Skip to main content

147 – just keep that number in the back of your mind for the time being – I'll get back to it's significance a little later on . ... but for now, just file it away somewhere where we can find it when we need it.

For almost three years now, anti-immigrant forces have been ratcheting up  their message of opposition to  anything short of deportation and/or attrition for the approximately 12 mil unauthorized immigrants currently living and working in the US, coupled with increased militarization  and "security" along the southern border as the only way to solve their self-defined "immigration crisis."  Armed with talking points crafted by Republican right-wing spinmeisters like Frank Luntz and zero-population-growth advocacy groups like the  Federation for American Immigration Reform and NumbersUSA, pundits, politicians and talking-heads have hit the airwaves with a constant barrage of misinformation and distortion.

By now we all know the drill.

They claim they don't oppose immigration ...just "illegal" immigration. There's no need for sweeping comprehensive reforms ...because we have perfectly good laws, it's just that the government refuses to enforce them.  It's not about the immigrants themselves ... but rather respect for the "rule of law." And those who wish to enter this country "legally" have a clear path to do, so it's only those wishing to skirt the law and "take advantage of our generosity" that are creating all the problems and need to be harshly dealt with  ... the mantras are repeated ad nauseam until ingrained into the collective American psyche.

But like all right-wing propaganda, this current fairy tale about immigration being the cause of all ills, and the need for a simple, quick fix, is based upon a foundation of lies and misdirection. It is only the newest in a long line of right-wing efforts to steer the American people in a direction that runs contrary to logic and their own best interests. From Colin Powell at the UN displaying cartoon pictures of mobile WMD labs, to Bush telling us why the "privatizing " Social Security is good for working Americans, or Reagan explaining how giving huge tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans would cause wealth to "trickle down" to those lower on the economic ladder, the history of right-wing lies, deception, and failure goes back more than twenty-five years. And the current hysteria over invading hordes of disease-ridden, uneducated criminals, streaming over the southern border to steal our jobs and destroy our American way of life is no more based in reality than Mr Powell's cartoons were.

But,  I have neither the time nor inclination to attempt to debunk every ridiculous talking point, and to do so would require volumes that the average reader  would soon tire of. But one talking point that can quickly and easily be put to rest is the one about the US having the most "generous Immigration policy in the world" providing a clear "legal" path for all "good immigrants" willing to take it. ...this is simply a fallacy, a tall-tail like Washington and his cherry tree taught to impressionable children to instill pride and patriotism.

Essentially our current immigration is broken in two key aspects. The first being the laws themselves, the second being their enforcement and implementation.

A recent NYT article demonstrated the problems within the bureaucracy set up to administer immigration policy.

Immigration authorities are swamped in new bureaucratic backlogs resulting from an unanticipated flood last summer of applications for citizenship and for residence visas, officials said.

In July and August alone, the federal Citizenship and Immigration Services agency received 2.5 million applications, including petitions for naturalization as well as for the entire range of immigrant visas. That was more than double the total applications it received in the same two months in 2006, said a spokesman, Bill Wright.

In the 2007 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, the agency received 1.4 million petitions from legal immigrants to become United States citizens, about double the number of naturalization petitions in the 2006 fiscal year, Mr. Wright said.


Immigration officials said it could take more than a year to decide many of the recent applications.

The processing backlogs are different from the visa backlogs that have burdened the United States immigration system for years. Because of annual limits on all green cards, immigrants from some countries like Mexico and the Philippines often have to wait decades for visas to become available. Now the agency has fallen behind on the bureaucratic work of logging in applications and deciding whether to grant visas or allow immigrants to become United States citizens


But this inefficiency is not a new phenomenon and the problems go beyond the procedural to include infrastructure problems like computer systems unable to communicate with each other.

Aging, incompatible systems and outdated processes have contributed to a backlog of approximately 1 million people waiting for a decision from the department's Citizenship and Immigration Services bureau. Computer problems at its Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau caused a snafu in which student visa holders were jailed overnight or barred from entering the United States.


The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service’s systems have come in for particular criticism from outside analysts and government auditors, who say these are simply not up to the task of serving the public, especially when coupled with a continuing reliance on paper forms. In some cases, for instance, information typed into one computer must be manually retyped into a second or third.

"All filings are paper-based, which means that everything you submit has to be keyed into the computer, which of course opens up the additional possibility of error, slows the process down and prevents some processes from being automated," said Crystal Williams, deputy director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association.


One problem is that applications for different types of immigration status are saved in separate records. These aren't interlinked, which means an application for a H1-B visa is not tied to the same person's application for a green card--causing more paperwork and delays, until the two records can be matched by hand.


But even if Congress were willing to expend the necessary funds to upgrade systems and supply the manpower needed to expedite the millions of applications already in the queue and awaiting processing, the major flaws in immigration policy would still exists.

Flaws codified into law that almost ensure that for the vast majority of would-be immigrants there is simply no legal path to take.

Here is where that number - 147 - comes into play, and why I asked that it be kept in the back of the mind.

I few weeks ago the annual Yearbook of immigration statistics from the Department of Homeland security came out listing every green card, work visa, tourist visa etc. issued for the past year. It's about as dry and boring a report as one could managed to muddle through ...but it supplies invaluable insight into what is really going on with the dysfunctional immigration system.

In 2006 the government issued a little over 1.2 million green cards to new immigrants to live in the US legally.  Additionally, 1.7 million more non-immigrant visas were issued to temporary workers and their family members to work in the US (1/2 million more than the number of green cards issued to new permanent residents, a troubling statistic unto itself).

So at face value it appears that there is amble opportunity for those wishing to enter the country permanently to do so legally. But  as Mark Twain said there are three kinds of lies  "lies, damn lies, and statistics" ..and in this case one must delve into the numbers to see what story they really tell.

Of the 1.2 million green cards issued last year, 581,106 of those went to wives, children and parents of current US citizens. And additional 222,225 went to various other family members of citizens and legal residents, for a total of 2/3 of all green cards going to someone who already had a US citizen or resident relative.

Additionally, out of the 1.2 million green cards issued, only 447,016 were "new arrivals", the vast majority ... 819,248 were already living in the US legally with a temporary status of one sort or another and simply readjusted their status last year to permanent status.  And while these two categories obviously overlap, simple analysis shows that the true number of new immigrants without US citizen relatives is in fact quite low.

The next largest category of immigrants after the  "family based" status were those who entered as "employment based immigrants".  159,081 immigrants were awarded green cards last year to legally work in the US. ( 12.6% of all immigrants). The vast majority of them being immigrants with high skills, "specialty skills" "extraordinary skills" or "advanced degrees".  This is codified into the system.

The yearly cap on unskilled workers is placed at a 5000 maximum. This despite the fact that according to the Dept. of Labor, the US economy produces between 400,000 and 500,000 new low-skilled jobs a year and the vast majority of the nearly ½ mil unauthorized workers who enter the country each year find work in these unskilled sectors.

But as unrealistic as the 5000 cap appears, the situation is actually far worse.

Last year the total number of unskilled workers allowed into the US legally was roughly half the official cap: 2513. Out of nearly 3 million people allowed to enter the country either as temporary workers or stay as legal residents, only 2513 were unskilled workers.

But here comes that number I asked you to keep in the back of your mind  ....remember it... 147?

Of the 2513 unskilled workers allotted green cards last year, 2366 were already here living and working in the US. They simply "readjusted" their status to permanent residents (most likely from some temporary worker status) ...that leaves 147

147 new un-skilled workers without US citizen or legal resident family already here were allowed to enter the US last year legally and receive green cards.

147 out of 1,266,264.

147 tell me again how there is a legal path for all who are willing to work and wait patiently.

How long  is one expected to wait...because if the ½ a million who enter each year through improper channels were to go home and wait patiently for their turn,  it would take over 3000 years before they would get that chance when only 147 are allowed in each a year.

But the rhetoric will most likely continue, despite all factual evidence to the contrary. Lou Dobbs will nightly inform his minion that only the shiftless and slovenly disregard the law. O'Rielly will bluster away how he "respects and supports" those who "do it the right way" and Rush will whine that reform isn't fair to all those "waiting in line"...But disingenuous blow hards and misleading experts cannot change the truth, or hide the facts.  The current immigration laws, and the systems in place to enforce them, are woefully inadequate and all the wall building, workplace raids, deporting and incarcerating will not change that fact...and until they are addressed rationally and reasonably the "immigration crisis" will never end.  

Originally posted to Duke Reed on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 02:31 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Obviously, comprehensive immigration reform ... (11+ / 0-)

    ... is needed. Just as clearly, IMHO, we would benefit from a Democratic candidate who does not completely deny that enforcement of a new policy will be a key element in its success or failure. And by enforcement, I mean things like efforts to punish the employers who are responsible for hiring illegal immigrants, not targeting the immigrants themselves or doing stupid stuff like building +300-mile-long walls in the middle of nowhere.

    Quite honestly, I don't know what the answer is, but I think you are right that this is a complex issue and will require a multi-faceted approach to arrive at a reasonable solution.

    Flame away.

    •  yes, real immigration reform (0+ / 0-)

      has to start with the people who hire illegal immigrants.

      The approach I recommend is using the illegal immigrants themselves to locate and turn in the employees of illegal immigrants.

