Given the attention, and strong feelings on immigration, there is no surprise that it is a hot topic among the various Presidential candidates. Each has staked out a position, usually running along political party lines. But there is an aspect of immigration that gets far less attention and is perhaps the answer to the issue.

Many of the illegal immigrants in America at this time are Hispanic/Latino. That is neither a negative nor an accusation. The fact is, as best as can be determined, that there are some 12 million illegal immigrants from Spanish-speaking nations. The main reasons they have come to America is because they are looking for work, a high standard of living, and the ability to provide families in their home countries with a better life funded by the American dollars they send to them. I cannot fault those reasons. That does not change the fact that they have broken U.S. law.

[I must state that I have very strict views on immigration. I have spoken before on these views. To simply state it, I do not believe any illegal alien, or undocumented immigrant if it makes some sleep better, deserves any rights or public aide in America.]

While many are suggesting that the answer to this issue is a wall along the Southern border (while completely ignoring the larger and virtually unwatched Northern border) or placing National Guard troops on patrol, few are looking at the other end of the issue. Improving the quality of life and income in the native countries of these illegal immigrants.

Improvements of the trade agreements and ability to conduct international business would reach the people of those nations and thus help stem the flow into the United States. It will not end the illegal immigration issue, but it could improve it far more than a wall or troops.

But the key leading presidential candidates seem to be questionable in their resolve on this issue. As noted in an article at the Latin Business Chronicle,

“Measured by their voting records and/or statements, Republicans John McCain and Mitt Romney are the best candidates, while Democrat John Edwards is the worst. Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton - the frontrunners in the Republican and Democratic parties, respectively - both have mixed records. The two have, however, been developing in different directions. While Clinton previously was seen as more favorable to free trade, she now is more critical, whereas Giuliani appears to have gone the opposite way.”

While Mr. Rudy Giuliani seems to be improving his position on free trade, which thus improves the chance to reduce illegal immigration at its source, Senator Clinton is traveling in the opposite manner. Mr. Giuliani is a bit trickier to decipher as he was merely a Mayor, albeit that the city was New York City. His choices and position is not nearly as strong as a political decision that impacts the entire nation.

Continued in Part 2...

Labels: illegal immigrant, immigration policies, presidential candidate, Rudy Giuliani, Senator Hillary Clinton

Today on Neil Cavuto’s show (on Fox News from 4-5pm) Mr. Cavuto had on a guest, a professor whose name I did not catch, to discuss a proposed law. I need help on verifying what this law states, but it seems that Home Depot is being required to provide for Illegal immigrants that are looking for day labor in front of their stores.

Again, I need to read this proposed law (someone must be familiar with it and can provide me a link), but if this is the essence of the law, then someone has lost their mind. How can anyone realistically expect a company to provide for illegal workers?

First let’s think this through, which the professor defending this proposed law seems not to have done. In essence it means that if a panhandler is standing in front of your grocery store, as an example, you the owner must provide for that individual. You have a Mime; you need to provide them with shelter, water, restroom facilities, and anything else you would provide an employee. According to my understanding you must essentially take on another employee, that you have not hired, that provides no benefit to your business, which could theoretically sue you if you failed to provide these benefits to them.


Then add the fact that this person is an illegal immigrant (alien) and you have a person that has violated the law pays no taxes, and may well be taking money out of the economy if they send any money to their home country. There is a business plan.

Perhaps I am wrong. The law may not state this. I may be missing something, and I hope I am.

Now some may say this isn’t fair. They are just undocumented workers trying to make a living. That may be true but the document they are missing is a birth certificate proving U.S. citizenship. There is no obligation to take care of them. They have no rights in this nation and are criminals from the second they enter the nation. No matter what anyone may call them this is a fact. Anything done to benefit their lives is a kindness, not an obligation. If that is upsetting to these illegal aliens/immigrants/undocumented workers then they can leave. They don’t even need to sneak back home, the government will take them their, and it’s on our dime. They can thank us later.

Some will say, ‘This is just racism in disguise.’ How? Who is this racist against? I’ve made no distinction on what illegal immigrants I’m speaking about. Nor do I wish to create a system of preference. If you are not a citizen by birth, not naturalized, have no immigration papers or other documents saying the government welcomed you here; you need to be kicked out.

That means if you are from Tbilisi, Milan, Jakarta, Berlin, Tokyo, or Mexico City and you are here illegally the above applies to you. The fact that the majority of illegal immigrants are from a neighboring country is incidental to the above, not because of it. I don’t think most people would allow a neighbor to just walk into their house, take the food out of their refrigerator, order movies on their cable account, and take their movie DVD’s. Then if the neighbor got hurt in your house, you get sued and have to pay the medical bills. Sound like a bright idea? Would you do it? Of course not. It’s the same thing with nations as with people.

