Happy Cinco De Mayo! Shoot the Mexican Hordes!

Matt Welch | May 5, 2005

Thanks to the open invitation from the possibly former illegal immigrant Arnold Schwarzenegger, those lovable Minutemen are now trickling into the Golden State to defend our deserts. One of my favorite things about the anti-reconquista brigades, besides a brooding paranoia that recalls the best of mid-'70s cinema, is how they can barely complete a sentence without insisting they're not racist. Here's the first lines from Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-Colorado), the Lou Dobbs of the House of Representatives, writing in a special L.A. Times opinion section on immigration:

People who say it's racist to want secure borders are insulting the intelligence of the American people, and such charges betray an empty arsenal of serious arguments.

Of course, his opponents aren't saying it's "racist to want secure borders" (because of course it's not); we're just saying, and probably not often enough, that the secure-borders crowd includes many who are rather peculiarly obsessed with the devilish nature of The Other. Take this e-mail from the Second Amendment SIG, forwarded to me approvingly last night from the California Coalition for Immigration Reform:

You BETTER be involved in this issue - the way Bush is letting in ARMED ILLEGALS the need for all of us to be ARMED and to known how to use those arms is of the utmost importance. We have those Latino GANGS EVERYWHERE. They love to take over small towns (Decatur, AL is FILLED with them) near major highways as refueling stops for the HOARDS of other ILLEGALS who are freely entering America with thanks to the BUSHITES (McCain - Frist- Cheney).

How will you protect your family when these GANGS decide they want to move into your house after they have taken control of your town.They can do this because the police are either too fearful to take them on or the PAYOFF for not enforcing the law is better pay than that paycheck from tax funds. It all boils down to MONEY &CONTROL. If your police force isn't grabbing these criminals then you better ask WHY THEY AREN'T.

The best thing is to have your own protection - your own *Social Security* - and know how to hit what you aim at. If your aim isn't that good - get a good scatter gun - hard to miss with one of those.

The CCIR website includes such sober public-policy observations as Meet the Mechista Weasel who Wants to Be L.A's Next Mayorista. At AmericanPatrol.com, we are urged to "Help keep this Mexican nationalist out of the L.A. mayor's office," a reference to Antonio Villaraigosa, who was born in the United States and doesn't even speak very good Spanish. Over at anti-Villaraigosa HQ, we are told that re-electing Mayor Jim Hahn will "stop the takeover of L.A. by Mexico City."

And this ain't cherry-picking -- that is the widespread sentiment, and the emotional fuel, within the anti-illegal-immigration movement. Tancredo and his rag-tag army want us to admit that securing the borders isn't racist, and that immigration is a difficult and pressing public policy issue. He'll get no argument from me on either point. But to pretend that race-based hysteria is not a factor in this movement, and to ignore that such hysteria has led to shamefully illiberal and overtly racist policies in the past, is to bury one's head deep in the desert sand.

Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

|5.5.05 @ 2:03PM|#

Damn, this sure sounds familiar...the post from earlier today...race card...oh yeah!

But, you know, that breathless rant from CCIR makes a good point: unless we put up 50-foot walls around the entire continental united states, then we're all screwed. Evil Chicano gangs will be squatting in our living rooms and raping our womenfolk before you can say "won't somebody please think of the children!?" But, if we secure the borders, then, everything will be fine and dandy. No gangs, nosiree. No violence. No need to own a gun for protection. Nope. Just one big happy society...as long as we can keep them beaners down below that border line...

|5.5.05 @ 2:12PM|#

There's no question that the border is a security issue.

...but every suggestion that California Republicans should go big on immigration should be met by a mob of old school, anti-Tax Republicans carrying placards bearing Pete Wilson's face in a state of shock.

|5.5.05 @ 2:15PM|#

"People who say it's racist to want secure borders are insulting the intelligence of the American people, and such charges betray an empty arsenal of serious arguments."

Then why, Congressman Asswhipe (R-Jesusland),why everytime I get into an discussion over immigration--legal or illegal--my opponent usually resorts to describing them as "spics," "wetbacks," "greasers," "gooks" "rice-eaters," "towel-heads," "punjabs," or a host of other racial pejuratives?

Normally I wouldn't give these milita kooks a first thought, much less the privilage of a second. But when you have fascist mother-fuckers like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Rielly cheering these KKK wannabes on to their audience of millions, then I get a little nervous.

There is the smell of a lynch mob in the air when I read about these redneck scum. Sooner or later, one of these yahoos is going to find a latino kid who was at the wrong place at the wrong time, and he or she is going to end up dead. Somebody needs to step on the Minutemen roaches, and step on them HARD before things get worse.

|5.5.05 @ 2:19PM|#

Sorry, this has got me so pissed off that I forgot to spell check. Here's a revised version of my last post:

"People who say its racist to want secure borders are insulting the intelligence of the American people, and such charges betray an empty arsenal of serious arguments."