      How long would these employers be hiring if:

      • illegals got green cards and cash (I was thinking $5K in cash) for turning in employers
      • other illegals at these employers got green cards (so people won't have any reluctance to turn in employers based on getting fellow workers in trouble
      • the program was funded by draconian fines from employers found guilty of hiring illegals
      • the program was easy to use, i.e. a 1-800 number with translators standing by, and a website
      • the program were extensively advertised in the media, including foriegn language and including foriegn media in the places sending us the largest number of illegals?

      The best long-term solution is to get Mexico's economy to the point where nobody needs to go to the US to find work.

      Unfortunately, if I understand the situation correctly, the structural problem is a Third World style income distribution... which we can not fix from the outside.

      Another solution is to FUBAR America's economy to the point where there isn't anything for illegal immigrants to do. Unfortunately, that's the anti-immigration strategy our collective leaders appear to really have in mind.

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 04:37:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am beginning to wonder (19+ / 0-)

    If common sense even has a place in this debate any longer, or whether it's time to fight the immigrant-bashers in the streets.

    Your logic is as usual impeccable and your stats unassailable. But there will still be folks who come along and barely skim the diary and repeat some eliminationist talking point. Markos bans conspiracy theorists but not immigrant bashers, for reasons unclear to me.

    I'm not part of a redneck agenda - Green Day

    by eugene on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 02:48:14 PM PST

    •  While you are all congratulating each other on (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      alizard, Nightprowlkitty

      your superior morality, I would like to point something out. Yes, there are many racists speaking out in the immigration debated. Every one that I have heard is a Republican. This is a Democratic forum.

      A point is no less valid because a racist, luddite agrees with it, even if he agrees for all the wrong reasons.

      The real enemy is the international corporations, and the trade & tax policies they buy. They have no loyalty to any country. They have no loyalty to humanity.

      When the factories started closing, the people who recognized this problem were called alarmists. Only the less important jobs were being lost.

      When the less skilled, white collar jobs were lost, few worried about it because everyone knew how smart, and important, and educated the skilled workers were.

      Now the doctors, lawyers, reporters, teachers, scientists, and engineers are in danger of losing their jobs. And anyone who speaks up is called a racist.

      While we are bickering over the crumbs, the pie is getting smaller. Mexican farmers can't make a living, so they leave their families & risk their lives to work as slaves in this country. Their presence is used as an excuse to slide our employment into slavery. We are promised salvation if we can prove ourselves worthy with education and long hours. Then they import new slaves to replace us in those jobs.

      It's time to recognize the fact that all workers, citizens, and people of the world are on the same side. The international corporations are the enemy, not each other.

      Impeach or be impeached.

      by Hens Teeth on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 06:38:43 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not superior morality. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        But definitely superior analysis and superior facts.  Too much of this debate here at Daily Kos is backed by unfounded opinions and outright falsehoods.

        As far as congratulations, I don't think that's an issue here.  We all have a long way to go before we'll even agree on how to discuss this, much less press our representatives to move forward on it.

        •  Which analysis, and which facts? (0+ / 0-)

          I've seen impressive charts and statistics proving every different opinion there is. It seems that every one of them ends up in some sort of circular logic.

          I keep coming back to a few basic facts;

          - The median income in this country is falling.

          - The ultra rich are getting richer.

          - Large numbers of people are falling out of the middle class, and into poverty.

          - Education is no protection. Professional jobs are just as much at risk as the ones that don't require a college degree.

          - This country is no longer able to produce our basic necessities.

          As I see it, the international corporations are winning, and workers of every country are losing. We bow down to the corporations and bless them for the cheap trinkets they bestow upon us.

          If this goes on long enough, the United States will be the poverty stricken, exploited workers, of the world. I can only hope that the next economic powers are more empathic and generous.

          Impeach or be impeached.

          by Hens Teeth on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 09:13:09 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The analysis and facts ... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ... in Duke's diaries on this subject, which address virtually every point you are making in your comment.

            His FP'd diary on comprehensive immigration reform exposed the roots of this problem, and was far more inclusive and detailed than what you laid out here in your comment (all of which points I agree with, btw).

            And yes, I call them "superior" because these diaries do not feed into the frame the Republicans have put this issue into for so many years - and so many folks have fed into in one way or the other because there was no comprehensive opposing view out there.

            Well there is now.  And the challenge for progressives is to get our capitulating Dems to stop letting this issue be defined by the Repubs and get our own view out there.

      •  P.S.: (0+ / 0-)

        I disagree with your analysis of racism.  I completely disagree it is only the Republicans who use racist rhetoric.

        I think too many folks believe that Dems, including posters here at Daily Kos, are immune from racism.

        I have found that not to be the case.  And I think it is wrong to make that claim.

        I have also found it within myself and was very grateful when I found places on the net where I could disabuse myself of my own ignorance as to what people of color have to experience every day.  And I have a ways yet to go and am happy to take that journey.

        Racism isn't just a problem with a discussion about immigration -- it distorts and provides an obstacle to discussing many issues.

        And yes, I've seen it here and I've seen it with liberals and Democrats.  Racism isn't confined to one political party.

        •  My point is that people are called racist simply (0+ / 0-)

          for wanting different trade policies. There are many valid points to debate on this topic. Even a racist might be right once in a while. Agreeing with their point does not make me a racist, or imply that I agree with anything else they have to say.

          The knee jerk reaction of calling people names like racist or luddite when they disagree with you does not add to the discussion. It just serves the corporations as we bicker over the disappearing crumbs.

          Impeach or be impeached.

          by Hens Teeth on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 09:22:43 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Again with this meme! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            I have heard it all too many times but have seen virtually no example of folks being called racist simply for disagreement.

            As far as a "racist being right once in a while," they are NEVER right about racism.  I see no value to that notion.

            Don't blame folks who call out racist speech for the divisions on this issue.  Blame the folks who use racist speech.  I have given examples on this thread -- you have given none to support your claim.

            Finally, the rhetoric spread by the right on this issue is absolutely racist in nature.  It is not wrong to inform someone who has been repeating those kinds of talking points that they are feeding into a racist view, whether or not they are racist.  That is not the same as having a knee-jerk reaction.  I have never called out racism frivolously or without serious consideration.

            Again, I have seen none of what you are saying, and I am very much opposed to spreading this false meme.

            I urge you to read McCamy Taylor's diary on this issue.  The prevailing discussion on immigration does indeed have racist aspects that should be adamantly opposed:

            For many outside the White South, where racism is still socially acceptable, anti-immigration is perceived as an economic and security issue. There is a reason for this. A study from the Anti-Defamation League entitled Immigrants Targeted: Extremist Rhetoric Moves Into the Mainstream. shows how the anti-immigration political movement, spearheaded by Republicans like Bill Frist, speaks with two heads. At home, in places like Georgia, it pairs up with NeoNazis, White Supremists, members of the KKK and eugenics advocates to deliver the kind of racist rhetoric that is so useful in getting Southern Whites to vote against their own economic self interest and for the economic interests of the rich and powerful---in this case represented by the Republican Party.

            Now you may not have to worry about being hurt by this kind of racism, but unfortunately all too many folks do have to worry about getting hurt.

            This won't go away because "even a racist can be right about something."  There is nothing right about what's going on now towards both legal immigrants and undocumented migrants.

            •  thanks for that. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty

              Believe it or not there are parts of the U.S., where American born people mostly speak Spanish because they aren' t ALLOWED to live amongst English speakers.   And I am talking about generations of families.  Poor schools, bad neighborhoods and low paying jobs.

              I grew up in just such a neighborhood.

              whoo, I bought a house in Texas!

              by TexMex on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 02:03:29 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I wish ... (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                TexMex, Duke1676, Dianna

                ... you would write a diary about that, TexMex.

                Folks here just don't know enough about the people who are being so demonized.  It's easy to hate a group -- not so easy when you encounter a friend, just one person, you get to know that person.  All of a sudden that fear and hatred vanishes -- at least for most of us here.

                There are a few who just hate because they like to hate.  But most of us aren't like that.

                Stories like yours shows us a reality that powerful folks don't want us to see.

                We need more real stories to combat all these damned lies.

    •  Short answer: no (0+ / 0-)

      I stopped reading this site completely two months ago on account of the uselessness of it all.

      In between my STOC and SOCG submissions, I decided to have a look, and there is really nothing at all new or worth reading here, which is only more apparent with more space.  Duke is an excellent writer, but this venue just seems like a waste of time.

      Peace, out.  Have you graduated yet?

      Ortiz/Ramírez '08

      by theran on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 02:57:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I know ... (24+ / 0-)

    ... that many won't read this whole diary.  But there will be those of us who do.

    And I'm hotlisting this one (along with most of your others) so that when I hear yet again the mantra of "this isn't fair to those who wait in line," I won't have to waste my time trying to persuade but will have a factual and substantive answer to post.

    If we can't have a real discussion here at Daily Kos about immigration law and policy without this Repub propaganda being flung around, then how can we expect to convince our representatives to do the right thing?

    Thanks for this.  Another weapon in the fight against ignorance (and I include my own in this).

    •  this is an excellent diary (13+ / 0-)

      you're right, it cuts through the empty rhetoric to dig out some essential facts. Shame that our national news media can't be bothered to look into the reality of immigration numbers.

