If everyone of these un-professional politicians elected to DO did what they were elected to do, meaning to PROTECT our borders and national security and to make sure that by their setting an example, the rest of the 300 million rich & poor could “behave” because everyone regardless should uphold the Law, because the Law is the Law as you said……that will automaticly holt the entrance of aliens to this coun try!

But you as everyone else know that politician$ nedd money, lots of it, to run their campaigns and that employers, contractors, cabinet members, and just about evryone WANTS CHEAP labor and “contribute$$$$$” to their campaigns, therefore they must have their illegal alien working somehow for LOW wages they would pay to hire a national….

in order for the IA to built their homes, manufacturing plants, harvest their food, wine & gardens, cook their meals, serve in restaurants, kill the cows & pack their meat, mow the lawns, choffer their cards, babyseat their brats, built their roads etc, etc, etc

Most politicians speak with a forked-tonge and everyone concerned with the wave of IA should demand accountability from them!

Some illegal aliens risk their lives crossing air, land and sea for a better life…..some come into this copuntry legally with a VISA that expires and join the IA lists….I’m for enforcing the law and our borders, but the enforcement of the law, is not working, when it comes to enforcing the law…and i worder why?

Maybe there was a punch line at the end of this play, but the set up was too lengthy to read to the end.

And you might want to think again about the relationship between an American dominated world economy and those “hellholes.” You misread me if you think I said they weren’t poor places. But consider 1) how they got poor and 2) why your first measure of a place is the economic.

The point is not a celebration of American nationalism. Indeed, I actually find it surprising that you read it that way…at all. The point is completing the circle of thought, instead of stopping mid-gap, according to your own political leanings.

On the right, the stop is clearly racially motivated…that we are somehow watering-down the country built on immigration with more immigration. To carry this further, the loss of high-wage jobs in manufacturing overseas to be replaced with low-wage work in the service economy is also a cross to bear (and, for that matter, how great is it that we tolerate near-inhumane work conditions in Shenzhen and the rest?)

In the center, there’s a ‘but its wrong to come here if you’re not going to commit to the country’ thought. I clearly agree with this thought. It is hardly naive to look back at our history and find no parallel to the current immigration pattern. Or maybe there is, as the last ‘guest worker’ program came from Africa. Seriously…if you come here.

On the left, there’s an overabundance of tolerance in this regard. Diversity is great…a multiplicity of thoughts, cultures and ideologies are a good thing, the sign of a strong government and populace. But…is it REALLY all that great to have ‘guest workers’ doing the jobs that Americans won’t? Is that not merely ‘in-sourcing?’

And all three broadly defined groups never complete the thought. The right wants racial purity and better jobs for white folk…but they also want to shop at a big-box retailer and pay less and less and less for goods there.

The center wants legal immigration, wants people to come here with the want and need to become American citizens…but also wants the reduced prices that go along with it.

And the left just wants tolerance of all cultures and ideas, which is noble, but also negates the reality of the situation: we are working these people to the bone for no money…so that we don’t have to! Are we, the people that lazy…that willing to turn a blind eye, all in the name of tolerance?

The point is that there is cause and effect…and that it’s not just one thing, but all things that intertwine to create the current reality. You can’t have ‘good’ American jobs if you won’t pay American citizens at the very least a minimum wage to do them. You can’t ‘Buy American’ unless you accept that our country’s standard of pay is higher than those we outsource to. And you can’t enjoy all the good and the bad of the country unless you accept citizenship. That’s the deal. It’s a hard sell, I admit, but that’s it.

I actually consider myself to be pretty left of center, so I’m astonished that this could be read as ‘right.’

This may be exposed in the rather spirited defense of the american worker and consumer (conflated with the notion of “citizen”). Our factories are moved overseas (and jobs are lost), the dollar loses value (and we buy more junk from those cheaper overseas factories).

Such quaint notions in the context of global capitalism. Maybe not a “Bubba” desire for 40’s politics, but certainly a longing for a time when “America” was the top economic dog. And perhaps this is most obviously betrayed when the countries of origin of immigrants are referred to as “hellholes.”

Such a naive understanding of the origins of poverty in the world and the impact of American wealth is not charming.

On your second point…I agree, to a degree. Southerners SHOULD talk about minority rights, and SHOULD talk about their past and present, to build a better future. Do you really think they will? Visit Atlanta, where the white folk live quite separated from the black folk. Or Alabama. To put it another way…there’s no logic in leaving the city you built behind for a one hour commute…unless it’s, at least, somewhat racially motivated.

But again, it’s an opinion piece. You are allowed to disagree.

Thank god there’s no such thing as classism. I can’t wait for Mr. Gordon’s exposition on parecon.

> When you’re talking immigration, it helps to have the blinders off
> (and this is exactly why one should not talk minority rights in the
> Deep South.)

Actually, it’s exactly why you should talk about minority rights in the deep south.