Then why, Congressman Asswipe (R-Jesusland),why every time I get into an discussion over immigration--legal or illegal--my opponent usually resorts to describing them as "spics," "wetbacks," "greasers," "gooks" "rice-eaters," "towel-heads," "punjabs," or a host of other racial pejoratives?

Normally, I wouldn't give these militia kooks a first thought, much less the privilege of a second. But when you have fascist mother-fuckers like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Rielly cheering these KKK wannabes on to their audience of millions, then I get a little nervous.

There is the smell of a lynch mob in the air whenever I read anything about these redneck scum. Sooner or later, one of these yahoos is going to find a Latino kid who was at the wrong place at the wrong time, and he or she is going to end up dead. Somebody needs to step on the Minutemen roaches, and step on them HARD before things get worse.

|5.5.05 @ 2:21PM|#

Edit: for thier audiences of millions...

|5.5.05 @ 2:22PM|#

...oh yeah, and Happy Cinco de Mayo!

I need a margarita and some carne asada right now. Waitress!

...Of course, carne asada, margaritas, etc. are highly affordable because of all the low cost labor available here in California. So when you raise your glass tonight, raise it to the good people of Mexico! I hope as many hard working, law abiding Mexicans immigrate here as there are Mexicans who want to come.

|5.5.05 @ 2:24PM|#

You can usually ferret out the racist ones rather quickly by asking them their opinion of legal immigration from Mexico.

|5.5.05 @ 2:30PM|#

If your police force isn't grabbing these criminals then you better ask WHY THEY AREN'T.

As I recall, several years back during the Rampart scandal (purely a few bad apples, of course), the LAPD started handing over to INS a lot of illegals....who turned out to have witnessed serious crimes committed by cops. Investigators had to go to other countries to interview witnesses.

And I seem to recall that being part of the reason why LAPD is no longer allowed to inquire about a person's immigration status.

Whatever one might think about immigration, can we all agree that some guy mowing lawns without government permission is less of a threat to our way of life than a cop who brutalizes and frames innocent people?

|5.5.05 @ 2:34PM|#

An organization like the MM makes my very nervous, but so far I have to give them the benefit of the doubt. From day one they've actively requested the presence of both law enforcement officials and the media, and have actively policed their own ranks for Klan-type whackos. That's not typical behavior for people who have an insidious hidden agenda. Of course, it could just be brilliant PR, but that sort of image is tough to maintain when you have an organization cobbled together like this. Also, what might happen if the law/media oversight was not there should give anyone pause.

Onto the broader issue of a hyper-sensitivity to cries of racism...well, I think that's a pretty well founded concern. My own initial thoughts about the MM were that they were a bunch of rednecks who wanted to go shoot some spics. At this point, as I mentioned above, their actions are not in accordance with that mindset. That doesn't mean I agree with them, only that so far they've defied my stereotypes. Regardless of Akira's experiences (which I suspect many of us have had), it is preceisely those types of people that make a rational argument about immigration control impossible to have without constantly distancing yourself from the irrational racist arguments.

I believe the crux of the matter really rests with the inefficient and incompotent process for legal immigration (from a gov't program? Gasp!). When people have to wait for close to a decade to enter the country legally, while rotting in whatever awful circumstance they're in, it's only natural that they start walking across the border illegally.

Steve M|5.5.05 @ 2:35PM|#

But Thoreau, those 'peaceful' lawnmowers are stealing jobs from Americans who want to do manual labor for a pittance, and they could be a front for al-Qaeda! Those Latinos and Arabs all look alike!

|5.5.05 @ 2:37PM|#

I think we as a people could learn so much about this sensitive issue (and really, what isn't a "sensitive" issue these days?) by sitting down together and watching Richard "Cheech" Marin's "Born in East L.A."

The Wine Commonsewer|5.5.05 @ 2:49PM|#

Already had my carne asada sans Margarita.

I personally think that there are only 8 to 10 people in Californicate who don't hate Mexicans.

However, there is a legitimate point here and I think the vigilantes are making it. Under current law the BP is charged with securing the border and they are doing an abysmal job of it.

The motivations of the Posse notwithstanding, if the Border Patrol was doing it's job the whole point would be moot and there would be no Posse patrolling the border, regardless of whether those people are racist, silly, stupid, or not.

I am compelled to add that this is a completely separate issue from the debate about how to secure the borders or if we should have open borders.

And I don't have to add that none of the 09-11 terrorists came across the border from Mexico.