      Duke, you ought to turn this into an op-ed.

      Do you happen to know how the government identifies "unskilled"? Are these people totally without job skills? Or are they people with, say, mechanical skills, or rough carpentry skills, or basic office skills?

      Presumably all migrant agricultural workers who enter legally are admitted as temporary workers?

      •  I would assume (10+ / 0-)

        your assumption of the agricultural workers is correct.

        As to how they classify "unskilled" I'm not sure. I know during the last round of CIS legislation, needed "skilled" workers (not those with exceptional skills or advanced degrees) were classified as such according to the Dept of Labors ten year projections on job growth by sector/profession.

        Those jobs showing the most growth were deemed "needed" jobs....this included some "lower-skilled" jobs such as hotel housekeeping and such that were predicted to have exceptional growth over the period. So "low-skill/high skill" appears to be somewhat of a misnomer in that's more a function of need.

        •  Check NAFTA for a list (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Duke1676, YucatanMan, Nightprowlkitty

          IIRC, the occupations included in NAFTA closely match 'skilled' occupations. Generally speaking, if it requires education it's probably 'skilled', if it requires physical labor it's probably 'unskilled'.

          A housekeeper - no matter how much in demand - would never be allowed to use an H1B visa, for example.

          "Put your Doc Martens back on." - Rude Pundit

          by opendna on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 06:01:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  your right (4+ / 0-)

            about the NAFTA classifications matching up with the skilled workers . And those line up nicely with the first two levels of employment green cards. It's the portion of level three employment green cards where I have trouble figuring out exactly where they are drawing the lines.

            "Third Level: Skilled workers, professionals, and needed unskilled workers" ... I am not quite sure how the "needed unskilled worker" is exactly determined. Here is where I Think the DOL projections might come in...but I'm not exactly sure.

            •  Does anyone even get those? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Duke1676, YucatanMan, Nightprowlkitty

              I thought that was the "and if we happen to have any left over" category.

              "Put your Doc Martens back on." - Rude Pundit

              by opendna on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 06:30:24 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

                •  I know you don't mean this (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  as sweeping as it sounds.  A message is only wrong or bad when it is used by wrong or bad people.

                  They claim they don't oppose immigration ...just "illegal" immigration. There's no need for sweeping comprehensive reforms ...because we have perfectly good laws, it's just that the government refuses to enforce them.  It's not about the immigrants themselves ... but rather respect for the "rule of law."

                  I am proud of my immigrant heritage and love the idea of the US being a melting pot.  I am, however, opposed to any immigration policy that is based on overwhelming the system or squatters' rights.  I also oppose blanket amnesty.  We did it once already, and it did nothing to address the problem.  Only way I would support a blanket amnesty is if they decriminalized illegal drugs and let drug offenders out of jail.  It is inherently unfair to lock up 15 million illegal drug users and give amnesty to 15 million illegal immigrants. The diary you wrote on this that got front paged was your best.  Hope you had a nice Thanksgiving.  

                  •  What did "nothing" to address the problem (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Nightprowlkitty, wa ma

                    was not Reagan's blanket amnesty (which wasn't even as thorough as was needed at the time) but the "border tightening" that WORSENED the problem.

                    Without the ability to come and go as they wished (and has they have done for over 200 years, including helping us win WWII by harvesting our crops while huge numbers of men were overseas, then being deported in Operation Wetback -- yes that was the REAL name -- even US Citizens who were Hispanic lost their homes and businesses in Operation Wetback), the "border tightening" simply made people decide to STAY. And then... they sent for their families.  So, instead of a few million migrant workers coming and going when needed and as they could earn money, they stayed here. And the numbers grew and became apparent - became obvious.

                    People began to NOTICE Latinos were here!  Oh. My. Fucking. God. They. are. here.  

                    Hardass policy has always led to the exact opposite result.  Instead of learning from experience, further hardassing continues to be advocated.  It is insanity.
                    You literally advocate insanity as a policy.

                    We cannot round up 20 million people and deport them  without becoming a literal police state with all that would entail.  

                    Thanks for that thought. I'm not buying any more insanity around here. We're full up.

                    •  No, if you read his first diary, and I'm sure you (0+ / 0-)

                      have, NAFTA made it worse than it was.

                      We cannot round up 20 million people and deport them  without becoming a literal police state with all that would entail.  

                       Tell it to the 20 million illegal drug users people who face jail or are in jail for illegal drug use.  Tell it to all of the people who are trying to put their lives back together with a felony arrest for drugs on their records.  Duke, unlike you, seems to think that all people are created equal.  You seem to think that some deserve a better break than others.  

                      •  You have no concept of what I think.. (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty

                        so putting words into my mouth won't do.

                        NAFTA did make it worse. As did the simultaneous cracking down on the border that Clinton signed up for to increase his "tough-guy credentials."  It's all about triangulation, you know.

                        We cannot round up 20 Million MORE people and do it in a short period of time.  We took 40 years to round up 20 Million drug users and petty thieves.  And yes, I think they should all get amnesty too.

                        The "War on Drugs" is another joke. And another scapegoating plan. And another enormous curtailment of our civil rights.

                      •  Why on earth ... (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Duke1676, YucatanMan

                        ... does one negate the other?

                        I'm all for revisiting drug sentencing laws and I agree they are terrible and put too many folks away for too long because of small infractions that don't deserve jail time.

                        But you only make Duke's point here.  The laws on immigration are equally egregious -- one can't get around the fact that folks in Mexico aren't able to get into the system legally as it is now, and yet the need is there, particularly for Mexicans who have worked here for so many years, for far more than 147 jobs.

                        Frankly, I believe solving the problem of the injustices in our immigration laws would be beneficial to all other issues of social justice, including what's happening in our prisons.  I think they are very much connected when it comes to that aspect.

                        •  Why can't they get here legally? (0+ / 0-)

                          What is stopping that?  Let's change it.

                          •  Argh (strangling sound). (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dkmich, YucatanMan

                            That is what this entire diary is about -- why they can't get here legally, what's "stopping that."

                            I agree we should change what's "stopping that".  I just don't see how talking about folks in jail over drugs has anything at all to do with changing the immigration laws, or why one issue negates the other.

                          •  Alright, I'm going back for another read. (0+ / 0-)

                            I admit, I scanned it as I got in.  

                          •  Back (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty

                            Process sucks - slow and arcane.  Granted.
                            Laws?  Didn't see that addressed really, but the statistics show that we don't allow enough immigrants in this country.  Again, why?  Why not just up the numbers and fix the process?

                          •  lol. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Duke1676, YucatanMan

                            Not just "slow and arcane." Impossible.  How can anyone expect migrant workers to wait several hundred years?  It's ludicrous.  It offers no real chance.  And I think Duke has shown in this diary as well as his others that big business has a real interest in keeping the laws "slow and arcane."  As well, anti-migrant groups (i.e., FAIR, NumbersUSA) and the Lou Dobbs democrats have their own reasons for not wanting to change the laws and make them fair.

                            As far as HOW to change the laws - Duke's the one to ask about that -- I'm still learning myself, dkmich.  I don't know enough to be an expert, but I do know enough to see when folks are not reading the whole diary and understanding it -- these are not easy diaries to read -- I often read them more than once.

                            Duke's comprehensive FP'd diary on how to change policy had a poll - and I wasn't surprised to see a large segment of folks thought the diary was too long and didn't read it (though they had no trouble making comments just the same).

                            I have sympathy for that -- I don't always read substantive diaries as carefully as I should.

                            But on this issue there's a lot of DE-programming to be done.  So it's a tough issue to bring to the table, to lead folks away from the Republican dominance of the conversation and take a fresh look at it from a Democratic and progressive view.

                          •  well actually (2+ / 0-)

                            but the statistics show that we don't allow enough immigrants in this country.

                            we really don't know that either. ...what we do know is that the current way of determining who does and doesn't get in isn't working. ...but does that necessarily mean "we don't allow enough in" ...I can't really say.

                            I do know that I find the 1.7 temporary guest worker number very troubling. How is it that we let in more temporary workers than permanent ones? Certainly that can't be viewed as the best way build a future workforce..or a future at all for that matter. Isn't the goal here to allow those from around the world to join society and become part of the American mosaic?       To work hard and make a better future for all of us?...somehow I don't see that happening through a system that has more new guest workers than new residents.

                          •  Guest workers aimed at creating perpetual (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Duke1676, YucatanMan, Nightprowlkitty

                            servitude -- a sort of rotating cast of slaves. It's really sick.

                            If you rotate them in and out of the country, they never gain the benefits of citizenship. If those people are more malleable, easier to push around (how could they not be?) then that sets the bar for the rest of society's members lower.

                            Or so's my take.

                            Be good to each other. It matters.

                            by AllisonInSeattle on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 11:33:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  that's a great idea (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            YucatanMan, Nightprowlkitty

                            but you do realize that the reason it's so silly to call people "illegal" is that the laws are so arbitrary?

                            I mean, look at your response to hearing how screwed up the system is:

                            Why not just up the numbers and fix the process?

                            This is exactly why so many of us are arguing for a path to legalization for the 12 million who are already here...they should have been let in to begin with.

