May 02, 2005
Taking back Los Angeles
Of course, this billboard flap is getting zip in coverage from most of the MSM. It does make a fleeting mention in the snarking at Gov. Arnold from the usual LA Times hacks along the lines that Arnold is just desperate for media coverage so ignore anything he says about illegal aliens. Or we get the not-so-veiled charges that this is just about nasty, white, racist hypocrits getting their hoods in a knot.
Sorry, Ruben, I was born in Los Angeles (St. Vincent hospital) and grew up with a pride in the many layered cultural background of the area, but if I wanted to live in Mexico, I'd emigrate. I have little more sympathy for law-breaking "migrants" than I do for tagging, assaulting gang-bangers.
What is it about the word illegal that open-border advocates are not getting?
Posted by Darleen at May 2, 2005 06:04 AM
As in wandering around the desert shooting at Mexicans illegal?
Or as in desperate to hire a nanny we can afford illegal?
Illegal immigration is not somehow damaging to the State of California. I've worked there, and illegal immigration is a fundamental and necessary part of her economic makeup.
The so-called minutemen are just looking for an excuse to crap on someone smaller and weaker than they are. I see no difference between them and the "assaulting gang-bangers".
The Minutemen of old would be ashamed.
Oh--and re. your movie list. The only "guy flick" I seriously disagree with is Armageddon, which is actually in close competition for Worst Movie Ever Made. I'd sooner watch Ishtar; Twice; While having my tonsils removed by a gorilla with a cheese-grater.
All the best,
Posted by: Ted at May 2, 2005 09:27 PM
You might actually follow the reality of the MMP rather than just the gossip from the open-border idiots... there have been NO Minutemen "wandering the desert shooting people."
Not a one. The MMP is a Neighborhood Watch program...something that already exists in many neighborhoods where people make an effort to be the policeman's eyes and ears.
The Minutemen WATCH the border and call in the LAWBREAKERS.
You might be surprised, but there are a lot of Americans of Mexican descent who are just as disgusted with ILLEGAL aliens as anyone else.
Illegals are NOT needed and their impact on So Cal infrastructure ... educational, medical, housing, is enormous. I was born in LA and have lived my whole life in So. Cal... I've never employed an illegal, why should I?
Re movie...Armageddon is what I'd call my guilty pleasure. It's pure comic book but really a lot of fun and shameless on how it plays on emotions. I can barely stand Ben Afleck, but I like almost everyone else in the movie.
Posted by: Darleen at May 2, 2005 09:54 PM
So you'd be OK with immigration on the same scale if it was legal? The sign above would be OK if every hispanic californian was there legally? I have my doubts...
If we really want to stop illegal immigration, go after the employers.
But I guess I just don't get the obsession with illegal immigration. It would be easy to end it, just let them come legally. They're here anyway, so why not?
/Mike in Arizona
Posted by: Mike at May 3, 2005 07:53 AM
Why do we need more people to work for little of nothing to drag down our standard of living. Big Business, and YES, our own government is doing a good enough job of it already. And what don't people get about the word ILLEGAL. It doesn't matter were they come from, they are not supposed to be here!!!
If all americans had good jobs, then there might be a need, But that is not the case. Put a fence up and guard it!!!
Posted by: Paul at May 3, 2005 09:05 AM
The debate should not only be focused on the legal/illegal question. It is a question of assimilation and lifestyle. I wonder how the pro-immigration types would feel if their own pristine neighborhoods changed from having local access to popular "American" brand named retail shops to run-down, filthy, tag-ridden streets where the local Von's and Home Depot have turned into 99-cent stores and flea markets, and now they have to drive 5 miles to get the best products for their lifestyle. That's the issue.
Posted by: Yvette at May 3, 2005 10:46 AM
A nation not only has the right, but the duty to "provide for the common defense" by, first of all, securing its borders and then setting the standards for citizenship and legal migration.
How do you think you'd be treated it you went to Japan on a tourist visa then squatted and demanded Japanese citizenship just because your butt occupied a couple of square feet of the country?
Certainly, go after employers but once again, we run smack dab into PCism...if the authorities go into workplaces and start questioning the citizenship of employees just because their names are "hispanic"..all holy hell breaks loose. Second, you can go into several downtown areas and pick up a whole packet of paperwork to give you a new American identity and if a prospective employer questions it, you have "civil rights" groups ready to sue the pants off the employer.
Many of the illegals come to this country to work and send the money to Mexico. Indeed, without that huge influx of cash, Vicente Fox's government would collapse. The Mexican economy is a leech on the US.
Posted by: Darleen at May 3, 2005 12:46 PM
The government has a right to go after the employers, and does so. There just isn't enough resources allocated to this, I think since the political will isn't there (and most employers have no incentives to stop hiring them). Sure, in some rare well-publicized cases there might have been accusations of civil rights violations, but that is not the norm.
"A nation not only has the right, but the duty to "provide for the common defense" by, first of all, securing its borders and then setting the standards for citizenship and legal migration."
I agree. I guess I'm just not sure why we set those standards the way we do.
Plus, it still seems to me that many people use the "it's illegal" not as a reason for their opposition to illegal immigration, but as a cover. The true reasons are cultural more than legal, I suspect, which is hard to legislate around.
"without that huge influx of cash, Vicente Fox's government would collapse"
That "huge influx of cash" equals less than 1% of Mexico's GDP (although I don't think it's included in the GDP, since the money goes directly to the recipients, and not through the government). It is a lot of money for sure, but Mexico will not collapse without it. I'm sure many recipients of the money depend on it to live though.
"How do you think you'd be treated it you went to Japan on a tourist visa then squatted and demanded Japanese citizenship just because your butt occupied a couple of square feet of the country?"
Huh? What relevance does Japanese immigration laws have with regards to how the US should treat Mexicans who are here illegally? I don't follow you. To answer your question, I have no idea how I'd be treated. I've never been to Japan.
Posted by: Mike at May 5, 2005 02:08 PM