Great Header for this thread. I love it.

|5.5.05 @ 2:54PM|#

I am only concerned about the white trash in my neighborhood. You know the ones, they holler out racial slurs while drinking buttweiser. They seem to think that manual labor is below them so they collect welfare and food stamps while complaining about fourners stealing American jobs. When they are not watching Jerry Springer via Comcasts low (no) income package, they are watching the cops hassle the one black guy who has a taillight out.

I need some Minute Brothers patrolling my hood!

|5.5.05 @ 3:00PM|#

I can't seem to get Missy Elliott's One Minute Man out of my head whenever those guys come up in conversation. Thankfully, it's got a pretty good beat to it.

|5.5.05 @ 3:05PM|#

Kris, maybe we could initiate some sort of exchange program? Well trade our drunken, jobless, whining white-trash for their oppressed peasants who want to do my dry-cleaning and retile my floor.

Of course, our WT might not like the idea of living in Mexico, but we'll just tell them that there's plenty of wetbacks to shoot and that 5 American dollars is probably enough to bribe their way out of jail.

Akira,

The proper perjorative is beaner, thank you very much.

|5.5.05 @ 3:06PM|#

Of course the big pink Elephant that no one wants to talk about (or knows about) is that the single largest source of illegal immigration is China, not Mexico or the rest of Latin America. I guess inspecting cargo containers isnt as sexy as camping out in the desert with a rifle.

|5.5.05 @ 3:12PM|#

The Chinese actually have a pretty good racket going. They bring them over by the boatload and sell them equipment and food to open a Chinese restaurant, house 30 of them in a 2-bedroom apartment and reap profits until they can pay off their debts...which may be never.

Also, I suppose that those who continually complain that Mexicans need to learn English (or is it American?) never lived in Chinatown. I had to buy things by pointing and awkwardly nodding my smiling head for 3 years in downtown NYC. Of course, NYC probably is equivalent to a foreign country for many.

|5.5.05 @ 3:18PM|#

Great post, Matt

*sigh* I despair of this issue ever being resolved, because of all the nutbags it brings out.

They're coming here to WORK for chrissakes, why can't we accomodate them legally? Meanwhile, the rampant exploitation of the illegalsthemselves continues unabated.

fyodor|5.5.05 @ 3:22PM|#

the BP is charged with securing the border and they are doing an abysmal job of it.

People have been saying that for at least 30 years (maybe longer, but I didn't pay much attention to political issues before that...). Maybe the BP are consistently underfunded or maybe they consistently don't care about their jobs...or maybe it's a consistently intractable problem? Much like stopping drugs from coming into the country?

BTW, I remember a photo in National Enquire of this guy in a uniform with his fingers up his anus with the caption: "US border guard picking his ass." Pretty funny. But I question whether they're really to blame. Lonewacko will of course disagree. And then some!

The Lonewacko Blog|5.5.05 @ 3:31PM|#

Shoot the Mexican Hordes!

Wow, this post is so full of BS I don't know where to begin.

Even the New York Times has reported on illegal alien gangs in small towns.

Antonio Villaraigosa might be an American citizen, but he's occasionally acted like he's a bit unsure of which country he's supposed to represent.

He's also a former leader of the racial separatist organization MEChA.

There are certainly bad people who support reduced immigration.

But, there are also bad people who favor open borders.

The problem is you have sneering "liberals" who are able to highlight the first group, but who refuse to even discuss the second group.

The L.A. Times, for instance, refuses to cover the questionable pasts of people like Antonio Villaraigosa.

For instance, here's a picture of Antonio Villaraigosa on stage with Augustin Cebeda of the Brown Berets.

And, here's something the latter said on another occasion:

"...Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out [of the U.S. Southwest]! We [Mexicans] are the future. You are old and tired. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people, it is your duty to die."

Let's see Reason start race-baiting threads about things like that.

|5.5.05 @ 3:32PM|#

Tough issue. If you've never lived in or near a border town its easy to label them all a bunch of racists and nuts.

Thanks to the fact that our borders don't move around, we don't get the luxury of finding out how many free-immigration True Believers there are, and now many NIMBY's. Everybody who's never lived near the Mexican border can disguise themselves as True Believers, their latent NIMBY'ism forever carefully concealed.

Used to about 15 miles from the Mexican border. When you have extremely desperate people with no i.d., and no accountability to anyone, tiptoeing through your backyard, jiggling your car door handles at 4 am etc., it puts you in semi-constant droning state of perpetual background paranoia. You have no way of knowing if the poor bastard on your back porch is just down on his luck and looking for work, or an escaped felon. Which is why these guys sound so nutty, IMO. They've been living with this weird paranoid sensation a long time.