                            The numbers and limits are arbitrary, we raise and lower the limits all the time, usually based on very little information about what the country actually needs in terms of labor.

                            This is why the "rule of law" and "they're lawbreakers" arguments are so ridiculous. We don't even take our own immigration laws/regulations seriously enough to make sure we're getting what we need out of them.

                    •  I would add that (4+ / 0-)

                      the 1986 IRCA legislation failed because it was not sweeping enough.

                      It made no real changes to the quotas systems, no changes in green card allotments, no actual examination into why in fact there were 3 mill undocumented immigrants at the time that needed amnesty. It simply provide a "do over", allowing Reagan to artificially eliminate the problem of the unauthorized (many of whom were the result of the dirty-wars in Central America and other US foreign policy fiascoes around the world) without actually trying to analyze or fix the causation  that led to the large number (at that time) of unauthorized immigrants. If in fact the hard work of real immigration reform was done then...we wouldn't be facing today's current situation. The problem wasn't the "amnesty" ...the problem was that it was only an "amnesty" without all the other needed components of real comprehensive reform.  

                  •  This diary is much more narrowly focused (4+ / 0-)

                    than the one you refer to. And this phrase is in fact a crucial part of that narrow focus:

                    (they believe) There's no need for sweeping comprehensive reforms ...because we have perfectly good laws, it's just that the government refuses to enforce them.

                    It is one of the great fallacies and misrepresentations that prevents us from moving forward in any meaningful way on this issue.

                    As long as it's "accepted fact" that the current system is fair, practical and workable, we will get nowhere in this debate. Until we admit the the current system is inherently flawed and ultimately unworkable...and start to move towards fixing it at its most basic level, we will never solve any of the issues surrounding the problem.    

                    •  Is it the system or the process that is broken? (0+ / 0-)

                      Going back to the immigrants of old, we never seemed to have an issue with the immigration system, so why now?  What's different?  (PS - People who yell racist at others in your diaries really do shut down the conversation.)

                      •  I think it's a problem we've been grappling with (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        shirah, Nightprowlkitty

                        historically since the close of western expansion. I know some of the more knowledgeable immigration historians here, like Eugene, could explain it better than I, but I'll give it a try.

                        Essentially until the end of the nineteenth century we had no real "immigration policy" to speak of. It was pretty much a matter of if one could get here, one was welcome. That seemed to change with the end of westward expansion and the subsequent first real immigration restrictions that came with the Chinese Exclusion Acts in the 1880's. From that point forward more restrictions would be passed, usually based upon race and/or ethnicity. The immigration acts of the 1921 and 1924 further restricted immigration from Eastern and Southern Europe.

                        The Immigration Act of 1924, which included the National Origins Act, Asian Exclusion Act or the Johnson-Reed Act, was a United States federal law that limited the number of immigrants who could be admitted from any country to 2% of the number of people from that country who were already living in the United States in 1890, according to the Census of 1890. It excluded immigration to the US of Asians.

                        It superseded the 1921 Emergency Quota Act. The law was aimed at further restricting the Southern and Eastern Europeans who had begun to enter the country in large numbers beginning in the 1890s, as well as East Asians and Asian Indians, who were prohibited from immigrating entirely.

                        The 1952 McCarren-Walter Act further restricted immigration along ethnic/national-origin lines, and now due to the cold-war, idealogical lines as well.

                        the legislation contained provisions aimed at "subversion". In this case, it permitted the exclusion or deportation of any alien who engaged or had purpose to engage in activities prejudicial to the public interest or subversive to national security. Although the exclusion or deportation of aliens on purely ideological grounds was not a new concept in immigration law, the modern adaptation of this practice in the 1952 Act would have a lasting effect.


                        The Act retained the National Origin Quota System established by the 1924 Immigration Act, but expanded it to all countries – except for those in the Western hemisphere, which remained exempt – and introduced the first system of visa preferences. This necessitated the removal of previous bars to immigration from Asia, but the ethnic bias of the new system remained clear: 70 percent of all immigrant slots were allotted to natives of the United Kingdom, Ireland and Germany, most of which went unused.

                        In 1965, coinciding with the civil rights legislation of the time, the basis for  our current immigration system was put in place, replacing many of the purely national-origin quotas with ones based upon family relationship and reunification.

                        In 1986 and again in 1996 more laws were passed trying to essentially refine the 1965 law and fix some of it's short-comings.

                        But none of these more modern laws have solved all the problems associated with trying to regulate immigration. So in essence our current laws are no more than a work in progress that started over 100 years ago.

                        And today we are once again faced with a another crossroads were we can try to once again modify the laws to better suit or modern realities or revert back to the restrictionist policies of the past. But as to the question of whether the current problems systematic or procedural... the answer is probably;  both....Like I said it's a work in prgress.

                  •  Oh, he meant it... (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    shirah, Nightprowlkitty

                    His point was that our system is screwed up and we need more than just an enforcement of laws. Yet, you didn't address that concern at all in this comment.

                    First, something that needs to be clarified:

                    A message is only wrong or bad when it is used by wrong or bad people.

                    That statement by you, is exactly the problem with this whole debate. If you don't inherently understand that repeating talking points created by xenophobes, racists and political panderers contributes to the toxic environment around this issue then I'm not even sure what to say to you at this point. The argument you've just written down on paper for the world to see is that it would be perfectly fine for you to go around repeating racial slurs just as long as you're not a 'bad person" or "racist." Is that really what you meant? Becuase that seems rather shocking to me.

                    Don't let yourself off the hook so easily. When you buy into and repeat talking points/messaging that is rooted in racist or xenophobic idealogy you're doing damage and contributing to the racism/xenophobia...period. full stop.

                    I am proud of my immigrant heritage and love the idea of the US being a melting pot.  I am, however, opposed to any immigration policy that is based on overwhelming the system or squatters' rights.

                    That's a lovely thought and the rest of us agree with you. There is no proposal to overwhelm the system or to base reform on "squatters' rights."

                    I also oppose blanket amnesty.  We did it once already, and it did nothing to address the problem.

                    No one is proposing blanket amnesty, and it's unfortunate that you've been silly enough to believe the GOP talking points enough that you think anyone has proposed such a thing. Blanket amnesty hasn't been an option discussed by anyone since Reagan did it 20 years ago.

                    Only way I would support a blanket amnesty is if they decriminalized illegal drugs and let drug offenders out of jail.  It is inherently unfair to lock up 15 million illegal drug users and give amnesty to 15 million illegal immigrants.

                    Um, I have no idea what to say to this. You're comparing undocumented workers to drug users? Is that where your head really is on this?

  •  We are 148.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    ...the title put the Misfits in my head.

  •  Just what about "legal" don't they understand? (10+ / 0-)

    Turning the commonly used phrase around, it would contribute a world of good to the discussions of this issue if more people understood just what it takes to immigrate legally, how long it takes, and how many eventually make it.
    Thanks for helping to get some of that information out here.

    "Sir, you are giving a reason for it; but that will not make it right." Samuel Johnson

    by Catte Nappe on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 03:08:15 PM PST

  •  I still am for cracking down on illegals (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    redcardphreek, Andy Lewis

    because I don't consider illegal immigration an inherent civil right that many of the apologists here do. The ideal system that I would like, though, is one where we admit a certain population from each country and have a random lottery that awards slots.

    •  Oceanstar, (6+ / 0-)

      of course you are.  You just don't get it and you show up on every immigration diary.  Get lost!

      There are no victims, only volunteers. Doctor Phil

      by mango on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 04:36:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  naw (6+ / 0-)

        one day, perhaps through osmosis, something will get through...better he/she at least reads something containing some semblance of truth...rather than the usual daily diet of Lou can't hurt.

        Plus also it's not like this is the first time we've seen these same tired talking it's not like they need serious rebutting.  

        •  I love how and you the other pro-illegal (0+ / 0-)

          apologists act like you're morally superior and "more enlightened" than the rest of us who don't agree with you.

          •  What do you know (6+ / 0-)

            about Mexico?  I have lived in a poor village for five years.

            There are no victims, only volunteers. Doctor Phil

            by mango on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 05:12:52 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Mango, (0+ / 0-)

              no matter how poor or wonderful they are as a people or a country, this shouldn't be about that.  This should be about creating an immigration policy that works for this country.  I am sure you don't mean to imply that Mexicans are the only ones who deserve citizenship in the U.S.  There are a lot of people out there who have been waiting patiently, and they deserve their day, too.

              •  I think she means that (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                having experience in Mexico, you can easily understand why someone would chose to leave the beloved land of your birth (and it IS just that, despite what many "Americans" think) and go to a faraway land, break their law, and WORK for money to feed their family, rather than see them slowly starve of malnutrition.

                That's what I took her meaning to be. No one is saying that "only Messicans" deserve to come to the USA.  (Although.... much of the USA was Mexico for about 300 years and has only been part of the USA for about 160 or so...  perish the thought!)

                What she's saying is that she has some understanding of more than one side of the issue.

                •  I have a hard time - sort of- relating to that. (0+ / 0-)

                  There are many of us who don't feel tied to the "homeland".  Family, yes - homeland, no.  If I could pack up my daughter and grandkids and move to Mexico, I would in a flash.  

