well, we did get some change
A few weeks back, a lot of folks had an opinion, (usually a rather adamant one), about the new state law in the Grand Canyon state that allows state and local authorities to demand that detainees produce documentation attesting to their right to be in the USofA. The law applies to everyone of course, but you usually don't see too many North Koreans skittering through the alley's and trails of Yuma, so let's be practical here.
The law has yet to take effect, but it has already produced one of the desired results. The federal government is taking a larger role, (the term "larger role" as used here indicates that they are actually doing something...), in policing the border, using federalized National Guardsmen for border security (as opposed to simple migrant interdiction). Had this level of participation in what is, ostensibly, a federal issue been present all along, the issue may not have come up. (On the other hand, it might have anyway, but the context would be different).
There may be a lesson to be learned here.
posted by eccentric recluse at 5:29 PM
16 Comments:
There are plenty of lessons here.. but they're all along the lines of; If you start addressing a gambling problem after you've lost your job, family, friends, and are in bankrupcy court, are you really addressing anything ?
The illegal alien problem.. like Social Security, Medicare, and any other problem that remains ignored until it's un-fixable, because it might hinder a re-election prospect.. is a problem beyond fixing.
This country is so perforated from the inside, that it's about to implode... And the radical progressives are seeing to it that the collapse is complete. This is their best window to-date (and they know it's closing), to re-shape this country by destroying it first.
Fortunately, it's a big enough, and diverse enough place.. with too much personal liberty built into it's societal genetics, for the current cast of whack-jobs in DC to finish the job. UNfortunately, that won't stop them from doing un-imaginable damage trying (they already have). The will of the governed means nothing to them.. and they aint likely to say, "well, we tried", if the citizens start un-electing them. I honestly see this country splitting into 2, maybe 3 parts, and ending up semi-European.
ANYway.. this effort by Honest Obe, is designed to fail.. so he can say, "SEE we need comprehensive reform" (i.e. 40,000,000 votes for eternal sate-ism).
Pick sides, and stock up on ammo ..
how would you deal with this problem?
There's not much TO be done, now. As mentioned, the problem has been ignored out of career politicians need to have a career..
Now, our very sovereignty is in play.. fully 1/10 of the people in this country are here illegally, and our border is void. In addition to the sovereignty issue, is the socio-eco-demographics. We either just give up and become a politically correct, homeland for anyone who wants it, and lower everyone's standard of living, and put us on a fast-track to default.. or take drastic measures.
And the sad thing is.. the Arizona law is FAR from drastic.. it's a sane, first-step, even if it's pointless. Every leftist-loon is throwing a fit, as though we were acting like China (a whole different discussion).
Let's face facts.. The progressive wrecking crew see voters. And yes, there's plenty of blame for the corporate side of this, ala cheap labor. But let's not waste time pointing fingers.
My solution: Everyone here illegally has 90 days to leave.. period. After 90 days, being in this country illegally will be treated as a high-crime, just short of an act of war. First-time offenders will be fully documented, deported, and given NO future chance at LEGAL imigration.
Second offenders will still be merely deported. Third offenders will be executed.
When you consider that this is a genuine threat to the country as a whole.. three strikes before execution is quite reasonable. And if the city you grew up in, is fast becoming a 3rd-world war zone.. and your neighbors are being gunned down on their own property.. you might agree with me.. cause it's only gonna get worse.. and amnesty is not an option.
I'll go on record as saying I think the problem actually does lie in the government's inability to stop corporations or business owners from hiring illegal aliens. The dialog should be about how to effectively curb that. The finger can be pointed at either the government or the business sector who would resist such an effort, either way; it doesn't matter.
As a lefty-loon, I am for NOT focusing on illegal aliens already here, even though my concern for human rights has nothing to do with the reasoning for this, which is to avoid wasting enormous amounts of resources on something that will not solve the problem, which can only be done by curbing the hiring of illegal aliens.
To continue to "allow" (by lack of proper enforcement) businesses to hire illegal aliens, and then harrass, torment, jail and, as facetiously (I hope) suggested, kill said aliens, is insane--far more insane than a little lefty loonyism.