And what really seems to be the deal breaker for them is a government talking out of both sides of its mouth -- on the one hand Bush talks about how he has singlehandedly saved America from annihilation thanks to his initiatives to keep the bad guys out of America; while on the other, these folks who live in the border towns see first hand every single day of their lives what a bunch of utter, complete bullshit that is. It drives them nuts.

|5.5.05 @ 3:33PM|#

There's certainly not enough BP to patrol such a huge border, but that's only part of the problem. Local law enforcement are often forbidden from arresting illegals. The issue of illegal immigration can seem a little overblown to those of us who live in large cities or places otherwise removed from the border, but to those who live in towns close to the border, I would imagine the issue hits home a little harder. I can't say that I would feel safe if I had a bunch of hungry and desperate people literally sneaking across my backyard in the middle of the night.

Again, most of these problems would be solved by an efficient and reasonable entry protocol.

|5.5.05 @ 3:40PM|#

Hola Ken Shultz - Happy Cinco de Mayo to you too! I can't believe you're still in L.A.

|5.5.05 @ 3:41PM|#

fyodor - on cue. Are you the lonewacko? ;)

Stretch - that's the real thing, for me. If we just made it easier to let in those who want to come in legally we'd be so much better off. Just like with anything you make "illegal", you send it underground, where you can't keep track of it, and it draws scumbags from far and wide to handle it, since it is underground. My dad got his vehicle wrecked by an illegal with no DL, and he was applauding the MM, until I made the same argument to him. That really made him think (and my dad's no intellectual) about the issue much deeper.

fyodor|5.5.05 @ 3:44PM|#

Lowdog,

I may be a lonewacko, but I'm not the Lonewacko!! :-) I assure you I didn't know he would answer my "call" so quickly!

|5.5.05 @ 3:45PM|#

If any person without a criminal record could get a pass to enter at any checkpoint and work after passing a background check...

And if it were legal to bring drugs into the US...

Who would be left to sneak across the border?

Answer: Terrorists and other violent people.

Border violators would be a much smaller group of people, and they'd be much less sympathetic.

Could there be a lesson here?

R C Dean|5.5.05 @ 3:46PM|#

Lowdog et al.: you guys all sound like you agree with Bush's proposed plan - a wide open "guest worker" program, and increased enforcement on the people who are illegal nonetheless. Yes? No?

|5.5.05 @ 3:47PM|#

Tancredo and his rag-tag army want us to admit that securing the borders isn't racist, and that immigration is a difficult and pressing public policy issue. He'll get no argument from me on either point.

Do the motivations of anti-immigrationistas have to be racist to be wrong?

Motivated by racism or not, impeding migration is a violation of natural rights, and current immigration law is nothing but legislated discrimination based on a condition of birth. Sex, race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, national residence: Why has our society more or less gotten over the first five, but the last motivation for discrimination is never questioned?

fyodor|5.5.05 @ 3:49PM|#

RC Dean,

I've said before that it's a step in the right direction, and there, I've said it again.

Ranger|5.5.05 @ 4:18PM|#

I find it interesting that some of the same posts that lambast the use of racial pejorative do so using racial pejoratives.

i.e. "I'm sick if hearing some damned redneck call somebody a spic!".

Kind of like saying "Stop all the damn swearing!"

I usually found the comments on H&R to be well reasoned and logical. Many of these are just ironically ignorant name calling.

I fail to see how belittling those that belittle others serves as an acceptable counter-point to an argument with which you disagree.

|5.5.05 @ 4:21PM|#

An easy Problem to solve.
Import 20 million Chinese that will work for 25 cents an hour and all the Wets will go back to Mexico so they can make $2.00 an hour.

|5.5.05 @ 4:23PM|#

RC - I'll admit I've not read a lot about Bush's plan, but if your summary is accurate, then I'll have to agree with fyodor that it's a step in the right direction.

I haven't looked in depth at Bushs's proposal, but I suspect it's like most of his "work". It sounds good at first, but ultimately runs contrary to my beliefs. See "private accounts" for an example.

I've got no problem with anyone that wants to come here, work honestly, and make a better life for themselves. Hell, that's America. There should be zero necessity to enter the country illegally, unless you intend to do some harm for whatever reason. That's not the situation we're in, largely due to bureaucracy. It seems to me that creating yet another gov't program, one that allows legal working papers for a limited period of time, is just adding more bureaucracy and ignoring the major problem of legal-entry bottleneck.

Ranger|5.5.05 @ 4:26PM|#

Could there be a lesson here?