                  Much of the USA also belonged to Cro-magnum man once upon a time.  Native American Indians and buffalo owned much of this country, too.  Stuff happens. I love the fact that this is a country of immigrants.  I think it is one of the things that makes our country special.  I don't want an immigration policy that isn't considered and delivered.  Out of control politicians and policies is what gave us NAFTA, Iraq, and union busting.

                  •  Straw man. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    YucatanMan, Hens Teeth

                    Who here is advocating "an immigration policy that isn't considered and delivered"?

                    I don't see that anywhere in the comments of this diary.  Nor did I think Mango's comment suggested anything of the kind.

                    •  From what I understand.. (0+ / 0-)

                      The system is broken.  They can't come in legally, so they sneak in at great risk to their own lives.  Because they sneak in, they do not enter under a considered and delivered system.  Despite that, we should give everyone who came in under a broken system a pathway to citizenship that is (or is not?) considered and delivered.   If we do that, how do we assure that we can now implement a considered and delivered system so that people don't have to sneak in in the future?    Can sneaking in ever be truly eliminated?  Even if this country wanted to, could it possibly accept every person on the planet who wanted to come here to live?  I don't know any of these answers, do you?

                      •  Ach. (0+ / 0-)

                        First of all, "sneaking in" isn't how I would put it at all.  I am no expert on this issue (which is why I have not diaried on it), but I have learned enough to know that the way you are describing what is happening is not accurate.

                        As far as your questions, I share them as well.  I believe this conversation is long overdue, and I believe Duke is doing his best to provide a "considered and delivered system" by pointing out what is hampering that system at this time, and why.  That is indeed where the fearmongering of the right has distorted our national conversation -- all of us with very few exceptions, have fed into that frame for far too long.

                        So no, I don't have the answers.  But I also don't think anyone here is advocating a blanket amnesty, or an ill-considered and delivered system, so I don't know why you are objecting on those grounds.  What is ill-considered is the system we have now.  I don't see how this or any other of Duke's very comprehensive diaries are ill-considered or don't tackle the very questions you raise.

                        •  I agree with you on Duke. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:

                          I am learning alot about this from him.  I think we need to do what is right for this country; and if we need more people, then we should bring them in. However, whatever is done should be fair and equitable for all.  Double standards, no matter who or what, should not exist.  I think it is inherently unfair to punish some citizens for breaking a broken law while rewarding others who want to be citizens for breaking a broken law.  Unless the issue of "fairness" gets covered/explained thoroughly in this issue, it won't fly.

                          •  I very much agree ... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            YucatanMan, Hens Teeth

                            ... that fairness should be part of the conversation.

                            But it's not just that.  There are folks who do not want to be fair, no matter what we say.  There are folks who do wish to scapegoat, and we won't be able to just make that vanish.  It also has to be spoken of.  You call it "yelling about racism."  Or xenophobia.  Or just plain prejudice and ignorance.

                            But it's not yelling, imo.  It's confronting it and calling it for what it is.  You may think that's a distasteful and polarizing thing to do -- and that may well be the case at times.

                            But the "fairness" part of this will not manifest without dealing with the very real prejudice over this issue.

                            And the same can be said for the others you speak of whose punishments don't fit the crime.

                          •  I agree about speaking the truth even when it (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hens Teeth

                            hurts; but I think accusing people of wholesale racism on a progressive blog is probably more harmful than good.  If it was redstate, then you might have the right audience.  I think most people here would support fairness, don't you?

                          •  Again with this meme. (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            theran, YucatanMan, Hens Teeth

                            Where is there a "wholesale" accusation of racism on this blog?  I haven't seen it.  The only thing I have seen is that accusation, and it is incorrect.

                            The fact is, there is a racist and xenophobic component to this issue, and it is deliberate.  There's a very good diary on the rescue list tonight by McCamy Taylor that shows how racism and bigotry feed into this -- how politicians and activists say one thing to folks in the south (extremely racist rhetoric about the terrible brown hordes who are all rapists, etc.) and then water the same thing down, take out the inflammatory language in the north and on mainstream media.

                            The same folks who spread this hate speech are found in our traditional media as "experts" on immigration.

                            As far as here at Daily Kos, yes, I've seen it and I've called it out, and I will continue to do so.  I hope everyone does.  I've read one poster call undocumented migrants "them and their brood," as though they were animals.  I posted an example of racist comments above in this diary.  I've read comments about how Mexicans are just too stupid to understand the rule of law because they've never known it in Mexico.

                            The reason I call it out isn't just to be an asshole or "yell" about it.  It's because we simply cannot have a real conversation about this issue when folks are trying to spread these memes.

                            So yes, it's here, there and everywhere.  That's why I think Duke's diaries are so important - they offer an alternative view, and I think, a fair one.

                          •  Huh? (0+ / 0-)

                            I don't know what you're saying here.

                          •  The accusations and flinging about of (0+ / 0-)

                            racist and xenophobic happens in the comments section.

                          •  Ok. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dkmich, YucatanMan

                            This is not fair at all.  I was very meticulous in linking to what I saw as racist comments by oceanstar -- if you read those comments and try to tell me they're not racist, then I just don't know what to say to you.

                            I also gave you in detail other comments I called out as racist, bigoted, prejudiced, whatever name you want to call it.

                            In response you make the claim of accusations of racism being "flung about" without showing any example whatsoever.  Oceanstar, among other bad actors has, however, tried to spread this meme:  "If you disagree then they call you a racist."  I have never seen anyone call someone a racist merely because they disagree.  Have you?

                            I saw one comment making this claim on this thread, accusing oceanstar of racism.  That accusation is correct, imo -- that s/he has written unmistakably racist comments.

                            So where is your proof, dkmich?  I think your comment is unfair and unfounded.  And I also think it is giving those who actually do make racist and xenophobic comments a pass -- and I oppose that.

                          •  Great article on this at FDL (0+ / 0-)

                            FDL and NYT taking Rahm to task for declaring immigration the new third rail.

                            The National Immigration Forum has compiled nearly two dozen polls from 2007 alone that show Americans consistently favoring a combination of tough enforcement and earned legalization over just enforcement.  

                            I read your link.  "Just plain silly, right?"  Yes, I think people who react to this issue from a race base are the same silly asses who hate blacks, think Saddam personally blew up the Towers, and know the WMDs are buried in Syria.  I just see that whole groups of people as stupid and irrelevent. Addressing them reduces this argument to their level and puts advocates for this issue on the defense, imo.   The people that need to talked to is the people that consistanly believe a combination of employer enforcement and earned legalization is the way to go.  I agree with those stated goals and the people who support them.  Sometimes I think the shorthand framing undermines them, and I think calling people on dk racists because they disagree doesn't help. I think most of them disagree because they don't understand how thought out and considered the dialog on this issue really is.  They don't take the time to really listen/read.

                          •  Racist.. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hens Teeth

                            I don't know anything about oceanstar.  I don't even recognize the name, let alone patterns.  If you do, then I take your word for it; but I can't make that claim.  In fact, I can't make that claim about anyone I've run into on this board.  However, my friends tell me I'm obtuse in my observations.  If it doesn't smack me in the face; I don't see it and I don't look for it.  It can include a whole list of different behaviors including alcoholic.  Even if passed out drunk on the floor, I would be inclined to chalk it up to a fluke instead of a symptom.  

                          •  You don't have to take my word for it. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dkmich, YucatanMan

                            I posted Oceanstar's comments ... if you believe they are not racist, then I don't know what else I can say to you.

                            How would you like your own family to be characterized as morally inferior, for folks to ask, "why do dkmich and his family loiter, publicly urinate, walk around publicly intoxicated, make so much noise?  What's wrong with those folks?"

                            Would you like your children or grandchildren referred to as a "brood"?

                            And then imagine every day this kind of language was used towards you about you, and about your family.

                            Can you imagine that?  Because it happens all the time.  Perhaps it doesn't smack you in the face, dkmich, but there are so many others who are smacked in the face by this every day of their lives.

                            It's good to be kind and give people the benefit of the doubt.  It's not so good when what folks are doing is badly hurting other folks.

                            Are you honestly saying that because it doesn't happen to you it's not your problem?

                          •  Wow, even if not racist - certainly ignorant. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            Does he claim this type of behavior is race and not nurture based? I'll pay more attention in the future, if I can even remember his/her name.  Good thing he wasn't around my loudly swearing Italian family when they played pinochle.  I can hear it now.   Damned dagos, they're all a bunch of greasy, cement laying, mafia goons.

                          •  lol ... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            ... well ignorance is necessary in order for racism to exist.  And yes, I think oceanstar's words were racist, simply can't see smearing an entire group of folks and their families this way could be anything else.

                            There are a small group of posters here who cry loudly that if they disagree with anyone on this issue they are called racist.  I have never seen that to be the case, tho I find it alarming that these posters feel they are not feeding into racist language when they support racist policies.  Instead, it's all about them, it's all ego and the charge they make is a flat-out lie.

                            The trouble with this is that it affects even good posters like you, who then repeat this meme, that folks are called racist for "disagreeing."

                            And that is what keeps a real conversation from taking place on this subject here at Daily Kos -- and elsewhere as well.

                          •  I guess I don't enough to know (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            who the posters are, so when I hear "racist" I feel like they are talking to "everyone".  You remember,  "class, everyone has to stay after school because someone..".  When I hear racist,  I also think of Hillary pulling the gender thing.  

