, over time, cause many illegals to go home. You also haven't addressed the fact that if it became clear that we were actually enforcing the laws (i.e. illegals would see that we are actually deporting large numbers of people, and that they aren't able to get a job anymore), that many of them would go home. This is where the other 8 million comes from. Nor have you explained how this information would impact potential illegal immigrants not yet here - it would discourage them from coming in the first place, which would make controlling the border that much easier. And I'm not saying we can get the number of illegal aliens, either living here or crossing the border, down to zero - just that we can get it down to a manageable level.

Your position is a common one on this issue, but it makes no sense - nobody claims that because we can't catch all murderers, we shouldn't try to enforce laws against murder. Likewise with theft, or vandalism, or speeding. According to your logic, if a large group of people stopped obeying the laws against theft, we should just accommodate them and throw up our hands. Another analogy is if someone illegally enters your house - how long do they need to stay there before they can claim a "right" to live there?

An important aspect of the rule of law is that we obey the law, even if we think it is wrong or misguided. And if the latter is the case, we work through the political and legal system to try and rectify it. We don't march around in the streets demanding that the government give us what we want. If you think we should have laxer immigration laws, you are welcome argue for that. What you are not welcome to do is pretend that just because you don't like the laws on the books, it's OK to ignore them.>

Rod's post continues my confusion over Crunchy Cons. If there is supposed to be a spiritual element to being a Cruncy Con, why does Rod always sound more like an NRO conservative with all of its nastiness and shrillness?>

My usually "knee-jerk" ultra-liberal mother is opposed to illegal immigration, because, as she tells me, "My father came to this country as an immigrant and did it the legal way" and today's illegal immigrants need to do it the same way.

I, on the other hand, think we need a more nuanced approach to the problem. An opportunity (but a time limited one) to enroll in a "guest worker" program (for employers and employees) followed by a crack-down on employers who continue to operate outside of the law.

Tighter border patrols. A crack-down on employers (including yuppie couples who employ maids and gardeners illegally) would do a lot to discourage illegals from crossing the borders.

With due respect to those who believe they come here in order to go on welfare, I believe they come here for better-paying jobs than they can get in their own countries.>

Comrade Rod,
No need to remain on the fence. Here is my viewpoint.

First, and I mean first, close the border tight. That is necessary for stopping the drug trafficing, the terrorist issue and the ILLEGAL immigrant issue. Not 100% I know but in the 90% bracket at least.

Then talk about what to do with the illegals. I am not into blaming them as they have been baited and allowed to continue this for several decades by our government and big business.

So instead of cracking down on them let's crack down on the employers BIG TIME. Let them earn citizenship by paying some fines and jumping through some other hoops and get them on the books at wages with workers comp. and health care that put them into competition with the workers who jobs they are now stealing.

Then set up a guest worker program and let some come back and forth from mexico or wherever through the front door and with some dignity.

But it is all useless until the border is closed tight.

comradesoul>

Rod,

If you're going to impugn "no small degree of outright racism" to people who want immigrantion law enforced, then give some examples.>