I think you've got a point there. Which, scares me a little bit. =)

With most immigration I think policies put the "cart before the horse" both in solutions and problems. Open borders COULD lead to additional problems with drugs and terrorism. However (WARNING:going off the top of my head!), ending the "war on drugs", freer trade -for goods and labor- and a streamlined naturalization process (people want/need to be here NOW not when the Fed gets around to that stack of paperwork) would allow us to better define who is and isn't a "bad guy".

Unfortunately, without addressing those problems first, having wide open borders risks tipping the scale in favor of those same "bad guys".

|5.5.05 @ 4:30PM|#

[i]If any person without a criminal record could get a pass to enter at any checkpoint and work after passing a background check...[/i]

For $20 and a case of Corona, I can have the Mexican police perform a background check on me that says that I am the Virgin of Guadalupe.

Kind of like my Role Model Judge Smails from Caddyshack said, "I sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. I felt I owed it to them", so then do I feel the urge to consign hard-working, law-abiding Mexicans to a life of deprivation.

If we allow the de facto open borders that we have now, what incentive does the world's most corrupt, incompentent & brutal government have to change?

(No, not China's government. Mexico's.)

What steps has Mexico taken to create rule of law & property rights?

Maybe a Quid Pro Quo? Privatize Pemex and we'll let in a million?

And it would help if Mexicans stopped throwing cups of urine at US soccer players and fans when we play them in LA.

|5.5.05 @ 4:33PM|#

And previous posters are right. Our drug laws = Paris Hilton. By comparison, our immigration laws = Marilyn Vos Savant.

When was the last time anyone heard of a Coors rep shooting up an Albertson's because he saw a Budweiser route driver making a delivery?

|5.5.05 @ 4:35PM|#

recordo---------05-05-05
felizadades los muchachos y hola puta mentirosa.

|5.5.05 @ 4:36PM|#

>>Sooner or later, one of these yahoos is going to find a latino kid who was at the wrong place at the wrong time, and he or she is going to end up dead. Somebody needs to step on the Minutemen roaches, and step on them HARD before things get worse.

|5.5.05 @ 4:45PM|#

Between those who just want to exploit cheap labor and those afraid of losing a voting bloc there is little chance of anything changing in the near future other than lip service.

In a sense the market is deciding in that there is a market for cheap labor so there is a supply. It's clear that the increased profit margin far outweighs the cost of getting caught since the majority of the risk is taken by the worker and not the employer.

WalMart paid $11M (about $6,000 per person-year) to settle with the fed. allegations. Does anyone actually believe that deters employers? I'd wager the settlement was to make the bad pr go away quickly and for that it was a bargain. Now that's what I call slashing prices.

Now if you'll all excuse me I have to insource(?) another translator for my gardener, the last one was deported.

|5.5.05 @ 4:46PM|#

Matt,

CA, like other border states, has an unfunded mandate to provide medical care and education to millions of immigrants from a third world country.

"Open boarders", fine. But, please send us money, and lots of it.

|5.5.05 @ 4:48PM|#

A couple other things that bug me about this......

-How come the activists that protest US mistreatment of immigrants never say anything about the way that the Mexican government officials rob, rape & murder Central Americans crossing through Mexico?

-What would happen if someone as palid as I am started an organization with a motto of "For the race, everything. Outside of the race, nothing."

My phone, computer, house & cat would be wiretapped, bugged or otherwise monitored by the FBI.

So then how come it's OK for Mecha to have that motto?

Jesse Walker|5.5.05 @ 4:56PM|#

I personally think that there are only 8 to 10 people in Californicate who don't hate Mexicans.

When I lived in Washington state, I got the impression that there were only 8 to 10 people there who didn't hate Californians. It would've been interesting to see some local minutemen guarding the Oregon border against the influx.

|5.5.05 @ 4:57PM|#

>>Now if you'll all excuse me I have to insource(?) another translator for my gardener, the last one was deported.

|5.5.05 @ 5:00PM|#

When it's fiesta time in Guadalajara,
Then I long to be back once again
In Old Mexico.
Where we lived for today, never giving a thought to tomara.
To the strumming of guitars
In a hundred grubby bars
I would whisper "Te Amo."

The mariachis would serenade,
And they would not shut up till they were paid.
We ate, we drank and we were merry,
And we got typhoid and dysentery.

|5.5.05 @ 5:15PM|#

>>Then why, Congressman Asswipe (R-Jesusland),why every time I get into an discussion over immigration--legal or illegal--my opponent usually resorts to describing them as "spics," "wetbacks," "greasers," "gooks" "rice-eaters," "towel-heads," "punjabs," or a host of other racial pejoratives?

|5.5.05 @ 5:17PM|#

When I lived in Washington state, I got the impression that there were only 8 to 10 people there who didn't hate Californians. It would've been interesting to see some local minutemen guarding the Oregon border against the influx.