                          •  Well ... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            ... thanks for this discussion.  I admire your open mind and how you are willing to engage even when you disagree.

                            And no, I don't think folks are calling "everyone" racist when they call out an individual poster.

                            It's a tricky thing to do -- yes, it can create more animosity, push people into hating even more.  But not calling it out has its own dangers as well.  That's why I don't call out folks unless I feel very sure, and that usually hinges on how they respond to comments disagreeing with them.

                            Racism, hatred, xenophobia, all of that is real and it hurts so many folks terribly.  I can't turn away from that, I just can't.  We're talking about real pain and suffering, even death.  Compared to someone's ego being hurt, I don't think there's even a contest.

                            Racism won't go away by itself.  And it's not enough, imo, just to say you don't like it.  I think we have to be "anti-racist," as activists, and oppose this kind of language that leads to such pain for so many.  That requires self-education and acknowledgment of our own prejudices as well.  It doesn't just "happen."

                          •  This is getting annoying. (0+ / 0-)

                            You are again making the claim that folks are calling posters here racist for "disagreement."

                            I asked you to show any example of that.  You have not.

                            I have shown you examples of racist comments and you are simply ignoring them.

                            You are just plain wrong about this.

                            As far as folks not taking "the time to really listen/read," that could also be due to their own prejudices which make anything that challenges those prejudices (and we all have them, even Democrats!) something they simply don't want to consider.

                            I wish you would stop making this charge, that folks are calling others racist for disagreement, when you have no proof whatsoever for it.

                          •  Amen (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            Impeach or be impeached.

                            by Hens Teeth on Sat Nov 24, 2007 at 08:02:59 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  On "sneaking in",,, (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty

                        a huge percentage of those people living in the USA with undocumented status (including large numbers of... just about everyone from everywhere: Irish, Asian, SE Asian, European, Latin American, etc) did not "sneak in."  

                        They came under legal status (tourist, student, temp worker) and then failed to leave before their legal status expired.  As numerous news stories have recounted, this is often the fault of the US government itself, which cannot process the paperwork for people who do TRY to maintain their status. There are families that have been waiting years for their paperwork to go through, under constant threat of deportation except that they do have a real claim to stay.

                        You can just google "immigrant family tragedy" or similar phrases and literally find hundreds of different stories of our (government's) abuse of people  who have done all they were supposed to do, yet no one is getting their applications through the system.

                        Whenever someone starts talking about "sneaking in," we are talking about Hispanics, Mexicans, Latin Americans. And then there is an undeniable - even if unintended - racial slur to the mix.

                        No nation on earth has ever had impenetrable borders. There's simply no way to do it. The Great Wall of China didn't work, nor did Hadrian's Wall. Walls don't work.

                        Good trade policy (fair trade with provisions for fair wages and environmental protections), addressing our farm subsidies, and enforcing labor protections for all workers are the solution to economic immigration.

                        Then you get to asylum immigration. And that's another long story.

          •  neither (9+ / 0-)

            "morally superior" nor "more enlightened" ....just a willingness to do the work to be better informed.

            I for one prefer to wade through dull and monotonous statistics, reports, studies and legislation to make up my own mind on the issues of the day.

            Others prefer their information pre-digested and handed to them, opinions included, from talking heads like Lou Dobbs,...unquestioned.

            There are some here that present unique and well thought-out arguments in opposition to my position. ...but for the most part, most do not. ...that is simply a fact.  Saying "what part of illegal don't you understand" does not constitute meaningful matter how many times it's said.

          •  Can I let you in on a secret? (7+ / 0-)

            He really is more enlightened and morally superior. He's also better informed, more thoughtful, intellectually curious, and creative.

            If your side read his writings more carefully then you might actually come up with policy proposals which were effective, enforceable, affordable or at the very least somewhat compatible with the basic freedoms enshrined in the US Constitution.

            You don't and you won't, so instead we get ~$70,000,000,000 proposals which would only be enforceable if we contracted out to the Chinese Red Army and the suspended of 40% of the Bill of Rights. The Republican Party calls this a 'policy', but normal people call it insanity.

            "Put your Doc Martens back on." - Rude Pundit

            by opendna on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 06:27:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I am waiting (5+ / 0-)

            for you to make one positive, thought provoking comment outside of the usual Dobbsian hysterics.  When you do I might consider you enlightened.

            "If you would persuade, you must appeal to interest rather than intellect." B. Franklin

            by Mas Gaviota on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 06:35:50 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Why should I get lost? (0+ / 0-)

        Do you just want to hear opinions that agree with yours?

        •  I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that (7+ / 0-)

          the immigration 'crisis' is a creation of our own policy? Year after year, since 1900, the United States has allowed fewer immigrants and yet increased the number of unskilled workers needed beyond what is domestically available.

          In addition, Mexicans used to come north to work in season and return to their families. Now, that is impossible, forcing them to remain in the country because it would be so damned hard to get back in.

          Since you accuse us of pretending we are more enlightened (we're not, we just ask questions and listen to the answers), I have a question for you:

          Why are you such a racist?

          •  Why am I a racist? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hens Teeth

            Again this is the typical attack that the pro-illegal apologists use. Where did I give any indication that I was "racist"? Anyone opposed to their agenda is automatically without question a "racist".

            I don't harbor negative opinions of Latinos. I don't care where they come from. If they come from the UK they should suffer the same legal consequences for coming here illegally.

            •  Um, no. (7+ / 0-)

              Just you, oceanstar.

              I ask folks to check out Duke's diary A Tale of Two Suburbs.

              You, oceanstar, not some anonymous group you're lying about, said these things:

              Mariachi Mama made a comment about a raid:

              I read somewhere that police came into an apartment complex in Irving where a bunch of latinos were having a BBQ and started asking about immigration status. Sounds like a sundown town, to me

              oceanstar begins the stereotyping right away:


              I think that the police should stop suspects for due cause. But part of my reaction to the police coming to a BBQ and starting asking status it this:

              They're here illegally. They don't belong here anyway, so they should expect to be caught at some point.

              Loitering, vagrancy, public intoxication, public urination, and disturbing the peace. Why are those people doing it anyway? If they caught they deserve to be deported anyway.  And yes--at least here in the DC area--people do get arrested for those crimes.

              'course there was nothing in MM's comment that had anything to do with these "crimes."

              It goes on.  burrow owl begins a rap about those noisy Puerto Ricans (who knew?  There was no mention of where these folks came from, but hey, who cares about facts?):

              Or, people should be arrested for those crimes.

              Loitering excepted in some cases.  Re: the bbq: it could've been they were blaring music and irritating the fuck out of their neighbors. That's definitely a time that cops should come.

              And oceanstar gladly pushes this false meme:

              They come here all the time for

              noise complaints. Anyway, though, you keep ignoring the fact that they are here illegally! They don't belong here! Why should they be allowed to stay?

              Yeah, I'd call that racist.  But, and I'd never have thought I'd find something worse ... it shows a wilful ignorance -- that no matter what anyone says, Oceanstar is not willing to hear the truth or discuss the truth.

          •  in addition, NAFTA (5+ / 0-)

            and other policies/trade agreements have been destroying the livelihoods of people in other nations, even while "we" "invite" the poor here to work to keep our prices low.

            Oceanstar doesn't want to pay more at the market (none of us do) but doesn't include penalizing himself (herself?) as one of those taking advantage of everything from cheaper dry cleaning, cheaper fruit and vegetables, cheaper restaurant meals, cleaner offices, cheaper roofing companies, cheaper highway and highrise construction and EVERYTHING fucking else in this nation as a result of the LABOR of the "illegal" immigrants.

            I mean, jesus fucking christ (that's the cold medicinetalking), we HAND them jobs EVERYWHERE and then bitch from our comfy living rooms. What ffucking Hypocrites we are....

            Every LEGIT study shows that it is a Win for us and a Win for "them" that they are here:  

            > money being paid into Social Security that will never be collected.

            > boost in the economy from their purchases.  I mean, just think how much you'd have to buy if you literally started with only the shirt on your back! Some studies show that nearly all the economic growth of the past 10 years disappears when undocumented workers are factored out.  Just think if we dropped the population of the USA by 10% overnight?  Can your business afford to lose 10% of all your customers???

            > more in taxes paid (especially sales tax and property tax) than benefits collected (healthcare - Ha! and education).

            > lower prices for myriad goods and services.

            > less unemployment in their own poor national governments, more cashflow for the desperately poor back home.

            > on and on and on....

            So, let's enforce labor protections for ALL workers and employees. Let's drop our enormous farm subsidies which are primarily paid to enormous multi-national mega-agra corporations.  And let's drop the racist chant of "it's only about enforcing the law."  Bullshit.  Everyone who states that should have it permanently stamped on their driver's license.  See how they squeal at the next infraction...  the next tax dodge... the next home improvement without a permit...

          •  Why are you such a racist? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hens Teeth

            Cheap shot.  Unless you know that for fact, you shouldn't be throwing it around.  

        •  No (4+ / 0-)

          but it would be helpful to hear a thoughtful opinion rather than an ignorant one. There are plenty of ways to disagree and to do so in a way that contributes to the conversation. You have yet to find one despite that we've all tried to help you do so on a number of occasions. At this point, people are just tired of the bullshit with you, and I don't blame them.

