Hmmm. Good question.I found the comment left on the page by Britannicus to be frightening.
Yeah, this person obviously have a whole movement behind them, but I don't think most of my liberal friends understand the problems that the border i creating for the border states. There is a drug war going on along there. People are coming across in small mobs. crime is a problem! Etc. And all this could be solved by a national policy of SOME sort.
I'm a liberal friend and I understand there is a problem on the border, but it's much more complex than this Draconian law recognizes.
It seems to be catching the attention of the people who need to solve the problems.
Ah, the states, the incubators of democracy.
Ve must see if you haff your papers in order, comrade. Vould you pleass provide zem ????I am so sorry ---chust my Chermann heritage ----Jew must undershtannd -----
Yes, Dash, you're right to make fun of the stop and harass law that Arizona has made. I can't believe this won't be struck down the first minute it shows up in a federal court. It's the sort of thing you'd expect in a dictatorship. The reason for making the law, however, is - at least for me - a separate issue. Immigration is a problem/area that the federal government has among its enumerated powers in the Constitution. But, for twenty years, the feds-- or more specifically the Congress -- has been negligent and the problem is approaching a crisis, especially for states on the border. Why is this ignored? Therefore, I am not surprised that a state would take this sort of extreme approach just to get the matter attended to.
Methinks you give the powers who be in Arizona too much credit. Trashing the Constitution to get the attention of the Congress doesn't appear to old liberal me to be a wise course of action. But, I'm not sure that getting the feds' attention was the primary motive behind the legislation. Election day is on the horizon and there are votes to be had - and those Hispanic voters weren't going to vote for Governor Brewer and the legislative leaders anyway. Up until recently Governor Brewer had not included the immigration problem in her list of priorities.
Just put a yellow star on every legal Hispanic's coat or shirt. Seems that worked in the 1930s and 40's in Europe.
Could any of us get a job without a Social Security number ???If the illegals can't get jobs most will quit coming.Simple solution ----Severly punish those who hire illegals --Problem suddenly solved !!!What am I missing here ?????
The Mexican government has done to it's poverty stricken, what this country did to the Native Americans 200 years ago. They have taken their little farms and lands away and given the the land to the multi-national agricultural corporations. This has left thousands if not millions with out a way to grow their meager crops for their subsistance. Where would you head and what would you do if you were put in the dilemma of needing to keep your family alive and having all means taken away from you. The drug problems on the border are a result as are the increasing numbers of immigrants to this country just to survive. I agree with Dashmannn's suggestion to fine those who do the hiring. However, I think our government needs to put huge pressure on the Mexican Government to recind their land properties and figure out a path to naturalization for the peaceable people trying to survive! This is one area where I agree with Bush...and Clinton...and Reagan...and Carter...and Nixon...and Kennedy. Welcome them and make them proud producing members of our society. As an after thought. Lucky for alot of us that we didn't send back all the illegal Irish who came to this country.
Don't forget about the impact of NAFTA on Mexican agriculture, particularly the corn growers. U.S. government subsidized corn flooding their market has helped push Mexican labor to the U.S. If I remember correctly Vice President Gore cast the deciding vote on approval of the treaty.
Oh, what a terrible tangled web we weave ----
Sparty; Yes! I've heard it said that Clinton was the best Republican we ever had in the WH. Clinton has recently apologized and said he was wrong on the NAFTA deals...he was particularly referring to the Hatian (sp) situation where they have no rice growing because of the same thing that happened in Mexico RE: the corn. Is it possible that the welfare of people will ever be placed above that of corporations?It worked until the 1890's. And again in from 1940's to 1980's. Time for a resurgence? Maybe?
Post a Comment