Yeah.. actual execution was just a point-maker.. illustrating that there really is nothing to be done, now. This is something that will have to work itself out.
FIRST step is to secure the border, and this is where 'execution' is stomach-able. A 90 day warning period, that illegal border crossing IS an act of war, and 'shoot first', would be in the rules of engagemnet. Plain and simple.. cross the border and expect to be shot. Casualties (even civilian), are part of war, and this is a war for our security.
As for those already here.. The AZ law is a good start. Rounding them all up is logistically impossible, but between our own unemployment, natural attrition, AZ-law attrition, along with a secure border, and time itself will set things right.. eventually.
MEAN time.. in absolutley no way AT ALL, will non-citizens be given ANY government assistance, nor will their children attend public school. That will help speed it all up.
I heard an interesting discussion last year; twixt a moderate liberal, and a moderate conservative. One thing they agreed upon, was that we aren't too far off from the point where the illegal population will become large enough to create their own, sub-economy, with a welfare, medicade, food-stamps, rent/utilitiy-subsidized foundation. 40 million people getting their absolute necessities absolutely funded for free, can become a Mexican annexation, quickly... and WE'RE funding it !
Execution for border crossing is not "stomachable" to me, nor is it for you, I suspect, except you see a greater need, maybe.
Your idea about attrition makes the most sense. You just need to be more patient. Time will set things right, but I think we need to consider ways to make illegal crossing less appealing. How we do that might define who we are.
Continuing comment 5, what do you do to those who employ those illegals, (and there are plenty of them)?
Anglo fortunes have been made with illegal labor, how will they be sanctioned?
It seems like disabling the mechanism for cheap labor is bound to hurt little businesses more than big businesses, to return to the pragmatic, ER. There is a lot of talk about how important small businesses are, and if that's true, we seem to have come to a sticky point.
I quite agree, but you mentioned this subject earlier, and it needs to be explored a little bit. We cannot punish only the undocumented workers when in a business oriented society we encourage them to be here.
Consider that in an environment where we see and hear no evil towards the business owners, we encourage bad behavior and working conditions towards citizens and legal residents. I agree that the border needs to be secure, whatever it takes, for the same reason that we need bouncers in bars, (tough love), and having the National Guard there with M16's will result in a few live-fire incidents I am sure. Too bad, if you play in the streets, you risk being a statistic. But we need to aggressively attack all aspects and symptoms of this, including the workplaces that encourage the migration, the mills that produce the fake documents and every other contributor.
Then we can take stock.
I agree. Part of my problem here is that while we discuss this, and keep saying we should do this, or we should do that, our government, if thought of as a single entity, is a bit schizophrenic. I probably need to think of "us" as a very sloppy, very large conglomerate of disparate bureaucratic organizations each with its own agenda.
This is supposed to be what we have an executive branch of government for.
You have hit on a very significant point here. When we selected our executive, for whatever reason, we tend to see it as selecting Batman or maybe Capt America, who will see this stuff through.
Not to give too much to the immediate past prez, but Mr Bush had it right when he said that "he is the decider", and that is about it. Bush had a group of cronies who gave him the option of deciding how the graft was to be delivered, ditto Reagan, Clinton had pretty fair sailing and no really deep crises not of his own making, Obama really remains to be seen, as his crew just can't understand why the rest of the world isn't saluting....
IMHO, the last President who really understood the mechanics of power resigned, (deservedly so), but that is another discussion altogether. Mr Obama is not leading, he is reacting. That does not make him dishonorable, but it limits what he will accomplish.
I think you're both over-emphasizing the effect of employer encouragement, and under-estimating the; welfare, food-stamps, rent-subsidies, medicade and the bi-lingual-daycare that our schools there have become.
They couldn't FUNCTION on the lesser wages, let alone send money back to Mexico.. without the sanctuary-izing, tax-payer-funded assistance.
Case workers in California go out of their way, seeing to it that the illegals KNOW what they can get... accomodating them in THEIR language.
The time for the touchy-feely approach passed a decade ago.. this is a direct assualt on our way of life, and our wallets.. AND they're turning big chunks of this country into war-zones.