    •  Crack away to your heart's content (6+ / 0-)

      They're used to it, having been "cracked down on" all their lives.

      Why else do you imagine that, despite all the hardship that it entails, they still keep coming?

      The TEA Fund: Practicing random acts of kindness to women

      by moiv on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 05:52:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  A random Lottery (3+ / 0-)

      is not what's best for the country. What is best for the country is to allow the amount and kind of labor we need to keep the economy healthy, and to couple that with a sane and humane family immigration policy.

      With a lottery, you have just as much chance of awarding a slot to a serial killer (or terrorist) as you do awarding a slot to a hard-working immigrant who wants to contribute to our society.

    •  Bush, Cheney are Gonzo are all illegal (4+ / 0-)

      So is AT&T and Verizon, a bunch of Republican Congressional buddies of Jack Abramoff and all the people that Papa Bush pardoned so that they could commit crimes in his son's criminal administration. I object to having that criminal element spoiling the character of my country. The entire war in Iraq is now illegal since there are no WMDs (the reason we went in, and Bush lied about it anyway so it was illegal from the start)

      You guys with your "Illegal" immigrants. You do realize that the people who are telling others to arm themselves and shoot Mexicans and steal from them and keep their kids out of public schools (by force) can be charged with illegal organized criminal activity as soon as we get a law abiding Attorney General. Their cries of "Free Speech" will not amuse the court if federal prosecutors can show that armed anti-immigration types have actually followed through on any of these threats. That will make the anti-immigrants the criminals---just like the KKK was in the 1970s when the tide finally turned for good in the Civil Rights movement. And at the first organized crime prosecution, Mr and Mrs America will run in horror from the cause, because they will not want to be associated with a low life criminal organization.

      "A dog starved at his master's gate/Predicts the ruin of the state" Blake

      by McCamy Taylor on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 10:19:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Repubs. talk of cracking down on the (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    moiv, Duke1676, mango, Dianna

    immigrents. But Bush is also pushing the North American Union. Infact the repubs. are lying to the voters and their fix after the elections won't satisfy those repub. people who want the brown people out. I started out worrying about our jobs but now I believe these people should be allowed to stay as long as they are working. I also believe that these people need to be making the same wages as Americans. That way wages are not brought down and these people can feed their families.

    "Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."

    by Owllwoman on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 03:55:20 PM PST

    •  They should go after the employers and make it as (0+ / 0-)

      economically unfeasible as possible for them to hire illegals. They also need to send employers to real hard jail time to send a message that the government will not tolerate them hiring and abusing illegals.

      •  Maybe so, but it will never happen (4+ / 0-)

        As you pointed out, however inadvertently, we don't have an illegal immigration problem in this country. We have an illegal hiring practices problem. But for various and sundry reasons, that's just how our system likes it ... and intends for it to remain.

        The TEA Fund: Practicing random acts of kindness to women

        by moiv on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 05:57:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  And this is why I don't trust the Republicans on (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          this issue. They will stoke the flames of racial resentment in order to win at the polls, while quietly reassuring their supporters in the industries that prey on illegals that they will look the other way when they abuse them.

          •  OK (7+ / 0-)

            That's a good start.

            So why not make one further jump in logic and say that the problem with worker abuse and a lowering of standards for all workers is not a problem of lack of enforcement of IMMIGRATION laws, but rather a  lack of enforcement of LABOR laws and protections. ..and that instead of trying to treat this problem as one of immigration and immigration enforcement...we should treat it as labor problem and demand strict enforcement of workplace standards. Instead of rounding up unauthorized workers and deporting them for immigration violations we should be severely punishing employers for not adhering to wage and hour, workplace saftey, and other workplace regulations. To me this raises the standards for all worker rather than simply punishing the unauthorized for their immigration status while allowing the employers to get off with fines they simply pass on to consumers as a cost of business..  

            •  We should do both (0+ / 0-)

              But clearly we are not doing enough on the employer side of the equation. Anyone who believes the GOP political ads about illegal immigrations and then expects those same Republicans to actually do something is being naive.  

              I am fully for targeting the labor violations and throwing those employers in jail. I fully support passing laws to make as economically unfeasible as possible to hire illegals.

              •  just can't let go of that "illegal" thing (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                YucatanMan, cfk, Nightprowlkitty, Dianna

                can you.

                Even after reading an 1800 word diary explaining pretty clearly why the entire quota system is a mess and that it would be nearly impossible for the vast majority of those who enter unauthorized each year to do so legally.

                You still see no need to possibly re-examine the laws? No reason to question the wisdom of a system that makes no allotment for the fact that we create nearly 1/2 a million low-skilled jobs a year yet limit low-skilled immigration to 147 people while all along filling those very jobs with unauthorized workers who are easily exploited?

                Don't these facts at the very least make you question the validity of the current system and suggest to you that posibly it should be changed?

                com' can do better than ..."make (it) economically unfeasible as possible to hire illegals"

                I know you can do better than'll only take a short leap of logic....think about it for a moment.

                •  We should fix the quota laws (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  Ideally I could see a system where randomly pick a certain number of people from every country in the world, a lottery where everyone has an equal chance of coming here.

                  •  Ok good (5+ / 0-)

                    now that we at least agree that the quotas need fixing,  we can move on to doing the work needed to fix them. Your suggestion is one that should be taken into consideration....we need to look at it's practicality and possible end results. But it's a good start towards thinking about this outside the box supplied to us by those who've been framing this issue from the start.

                    That's all many of us have been asking for from the start. To stop arguing this issue from a perspective of "enforcement only" vs some non-existent "open border" position, and begin to look at this situation practically, rationally, fairly, intelligently and humanely....and to try to come up with reality based solutions that benefit everyone concerned.  

              •  Sort of yes, but no. (0+ / 0-)

                We need to enforce labor laws, and we need to fix our immigration system so people can come here in an orderly and legal fashion.  What we do to people who are already here, illegally, needs to be a seperate argument.  I think they should be screen, and if we need them, they should be allowed to stay.  

      •  Yeah, we only already (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        imprison more people than any other nation on earth, except... Russia.

        Nice.  Let's add some more to that.  The answer is simply more prison time for EVERYONE!  Sure, that's it!

        Never mind considering that this is an inflamed issue to keep people voting Republican. That the solution involves paying LESS government welfare to multinational corporations.  That we need a policy other than "free trade" when doing commerce with developing nations.  Rape and pillage their countryside is an ages old colonial tactic, not a 21st Century solution.

      •  So... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        YucatanMan, christianfalling

        How exactly do you propose that we "go after the employers" as you suggest? What exactly do you mean by "enforce the law?"

        I mean, it's nice to suggest that we're going to jail people for hiring undocs, but who's going to "enforce the law?"

        You do understand how this all works right?  What you're proposing is analagous to saying "why don't we stop all the drunk drivers nationwide by enforcing the law."

        I mean, is there any sane, reasonable person who actually thinks it's possible to stop every driver who gets behind the wheel drunk? Is there any reasonable person who even thinks that it would be possible to stop, oh, say, 2% of the people who get behind the wheel drunk? Of course not, because we all stop long enough think about how it works and realize you couldn't possible hire enough police offers to take on that task even if we really wanted to.

        The same thing applies with illegal immigration, but for some reason those who have tricked themselves into believing "cracking down on employers" will stop the problem never stop to ponder what it is they are actually saying.

        "cracking down on employers" doesn't work unless you can reasonably crack down on enough of them for it to be a valid threat. Have you ever given one second of thought to what that would take? How many people would have to be hired by INS, Social Security and the IRS combined to make sure that EVERY SINGLE employee was checked and double checked before starting work? Ever given any thought to what that would do to the hiring process in terms of the length of time it would take to hire workers? Have you ever given any thought to how much that would cost us? (hint: it's way more money than we currently spend on "benefits to illegals" i can promise you).

        What you're proposing by saying that we can stop illegal immigration by "cracking down on employers" makes about as much sense as saying we can end drunk driving (or speeding for that matter) by enforcing traffic laws.

        I would bet that roughly 90% (or more) of people who drink and drive (or speed) on any given day never get caught. Funny, I don't hear anyone running around saying we're not enforcing our traffic laws.

        Why do you suppose that is?

    •  Repthugs NEED scapegoats (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AllisonInSeattle, Dianna

      From the commies to Saddam to the homos to the wetbacks, Repthugs cannot gain votes without someone to hate on.  Hate hate hate.... That is the one and only true R-mantra...

  •  Maybe you should send this to Keith Olberman and (4+ / 0-)

    Lou Dobbs. I doubt Lou will use it but maybe. He is having too much fun bashing Illeagals.

    "Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."

    by Owllwoman on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 03:56:49 PM PST

  •  Thanks for presenting the facts surrounding this (8+ / 0-)

    issue.  It doesn't seem likely, to say the least, that people will go for something that, well, really won't even help them.

    What is hard to take is the misinformation and distortions that go unchallenged for the most part, sadly it seems, in this country.  Look at what big tobacco has done.  Look at global warming and how doubt has been sold so effectively to the American people.  