Mark my words, if the proposed law is enacted, it will not be limited to Home Depot. The bum on the corner will have the same rights as the illegal immigrant at Home Depot. It’s not about race; it’s about where my taxes go, and the cost of goods. Illegal immigrants make both go up, especially when dumb laws like this are made.

Worse still if, like many other trends, this catches on and several other states start adopting it. I mean this law is based in the same state that recently had a city ban smoking in your own home. Yes, there was a restriction on smoking [to be exact at least in apartment buildings] that applied to every person, even if you are over 21, can vote, a citizen with the right to something… what was it… the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing like being told you can buy a legal item but can’t use it as is intended.

But I detract from the point. This law is stupid as I have come to understand it. If anyone can provide me the exact wording, I’d love to see it. If anyone can explain why I or anyone should be forced to spend my hard earned money on factual criminals, I’d love to hear it.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: Fox News, Home Depot, illegal immigrant, Neil Cavuto

Let’s think about what happened today. It’s May 1st and thousands of illegal aliens took to the streets throughout the nation today. Their goal was getting immigration reforms passed that would legalize their presence in the nation. Almost sounds impressive.

That is if you don’t consider the fact that these illegal aliens do not have the right to assemble, the right to free speech, cannot vote, nor have representation in the government. Those are rights of citizens of this nation. In effect they just gummed up the works in various major cities, increasing the need for police and law enforcement officials which will be paid for by myself and other citizens since these illegal aliens do not pay taxes either. That just pisses me off.

Yes I’m sure there were citizens in the crowds as well. But there were many illegal immigrants as well. Were it up to me, I would have used the manpower of law enforcement officials at the protest sites to round up as many illegal immigrants as possible and deport them all. Why this wasn’t done makes no sense to me.

I’ve seen the news all day showing various individuals complaining how may of the illegals have created families and are part of communities having lived in this nation for decades. Is this supposed to make me feel bad about their situation? The fact they have been a drain on the system for decades, and knowing that my tax dollars have helped to pay their medical bills and college tuitions without any contribution from them is not endearing to me. Do you feel bad that all the money you have paid in taxes every week and by April 15th every year goes to benefit people that NEVER pay taxes or have them taken out of their pay?[ok, not all your taxes but yet a good portion of them] Do you feel bad that there are entitlement programs in existence just to help them have better lives, and we cannot get relief or help from those same programs because we make too much money and are citizens of our own country? Makes me all warm and fuzzy.

I’ve listened to the illegal aliens and ultra-liberals cry about how families are being broken up with the current policy. But I forgot when it was I invited any of these people to come here, and then have kids. Each of them knew that if they got caught they would be deported, so it’s not a sudden risk just was added by the government. In addition, many of these illegal immigrants know that many liberal cities and officials won’t deport a family that have children (especially if the child is a citizen by being born here) who cannot support themselves. I have no doubt that some chose to have children just so the difficulty is increased. Smart plan, but highly deceptive. Hardly endearing.

Were it my choice, I’d deport the parents and the kids go into the governments care. I’d rather pay taxes for the state to raise a kid than keep their parents illegally in the nation longer. They made the choice and knew the potential problems. I don’t feel bad when the consequences of their actions come to fruition as negative actions to them.

I have to ask another question. If so many illegal immigrants have the balls to clog up our streets, protesting our laws, and making demands of us, why in the world don’t they go and change the government and laws in their own lands? Maybe for some it’s because it would take hard work, time, and there wouldn’t be any bleeding hearts waiting in the wings ready to give away their hard earned assets for no reason other than the fact they exist. Maybe that is part of the reason, maybe not. Either way they still don’t deserve any of the things we allow them to have here. The very least they could do while enjoying this free ride is to get out of the streets and stop demanding anything.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: college tuition, illegal immigrant, immigration policies

This post is in reference to a comment made to the post Immigration and student aid for college

First I would like to thank Anonymous and Mike for responding. I know that these issues are a trigger point for many people, and that some may respond without spellchecking their comments. It’s not a big concern, but I mention it because I do not alter any aspect of the comments made. I just suggest pausing before sending the response, no matter how passionate you are on the issues (and I’m sure that is the cause of any typos and missing words your comments may contain).

To Anonymous I wish to say that my position does not change whether any illegal alien is proven to be a great person or not. If Mother Theresa was an illegal alien, I would not provide her healthcare or student aid as stated in my post. I don’t care how worthy an illegal alien may be, they don’t belong here and thus deserve nothing. That is my feeling, as stated above.

To Mike, I think you failed to read through the post intensely, or perhaps I was not clear. While I did make an assumption that a major motivation for the intense efforts against Hispanic illegal aliens is the ease in identifying them it is not merely due to the color of their skin. That is a part, but it is also the fact that many are not bi-lingual or even marginally competent in English. That lack of ability to communicate in the national language (and yes English is the national language) AND their darker color makes them an easier target than say a British White female. That not racist, it is a fact. If I am correct and the motivation of many lawmakers and others is solely fixed against Hispanic illegal aliens due to a fear based on their different look and manner of speech (like their influence is somehow ‘tainting’ America – one argument I have heard and dislike) then that is racist. I thought I had made this point directly, if I did not here it is now.

