Defending Tester from the eggheads

Tester both consistent and right (0.00 / 0)

It's a great mystery to me why so many on the left want amnesty for illegal immigrants.  I'm as left as most, but on this issue I think some leftists are unintellibible. 

Illegal immigrants coursing into our country help big agribusiness, building contractors, hotels, and food processors by giving them a workforce of virtual slaves.  Just as the Old South depended on slaves to sustain their economy, places like San Diego (coverage of the fires reveals) depend heavily on illegal immigrants for their workforce.

One tomato farmer, who admitted virtually all of his workers were illegals, didn't want to evacuate them when a wildfire approached his ranch.  The discussion on CNN was about whether or not he had the right to keep "his" workers in a dangerous work situation.  (After all, they were HIS property.)

My question, watching this discussion, was why the farmer wasn't arrested on the spot for hiring illegals and his workers deported.  Present day plantation owners shouldn't get special treatment under the law, but they do.

Police the border.  Bust employers who employ illegals.  Deport illegals.  You can advocate these measures without being a rabid right winger.

Let's not accept the line that there are too many illegals to deal with. The deportation of 12 million illegal immigrants begins with a single deportation.

 

---

by: Turner @ Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 16:51:27 PM UTC

Keeping immigrants off the legal books (0.00 / 0)

is what perpetuates the problem. Legalizing them makes it easier to prosecute the unethical employers for wage slavery, opens up opportunities to unionize, and generally undermines the problem.

Simply blaming the immigrants doesn't solve the problem. And cracking down hasn't been shown to be particularly effective at stopping the tide of immigration.

I'm not calling Jon a liar or anything. I just disagree with him on this issue.

As for Harold Meyerson, I typically like the guy, but what a stupid comment.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 17:51:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Matt's response (0.00 / 0)

to my post was disappointingly evasive and dishonest.  Like others on the left who are incomprehensible on this issue, he refuses to acknowledge the difference between two groups of people: LEGAL immigrants and ILLEGAL immigrants.

It's as though he were wired linguistically so that he's incapable of placing the adjective "illegal" in front of the noun "immigrants." 

Refusing to make the distinction leads to nonsense. "Keeping immigrants off the legal books is what perpetuates the problem," he says.  But what is he talking about? No employer I've ever heard of keeps LEGAL immigrants off the books.  Why would they?  It's true that some employers keep ILLEGAL immigrants off the books, and in my opinion they should be prosecuted not gotten off the hook by having their wage-slaves legalized (an amnesty that would encourage an even larger tidal wave of illegal immigration).

Evasive and dishonest statement number two: "Simply blaming immigrants doesn't solve the problem."  This is a straw man argument if I've ever seen one.  Who are these people he's accusing of "blaming immigrants"?  Not me.  Not anyone I know. In fact, I welcome LEGAL immigrants into our country.  Legal immigrants have always helped our country more than they're harmed it.

I don't welcome, however, ILLEGAL immigrants into our country.  Big agribusiness welcomes them.  Union-busting corporations welcome them.  Prostitution rings welcome them.  And, by insisting on clumping them together with LEGAL immigrants, Matt and other leftists who are incomprehensible on this issue apparently welcome them.

Finally, there's his lame (but probably not dishonest) assertion that "cracking down hasn't been particularly effective."  How does he know?  Has there ever been a serious effort to enforce legal immigration?  No.  There have been only the sporadic, isolated, for-the-camera raids of a few businesses.  But, because big business loves illegals immigrants so much, there's been no "cracking down." 

By the way, I usually agree with Matt.  I think he makes sense on virtually all issues except illegal immigration.

---

by: Turner @ Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 16:58:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How do you find the illegal immigrants? (0.00 / 0)

Threatening to run them out means they won't step forward to talk about labor abuses -- which means the labor abuses continue.

Can we really deport 12 million people? I just don't think it is feasible. And every study I've seen of stepped up border security shows that it does little to stop entrance into the U.S., while doing a lot to keep people here once they've made it across.

My opposition to crack-downs is largely pragmatic. I think illegal immigration isn't the problem in itself -- and that the related problems, like labor market impacts and the like, need to be handled in ways that actually work.

I don't think this is evasive. It's just honest disagreement, same as I have with Jon Tester on it. I think I understand where you're coming from. I just disagree that your methods will be effective.

---

by: Matt Singer @ Sat Oct 27, 2007 at 21:31:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

illegals (0.00 / 0)

I always find the immigration discussion to be long on negativity, fear, and hate, and short on positive solutions.

How about a one or two page form that anyone wanting to work in America fills out and signs? Once signed you have a legal right to work here.  Stay and work if you want, leave if you want. You would pay taxes etc. and have use of social services. But the fear of being used (a slave)or deported, is gone once you sign it. Maybe there's a provision that makes a legal worker return to their country of origin for at least one week a year and then they can return to work for another 52 weeks...some incentive to work toward becoming a citizen.

As for "free" trade...so long as Max Baucus, and Dems like him, is involved we will have toothless trade agreements that benefit no one but multi national corporations. Lets hope Tester does not follow Max's lead on trade.

---

by: bigsage @ Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 17:59:45 PM UTC