    I just hope we can push all of this misinformation and rhetoric back to the right-wing fringes from which it came.  

  •  Thanks for this diary! (9+ / 0-)

    People need to know this!  

    There are no victims, only volunteers. Doctor Phil

    by mango on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 04:33:06 PM PST

  •  Explaining the problem with facts (10+ / 0-)

    Great Diary. I feel one of the best tools is to explain thoroughly the situation so that more people will realize that it's not that some people don't want to come legally, it's that they can't realistically. Clear explanations blunt criticism.

  •  good diary here (7+ / 0-)

    I'm still amazed how diaries end up on the rec list

    IMO this diary belongs there
    Thanks for posting

  •  The Illegal Immigration "problem" (7+ / 0-)

    is just another hot button issue (like gays, abortion, ect) that the Repubs pull off the shelf when they feel a threat at the polls.  This "crisis" appeared in winter / spring of 2006 when the GOP leadership realized that they were going to get their asses kicked in the November 2006 election.  The manufactured crisis still could not stop the shit storm brewed by Arbusto's multiple fuck ups.  This "problem" will not seem so critical when Dobb's and Company move on to more fearful pastures.

    "If you would persuade, you must appeal to interest rather than intellect." B. Franklin

    by Mas Gaviota on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 06:44:34 PM PST

  •  Thank you. Great Diary. (7+ / 0-)

    I keep trying to tell people that the problem isn't that they are coming (we are not going to stop that no matter how many fences we build or laws we pass, and why do we want to?)  The problem is that we have no system of adequately absorbing them legally, without exploitation.  

    As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular. - Oscar Wilde

    by SaneSoutherner on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 08:18:08 PM PST

  •  I know this has come up before (5+ / 0-)

    But why is it that when ever the rightwing talks about immigration. They always refer to Hispanics. Never the Canadians (No offense to the Canadians here at DK or otherwise intended), English, French, Africans, etc.(See comment for Canadians).

    Why is it okay for Canadians to come here and our acting, comedian, and singing jobs, but not okay for Hispanics to come here and work in our fields, hotels, construction companies?

    "Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." -- Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

    by Wes Opinion on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 08:51:00 PM PST

    •  ummm because Repthugs are by default, (5+ / 0-)

      racist pigs?  just guessing...  

      See "Reagan Southern Strategy" if in doubt...

      •  There's that word again. n/t (0+ / 0-)
        •  And it's true. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dkmich, Dianna, Wes Opinion

          It is very much like the "southern strategy."  See my above link to McCamy Taylor's diary - he spells it out and there is absolute proof of this.

          "That word" is not there because we're making it up, dkmich.

          •  Yes, it is true of racists most of whom (0+ / 0-)

            belong to the Republican Party, but it is not true of the posters on DailyKos.

            •  I wish you were right. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Dianna, RevenantX

              But you are not.

              If you are right, then why is it that so many Democratic representatives signed on to enforcement-only legislation with the SAVE Act?  Legislation that would build even more detention centers on the same lines as the Hutto Facility in Texas, a facility that only recently was sued (via suing Chertoff and the Dept. of Homeland Security) for major abuses, and the suit was settled in the ACLU's favor?

              You are just flat out wrong about this.  Racism is NOT confined to one political party.  And it is dangerous for you to believe this lie, because it only promotes folks' racism and their thinking they can feed into this kind of hate-speech with no consequences.

              I've shown my own examples.  You seem to want to ignore that

              You also seem to want to ignore the very real racist and xenophobic underpinnings of the rhetoric that is out there now which I linked to in McCamy Taylor's diary.

              So go ahead and ignore this, dkmich.  Doesn't mean it doesn't exist or that it will somehow vanish for your convenience.

              As an aside, several black posters have left Daily Kos and many more (I read the blogs founded by people of color) wouldn't come near this place with a ten-foot pole.  Perhaps your notion of racism is solely the overt behavior of calling folks names and hating those who are different.

              It's far more than that.  And real people suffer because of it.  I am not willing to turn away from that.  And I think it's sad that you are.

    •  My guess is the numbers.. (0+ / 0-)

      We don't see many Canadians sneaking across the Detroit River or through the Soo.

  •  Excellent diary, as usual... (6+ / 0-)

    I truly wish this information would get wider exposure -- esp HERE in Progressive-landia...

    My holiday cold (86 here one day, 50 the next, 30s at night the next) says I need to forget this computer stuff and get to bed.  ?But I had to leave this note first.

    Thank you for writing this!  

  •  The one argument Hispanic immigration opponents (5+ / 0-)

    use a lot. Is that immigrants are responsible for the decrease in wages in America. When the fact is that the employers are actually responsible for the low wages. And it has little if anything to do with the labor market. Because if it did, since there is supposedly a shortage of agricultural workers in this country. But instead of raising wages as would happen according the law of supply and demand that would be in effect if we actually had a "free market". Big agribusiness goes to the government to have form of indentured servitude put in place as a way to import workers and keep wages down.

    "Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." -- Voltaire (1694 - 1778)

    by Wes Opinion on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 09:36:19 PM PST

  •  Holey crap (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Be good to each other. It matters.

    by AllisonInSeattle on Fri Nov 23, 2007 at 11:28:31 PM PST

  •  This brings up a killer question (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    If we are to fix the system (not to mention round up millions)...exactly who is going to pay for it?

    Will Rush, Hannity, et al open their grubby little fists and pay higher taxes to do it?

    To them: Pay up, or shut up. Whining is not a solution.

  •  Fantastic (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Duke1676, Nightprowlkitty, Dianna

    Very nicely done... wow... I am simultaneously shocked and impressed by the facts and your work respectively.

  •  GREAT DIARY! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Duke1676, Dianna

    Thank you.

  •  147 is a nice number... but (0+ / 0-)

    not to worry, because 3 MILLION additional illegal immigrants walked in in th same time frame. So the real number is 3,000,147. Feel better now.

    Meantime the wages of lower income American's got lower, incrementaly with each new illegal unskilled worker who puts downward pressure on labor prices of the very people who need the "help" the least, who can afford it the least, and who are damaged the most.

    But it's great for all the folks who like getting thier lawns cut cheap.

    How is that whole teenage employment thing working out these days? Not alot of openings for 16-22yr olds working partime afterschool these days. Oh well, they have mommy and daddy to live off of, let the illegals have the jobs.

    Im sure Hispanic and African American's are thrilled letting thier jobs go to the poor struggling illegal immigrants. Afterall, they dont need those stinky old jobs, Im sure they will all be "steppin on up, to the east side" any minute now.

    I'm always curious about one thing.... maybe you can help me....

    How is it that you "types" (I say types because I dont even know what to call people like you) are all touchy feely worried about the poor poor mexican illegals, and yet you leave the other 2-3 BILLION thirdworlders who would love to come here for work to suck an egg?

    Just because they can't walk here across our pathetically non-existent borders, does that make them any less worthy? Why aren't you lobbying for free plane rides or ships for countless millions from Africa southest Asia, the Indian subcontinent, and China?

    Come on, at least be consistent in your argument. Advocate a vigorous immigration policy that brings us the diversity of peoples and cultures that allegedly will make us stronger... as opposed to 99% Mexican native peasents (you know, the ones the White Spanish Mexican elites in government are driving out of thier own country through economic genocide that WE are assisting).

    But any sensible immigration policy comes with a fundamental prerequisite.... the people coming here WANT TO BE AMERICANS. Unfortunately most of the illegal immigrants coming here do not want to be Americans, they want to earn a living, send money home and eventually return home when they can achieve the economic viability that the White Spanish Mexican government wont allow them to achieve at home... in MEXICO.

    The only RACISM in any of this is the racist actions of the White Spanish Mexican elites who are trying to purge thier nation of the undesirable pesky NATIVE Mexicans. The ones that they let live, because the British and French had complete control of African slave trade, locking Spain/Portugal out and forcing them to keep the "indians" alive and enslave them since they couldn't get the "good" slaves.

    Hint: assisting this effort makes YOU as bad as the Mexican government. Maybe instead of freeing Iraq we should be coming to the resue of the Mexican people.

    Anyway, best of luck with the whole immigration thing. And it is 30 MILLION not 12 million, try to keep the facts accurate.

    •  now that ou've got that off your chest (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      why not go back and actually READ the diary ( or re-read it if you already did but have some sort of reading comprehension problem)

      no where does this diary talk about "Mexican' immigrants.

      In fact your assumption that it does speaks volumes.

      If you in fact read the diary, you would know that the 147 number is of ALL unskilled workers (from ANTWHERE in the world...your "2-3 billion thirdworlders") who don't already have US citizen or legal-resident family members here (which many Mexican immigrants do have) the careful reader could probably deduce that many of the 147 were in fact non-Mexican.

      BTW: "because 3 MILLION additional illegal immigrants walked in in th same time frame" or "30 MILLION not 12 million, try to keep the facts accurate".....I'd love to see a stats on those....or did we just pull those numbers out of thin air?...if not, let my guess....FAIR? Heritage Foundation? Lou?

      Also you are aware for the fact that almost half of all unauthorized immigrants came here legally and didn't sneak across the border. They've overstayed visas. ...From countries all over the world.

      But "you people" are not exactly know for your fondness for reality based information...when shit you can just make up is sooooo much easier.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site