Thanks for that absurd equivocation.

If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be. Do you have borders or not ?

|5.5.05 @ 5:27PM|#

Mexicans Still Think They Own the U.S.

|5.5.05 @ 5:30PM|#

John - what are you talking about? I can't figure out if you're for or against ending drug prohibition and if you're for or against rational immigration policy.

|5.5.05 @ 5:34PM|#

"Between those who just want to exploit cheap labor and those afraid of losing a voting bloc there is little chance of anything changing in the near future other than lip service."

The use of the word "exploit" is interesting here. I saw that corn was on sale at the grocery store last night, and I bought some. Am I "exploiting" farmers?

"WalMart paid $11M (about $6,000 per person-year) to settle with the fed. allegations. Does anyone actually believe that deters employers? I'd wager the settlement was to make the bad pr go away quickly and for that it was a bargain. Now that's what I call slashing prices."

I know someone who recently negotiated with Walmart to construct a new store. As part of Walmart's contract, the developer has to personally indemnify Walmart against the employment of a single illegal immigrant on the construction site. ...That includes illegals hired by sub-contractors!

...Yes, federal regulation deters employers.

Jesse Walker|5.5.05 @ 5:52PM|#

Thanks for that absurd equivocation.

I do not think you know what the word "equivocation" means.

|5.5.05 @ 5:58PM|#

"Mexicans Still Think They Own the U.S."

So what?

Inconceivable!

|5.5.05 @ 6:02PM|#

"If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be. Do you have borders or not?"

I keep tryin' to follow the reasoning here, but I've given up. I guess I'm just not smart enough to figure it out. Maybe someone else can help me?

|5.5.05 @ 6:05PM|#

Ranger-

Open borders COULD lead to additional problems with drugs and terrorism.

That's why I haven't suggested open borders. I favor a heavily guarded border that any peaceful person can pass after going through a background check.

For $20 and a case of Corona, I can have the Mexican police perform a background check on me that says that I am the Virgin of Guadalupe.

Well, we should probably make sure that the background check isn't done by Mexican police. But I will grant that foreign criminal databases may not be all that accurate (and foreign criminal convictions may not mean that the person actually did anything wrong if the authorities are corrupt). I was thinking more about checks against terrorist databases and US criminal databases, including fingerprints (if they lie about their names). Not a perfect system, but probably better than the status quo if it also disempowers coyotes and other smugglers. Coyotes charge hundreds or even thousands of dollars, and the crossing can take several days and be quite dangerous if they go through the deserts of Arizona. A background check with a fee of $100 and a 2-week waiting period would compare quite favorably.

If we allow the de facto open borders that we have now, what incentive does the world's most corrupt, incompentent & brutal government have to change?

(No, not China's government. Mexico's.)

I'm sure a few North Koreans, Zimbabweans, Turkmenistanis, and Saudi women (to name a few) would disagree with you there, but anyway...

What steps has Mexico taken to create rule of law & property rights?

Maybe a Quid Pro Quo? Privatize Pemex and we'll let in a million?

What does this have to do with anything? When my ancestors came here, nobody said to the British "You allow the Irish some home rule and sort out the potato famine and then we'll talk about how many we'll take." Nobody said to the Italians "You get those damn trains running on time and then we'll see how many people we'll take off your hands." And nobody told the Canadians to privatize their health care system before my grandmother could come over. (FWIW, I have no clue if Canadian health care was nationalized back then, but you get my point.)

Jesse

Equivocate:

"to speak in a way that is intentionally unclear and confusing to other people, especially to hide the truth"

I stand uncorrected.

Jesse Walker|5.5.05 @ 6:07PM|#

I keep tryin' to follow the reasoning here, but I've given up. I guess I'm just not smart enough to figure it out. Maybe someone else can help me?

I think the point is, he'd be perfectly happy to have a thousand pregnant Swiss girls, or a thousand Mexican virgins, but there's something about multiple bulging Hispanic wombs that sets him atwitter.

Anyway, I don't have a front lawn, but if I did, I wouldn't want a thousand people of any kind squeezed onto it. And, as the owner of the property, I'd be within my rights to kick them off. If the minutemen want to help me, they're welcome to.

Jesse Walker|5.5.05 @ 6:10PM|#

Richard: Glad to see you can use a dictionary. Not sure how that definition relates to anything I posted, but whatever. As my mom once told me, never debate a drooler.

|5.5.05 @ 6:22PM|#

If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be.