I must dispute another of your thoughts; it is skin color and language as opposed to standard of living and quantity. The policy on immigration to the United States has always been skewed to Europe versus any other country since the time of the first policy being made. It continues to emphasize immigration for Europeans today. I have not been to Italy, but I understand it to not be the same standard of living as here. Nor is most any other part of Europe except England.

When this policy says that a Polish, or Croatian, or Russian immigrant has an easier chance to immigrate, and has more chances as there are 3x as many people allowed than say Africans or South Americans, then I must conclude it is about skin color. Poland or Russia, as examples, is not similar in lifestyle, quality of life, or language yet they are given greater slots for entering this nation. That is a bias that’s sole, as I understand it, reason is color of skin. That is racist, if my understanding is correct.

But the focus of the post was more to the point of the disparity that should not exist. The argument of creating walls at our border with Mexico is claimed to be needed for security reasons. That seems silly when it’s considered that Canada is where all terrorists that have attacked, and several that planned to attack, this nation entered from. Lifestyle is not a factor here, nor is quantity of people. The argument is made for homeland security and thus Canada and not Mexico is the greater threat.

Continued in part 2...

Labels: Canada, homeland security, illegal aliens, illegal immigrant, Mexico

Well a lot is being said about immigration as the next voting cycle approaches. Various senators and representatives are on both sides of this issue. Fear is also high as a factor dealing with the question of what to do. Amnesty, walls, and other compromises are being stated as races move forward.

As I have mentioned before [in post So what about Canada?] all the questions are firmly focused on Mexico and Hispanics with no mention of Canada. I can only assume that the reason is that Hispanics are darker skinned and more easily identified than any other illegal immigrants in this nation. If that is the case it is very sad. The youth of the nation should take note. If this is the reason of the focus, which I think it is or at least the major part, then it is just a very visible expression of racism in this nation. While the youth may deny or not notice racism it still exists. This is just one form of it.

I say it is racist because if we were to truly be concerned about our borders we would have more action to the north. Of course the size of our border with Canada makes it difficult at best to manage. Yet no thoughts of fences have ever been made to the north. Their are no ‘minute men’ or other watchdogs patrolling our larger open spaces in the north with our quiet neighbor.

That is not to say Canada is a hot bed of incursion, but the facts are that several terrorists [let’s face it a large part of the current impetus to restrict our southern border is due to the fear of terrorists entering the nation] have arrived from the north not the south. If we want to act on our fear we should do so in a fair and proportionate manner. Where the greatest threat has appeared the greatest safeguards should exist. That has not happened, and seems unlikely if it will anytime soon.

I am upset by illegal immigration as well. Not for the fear of terrorists infiltrating the nation with the illegals but for other reasons. [As comedian Mr. Carlos Mencia aptly put it, I paraphrase, ‘The Mexicans don’t want any terrorists screwing up their ability to cross the border. One terrorist get thru and does something and the next thing you know the military is on the whole border and nobody will be able to get over. They don’t want that. So if a possible terrorist is in the van he will be pointed out.’] I do not agree with anyone receiving medical treatment, or financial aid that is not a citizen. I pay taxes [and the IRS knows it] every year and with every purchase, to fund programs aimed at benefiting those less capable than myself. Regardless of my qualms on how much should be taken from me, or how much aid is needed by someone trying to better themselves, it is my strong feeling that that money be directed to other citizen who do pay taxes as well (whether those taxes are for purchases or IRS it doesn’t matter). It is not the responsibility of this nation to take care of those in our borders illegally.

Would I support emergency care that prevents imminent death? Yes. But if you have diabetes or high blood pressure, go back to your nation for medication. Do I think children should be able to get proper healthcare? Yes, if you are a citizen. Do I think that an illegal immigrant child deserves to pay in-state rates for state-run colleges? No, they are not citizens of the state or country. They pay out of state fees at best if not foreign student rates. They definitely do not deserve to receive student aid that is for citizens. My taxes are for the betterment of young citizens trying to improve their minds that in turn will help this country continue the quality of life that currently exists into the future.

I cannot fathom the argument that allows my money to benefit an illegal alien in gaining a higher education while denying that right to an African American, Hispanic or other citizen. What is the benefit to the nation? How does this improve America? How does this discourage more illegal aliens from bringing their children? Where does it stem the drain on my taxes.

America is not an open door to everyone. Our immigration policies need improvement, that is a given. We can do better, given. But for those that enter without permission we have no obligation. Nor do we have the need to improve their lives at the cost of our own children. There is only so much money that is available for various programs. Each dollar spent on an illegal alien is money taken from a citizen, and that is not what I pay taxes for. Especially when higher education is involved.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Labels: border crossing, Canada, Carlos Mencia, illegal aliens, illegal immigrant