Even up here in Michigan.. I've seen a non-English-speaking man walk into a gas station, because he didn't have cash for the gas he just pumped... The teller was polite and just said, "let me see your license.. I'll record the info, and give you an hour to come back and pay. HE BARELY understood her, and had no license. What happens when he runs a light and injures someone, and obviously has no insurance ? (while you and I can be cited for not having insurannce). He ended up walking out... I asked if she would call the police.. she said it's pointless.. they won't do anything about them not even being licensed.. what chance is there to collect for the gas ?
I hate to be repetively petty.. but if that guy plowed into your loved one.. or made it so you fear for your life on your own property.. or was at the root of the cause that your very city is now the kidnap capitol of the WORLD.. you might not disagree with a "shoot first" border policy.. along with other, serious steps..
And as bad as it is, it'll get far worse as we just talk about what to do.
It may very well get worse, but you are jumping way ahead here. The issues are related, but there cause-effect relationship is tenuous. Here in the midwest, in the incident that you described, the customer who had no money would have first enjoyed an asphalt burrito, (having obviously threatened the clerk after failing to pay), before being treated with a free bandaid in the city lockup and a dance with Bubba, the lonesome rodeo clown. The problem you described is a bunch of wussies in the local PD.
My point is that one thing need not lead to another. I can stand in front of a cash register, empty handed and speak a solid three minutes of Norwegian if it will get me a tank of unleaded. If the merchants interests are threatened enough, that will stop. And I live in a solidly Blue democratically controlled county.
I hate to go off on a tangent.. but you just illustrated THE problem.. Cities ,counties, states, whatever your barometer.. are controlled by the political class. THEIR preservation and interests come before the people's, and this country's..
This shouldn't be a red/blue argument, because the illegal cancer is infecting EVERY barometric reference (that was the point to my story).
I'm only the second generation of my family born in this country. I want ANYone who thinks this country is a great place to live; to come here... legally. Blaming some entity, or party, or color for this problem right now; is akin to arguing in a burning house about who started the fire (or standing on a company's throat while the oil flows). We can sort all that out later, mostly to prevent it from happening again. Pointing fingers and pushing us citizens to argue amongst ourselves suits the political class' (especially the one in power now)just fine... ala;
"SEE.. we need amnesty, ummm , comprehensive reform !"
This situation is now critical. The cancer must be removed, and radiated when it tries to return. Then we can work on quiting smoking, or even going after tobaco companies... and focus the resources on processing people who want to be here, and know that one of the reasons this is a country worth sneaking into, is diminished by doing it illegally.
"A few weeks back, a lot of folks had an opinion, (usually a rather adamant one), about the new state law in the Grand Canyon state that allows state and local authorities to demand that detainees produce documentation attesting to their right to be in the USofA."
A few weeks back, the bill made no mention of requiring citizens prove their citizenship. I'll let you read it and find out what it really says.
Welcome Carlos.
Yes, I know that the law requires an individual who finds themselves in the hands of local authorities to provide documentation, (in whatever form that takes) to prove residency status, but my point was that the state, by taking some action, draconian though it may be, got the federal government off its ass to address the issue, for better or worse. Please bear in mind that I am not endorsing the "solution" offered by the state or the feds as being best or adequate, just pointing out that one action did serve as a pretty good catalyst for the other.
So, let me wrap this up by saying that I believe that it will be this way with ObamaCare as well, albeit in reverse in many respects. What we have before us is a HUGE, MASSIVE, clusterf**k that will swallow the entire nation, quicker than a salami in front of Linda Lovelace, beginning in four years, in the absence of any preventive or preemptive action. I am thinking that the mere threat of this bill going through, (and it did go through in a fairly unstatesmanlike manner), prompted quite a few decent ideas, even from those who, under the previous regime would not have given a band-aid to an amputee. The thought of its implementation may prompt some fiscal moderation and a plan that doesn't make so many people throw up.
That is my first glance impression anyway.
Thanks for stopping by. Come back soon.
Post a Comment
<< Home