I swear I've never seen any of these girls before in my life!

|5.5.05 @ 6:27PM|#

Los Angeles Mexico

|5.5.05 @ 6:30PM|#

"Los Angeles, Mexico"

So what? So a stupd TV station put up a stupid a billboard!

...So what?

|5.5.05 @ 6:47PM|#

As my mom once told me, never debate a drooler.

That's an appeal to authority.

|5.5.05 @ 6:51PM|#

If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be.

I did not have sexual relations with those women.

|5.5.05 @ 7:06PM|#

Regarding cities and states and employers: why should any of them care one whit about someone's immigration status? The Constitution (remember that?) specifically charges the federal government to "establish a uniform rule of naturalization", from which the idea of legal/illegal immigration stems. This is a federal responsibility, not a state responsibility. A state should (must?) assume that if a person is in its jurisdiction, that person person has every right to be there. A federal screw-up is not the state's concern.

Similarly, why should an employer care about the immigration status of an employee? How can the feds justify the constitutionality of such regulations on a employer? The commerce clause? Come on! A guy who mows lawns has ZERO effect on interstate commerce. If you claim the feds have commerce clause power with regard to employer/employee relations, then the feds have commerce clause power with regard to buyer/seller relations, and could require proof of citizenship every time you try to buy something. That'll clear up that nasty immigration problem, won't it? (Because black markets are impossible, doncha know?)

Basically, attempts by the feds to draft employers and states into helping them enforce immigration law is just sheer laziness. The feds don't want to go to the trouble of making the Border Patrol an effective force. So they do what people in power have done since the beginning of time: they force others to do their bidding.

You know, the more you think about it, the more it seems the only remaining purpose to the Constitution is define the terms of service for federal officers. Given that elections to Congress are increasingly uncompetitive, even those provisions are more like suggestions than principles.

Jeez, I'm pessimistic today.

Matt Welch|5.5.05 @ 7:06PM|#

Lonewacko --

Even the New York Times has reported on illegal alien gangs in small towns.

Does that prove that Latino gangs are "EVERYWHERE," that "they love to take over small towns," and that "they want to move into your house after they have taken control of your town"?

Antonio Villaraigosa might be an American citizen, but he's occasionally acted like he's a bit unsure of which country he's supposed to represent.

This is your cowardice in a nutshell, 'wacko. American Patrol calls Villaraigosa a "Mexican nationalist," and the *most* you will do to correct that obvious bit of hysterical slander is to reluctantly admit that Antonio "might be an American citizen." Then, of course, you go on to second the questioning of Villaraigosa's patriotism. Is there *anything* from your camp that you would consider going too far? Do facts even matter? If so, please name *one* example of his whole supposed "unsure of which country he's supposed to represent" *besides* the hearsay report of praising the Mexican pol for opposing Prop. 187, or incendiary quotes some dude he once shared with said on some other occasion. Antonio's been a paid politician for a long time, now -- if he's a "Mexican nationalist," or a traitor, or a reconquista fanatic, or an anti-gringo racist, there should be a significant paper trail. Unless it's all totally secret!!!

|5.5.05 @ 7:37PM|#

I think the point is, he'd be perfectly happy to have a thousand pregnant Swiss girls, or a thousand Mexican virgins, but there's something about multiple bulging Hispanic wombs that sets him atwitter.

In terms of my sexual fantacies, I would prefer a brownish skin tone over a white one. And I'd prefer either of those over a strawman.

Has Jesse Walker lost his reason gene ?

|5.5.05 @ 7:47PM|#

Screw Tancredo and his knownothing demagoguery, screw Victor Davis Hanson and his pseudo-historic bullshit, screw Shelly "internment is kewl" Malkin and her idiotic Malkin-ness, screw Pat Buchanan just for being Pat Buchanan, screw the Minutemen for insulting the memory of the original Minutemen, screw the moronic talk hosts like Savage and Larson, (let me apologize to all the morons who are rightly offended being compared with Lars Larson), screw the neo-knownothings, screw 'em all.

|5.5.05 @ 7:48PM|#

I HATE how anonymous POSTERS try to to SCARE US with overblown RHETORIC designed to INFLAME us into a lynch MOB, then try to CONVINCE us to take radical ACTION.

Do YOU know what your neighbors are doing in PRIVATE? Where is your daughter going out at NIGHT? How much MONEY & POWER do your politicians have? How many CONSPIRACIES are out there? Did the author of this article ever finish THIRD GRADE?

|5.5.05 @ 7:49PM|#

Lonewacko is still more entertaining than Juan and Drooling Ricardo.

|5.5.05 @ 7:58PM|#

The use of the word "exploit" is interesting here. I saw that corn was on sale at the grocery store last night, and I bought some. Am I "exploiting" farmers?

