A good doctor knows to treat the disease, not the symptoms.
In the discussion about the new law passed in Arizona directed at addressing that state's problems associated with illegal immigrants from Mexico, the protests concerning the legislation are directed at the wrong parties, in the wrong direction. The pro-immigration community, some church groups and many Civil Rights leaders are all calling for a boycott of the State of Arizona based on their belief that the new Arizona law is focused on "racial profiling" as the method for identifying possible illegal Mexican immigrants.
As an African-American who lived through and before the Civil Rights Movement, I'm no fan of assessing people based on their skin color. But holding a struggling State's feet to the fire on tactics is missing the point . Why are protests not being directed to our national government and the government of Mexico? Why aren't these groups demanding that our porous border with Mexico be closed, once and for all? It's not impossible. We have the most sophisticated surveillance and monitoring technology in history, the most formidable military in the world, yet we are unable to stop the daily intrusion of illegal immigrants from Mexico into the United States? This is a failure of policy, not one of capability.
Congress has been unwilling to pass an immigration bill, the first priority of which is closing the border. Why does "immigration reform" now demand a higher national priority than the crippling unemployment that is devastating the economic base and precipitating wide spread home foreclosures in our communities? President Obama said the health reform was the first priority of his first term. Now, he is turning his attention to financial reform of the banking system. Meanwhile, cities like Phoenix and many cities in the State of California and elsewhere are drowning in red ink with an ever-growing population demanding ever-more city services.
Arizona is now being depicted as the official state of "racial profiling," with anti-Hispanic and anti-immigration swirling around it like scarlet letters. But the passage of its bill to prevent the continued influx and presence of illegal immigrants in the State appears more like an act of desperation than racially motivated legislation.
The pro-illegal immigration amnesty movement shuns the classification "illegal" immigrant; preferring instead the term "undocumented immigrant." This is, of course, framing the debate. The "undocumented" immigrants entered into the United States illegally. When apprehended, deportation back to their country of origin is the customary legal procedure. Now, however, an intermediary process is advocated in lieu of deportation: an undocumented immigrant who, after following certain prescribed procedures, including the payment of taxes, will be permitted to remain in the United States. This constitutes de facto amnesty for the "undocumented immigrant." As such, it relieves the government of Mexico from any financial responsibility for the economic consequences associated with the cost of medical care, public education, public housing, welfare, police, and social services provided by the cities, counties and states in which such initially illegal immigrants choose to reside.
Well-intentioned people are quick to denounce Arizona and call for a boycott of business transactions or travel involving the state. Why are they not calling for a boycott of Mexico? The truth is that Mexico is exporting, or at the very least facilitating the export, of its poverty in the form of illegal immigrants to the United States.
Any version of amnesty for illegal immigrants and efforts to organize a boycott of Arizona will detract from the number one priority affecting substantial segment of the American people: unemployment. Moreover, it will blow a hole in the projected operating costs and budget deficit projections in the new health care bill.
Why don't the pro-amnesty undocumented immigrant leaders join forces with the "anti-illegal immigration" leaders and bring the Government of Mexico to the table? The annual cost of maintaining and providing services to illegal or "undocumented" citizens should be tabulated, assumed and paid by the Government of Mexico or credited against the annual cost of oil we import from them until such time as immigrants from their country become U.S. citizens.
Let's face it: right or wrong, the Arizona legislation is treating the symptoms of an international disease that needs much stronger medicine.
Southern California English teacher has phrased it the best I've seen yet.
This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent
"As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:
I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.
Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens , Huntington Park , etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title 1 schools.
Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud. The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten.
You might try checking if you can walk on water. I thought that any article that even contained a whiff of anti-amnesty sentiment was illegal on Huffington Post.
Many Far-Left Liberals don't realize that by supporting a massive influx of people at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale, they are really causing profound harm to our own citizens who are at the bottom of the socioeconomic scale. Many Far-Left Liberals are quick to SACRIFICE THE SOCIOECONOMIC WELL-BEING OF OUR OWN CITIZENS in order to selfishly portray themselves as the savior to the world's downtrodden. These Far-Left Liberals feel free to give away the jobs that should rightly go to our own citizens.
A better way would be to support policies and charities that help developing countries BY BUILDING PROJECTS IN THESE COUNTRIES AND ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT IN THESE COUNTRIES. There is no way that the U.S. can take in all of the world's poor - policies like amnesty just encourage more to come here illegally in anticipation of the next amnesty.
The U.S. cannot compete with developing countries like China in the area of low-cost labor. Bringing in MILLIONS OF UNSKILLED WORKERS just undercuts our own citizens while drawing unnecessary low-skill labor to the a U.S. economy while low-skill jobs are rapidly disappearing. This policy does tremendous damage to our own citizens.
I have been confused by the reaction to the Arizona law and I have been called a racist, as well.
But, I remember marching through Coachella Valley to the Mexican border in 1969 with Cesar Chavez, Dolores Huerta, Walter Mondale and Ralph Abernathy to protest growers using "undocumented immigrants" ("illegal aliens") as strikebreakers. We all believed that the illegal workers undermined the rights of our own legal workers, and, helped to further exploit us.
I was wondering if I confused then; or, am I confused now?
Unlike the liberals who live in their Ivory Tower neighborhoods, far removed from the harsh realities and ill effects of illegal immigrantion, I have seen and have lived in "cities like Phoenix and many cities in the State of California" that are drowning in ever-growing population and demanding ever-more city services.
My questions to those who oppose the AZ Law, What About Our Lower Income Neighbors, who depend on access to free healthcare, public education, jobs, etc. that are inudated by illegal immigrants? What about our lower Income neighbors' desires to maintain an "American" lifestyle (i.e., Store Fronts with English signs) as oppose to having the communities flipped to Little Korea, Tijuana, Peking, or Keniston towns? Who is respresenting the interests of the lower income neighbors; the neighborhoods that are "settled" by illegal immigrants?
It's about maintaining the right to a job, a right to education, and other pursuit of happiness "accustomed" to the American dream.
When they come to US, they don't assimilate, they're taking back territory; territory seized from the Spainards and Native Americans. But the Liberals in their Ivory Towers don't know this b/c they're not in the trenches.
Boy are you going to catch hell for this...
With that treatment and many of those people still alive who suffered through that time the big picture may be quite different ...and their is no guarantee that can be given to US Mexican Americans that some wont be place again to be illegally deported or held for long terms in Arizona.
may be the biggest picture to them ....and that is the why. A vet friend in AZ asked me to boycott AZ goods I will ....this bill effects are by designed to use fear to drive people out we just don't which people .... like a friend of mine said damn dude I cant tell you ... you all look alike to me.
Of course the prices of certain goods and services will rise dramatically, but that's a small price to pay, no?
IMO, that's not fair to those who are paying into the system.
Instead they can possibly work to change things in their own country instead. What's wrong with expecting those from poor countries, to make efforts to correct those problems for themselves in their home country? Expecting the US to be obligated to immigrants for jobs and their welfare is wrong. Not when a large majority of US citizens are already out of jobs, job benefits, health insurance and living in bankruptcy! I am sick of being told we "should" welcome those who have no respect for our immigration laws. We would have to abide by any other country's immigration laws to be there. Crummy double-standard!!
This has been going on since I got here, 23 years ago.
That's one slow knee...