No, but I hope you would exploit the corn, as the farmer surely tried. Granted the word does have a more sinister connotation than does "employ" but I think it applies well here in that someone using illegal labor has a cost advantage over a competitor who does not. I do not mean to imply that all employers of illegals treat their help unethically but surely some do, so I think the word fits for either context.

|5.5.05 @ 8:00PM|#

"And I'd prefer either of those over a strawman."

I already admitted I'm not smart enough to follow your reasoning Richard, but maybe if you explain it to me, real slow, I'll be able to get it.

When you wrote, "If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be. Do you have borders or not?" what did you mean exactly?

...and in what way did Walker's characterization of your statement present a straw man?

|5.5.05 @ 8:18PM|#

"and in what way did Walker's characterization of your statement present a straw man?"

I think the point is, he'd be perfectly happy to have a thousand pregnant Swiss girls, or a thousand Mexican virgins, but there's something about multiple bulging Hispanic wombs that sets him atwitter.

Read it. Jesse Walker just assumes that I am a racist and that I'd be happy to find a 1000 pregnant Swiss girls on my front lawn but be dismayed if they were Mexican.

|5.5.05 @ 8:19PM|#

L.A's Next Mayorista

I think the word you want is alcalde.

|5.5.05 @ 8:35PM|#

I'll try again Richard.

You wrote:

"If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be. Do you have borders or not?"

What does that mean?

|5.5.05 @ 9:00PM|#

It's not just that the statement is racist (the fact that he brings up an ethnicity at all shows that), the argument is really quite stupid. Can anyone rationally think of a situation where 1000 pregnant women of any racial group would congregate on Jesse Walker's front lawn?

|5.5.05 @ 9:17PM|#

Can anyone rationally think of a situation where 1000 pregnant women of any racial group would congregate on Jesse Walker's front lawn?

Discount diaper sale?

|5.5.05 @ 9:19PM|#

It's not just that the statement is racist (the fact that he brings up an ethnicity at all shows that)

The terms "Mexican" and "Swiss" refer to nationalities, not races.

Jesse Walker|5.5.05 @ 9:32PM|#

Apparently, Richard doesn't know what "strawman" means either.

|5.5.05 @ 9:38PM|#

"The terms "Mexican" and "Swiss" refer to nationalities, not races."

My... what an inane response. I would expect a response like this from a 13-year-old, but an adult?

|5.5.05 @ 9:40PM|#

The Poor Man had the best response to that whole "Los Angeles, Mexico" billboard crap.

|5.5.05 @ 9:56PM|#

My... what an inane response. I would expect a response like this from a 13-year-old, but an adult?

An argument's validity has nothing to the age or maturity of person who makes it.

|5.5.05 @ 10:03PM|#

oops,

insert after "to".

|5.5.05 @ 10:04PM|#

"An argument's validity has nothing to the age or maturity of person who makes it."

When you get around to making one, let me know.

The Lonewacko Blog|5.5.05 @ 10:24PM|#

Then, of course, you go on to second the questioning of Villaraigosa's patriotism.

There's evidence to question his patriotism as well as that of people like Nunez, Cedillo, Firebaugh, and more.

If so, please name *one* example of his whole supposed "unsure of which country he's supposed to represent" *besides* the hearsay report of praising the Mexican pol for opposing Prop. 187

It was on the front page of the L.A. Times. They thought it was a good thing.

Read about small town gangs in the NYT and see what they have to say.

if he's a "Mexican nationalist," or a traitor, or a reconquista fanatic, or an anti-gringo racist, there should be a significant paper trail.

You seem to be a bit deluded. Stop expecting the L.A. Times to report the truth and you might be OK.

Let me tell you how this is going to end up. If AV wins, he'll go from local to national. What you see at mayorno.com today might end up on national TV or in the NYT in a year or two.

At that time, expect all of his supporters, apologists, and defenders to take a significant hit against whatever credibility they had until that point.

Good luck.

|5.5.05 @ 10:58PM|#

Hey Matt: Didn't your parents ever tell you not to trust strangers? Or was it only white strangers you shouldn't trust?

Matt Welch|5.6.05 @ 12:26AM|#

Lonewacko -- Wow, you really don't have any answers, do you?

* There's a difference between saying "There's evidence to question his patriotism," and actually, um, providing evidence.

Just like when I challenged you on my website to come up with something specific Villaraigosa might do as Mayor of Los Angeles that we ought to be worried about, and the worst thing you could come up with was that the Mexican government had once donated books to an elementary school in New Mexico.

* I ask you to name just one example supporting your provocative claim that Villaraigosa is "unsure of which country he's supposed to represent," and you can't do it.

* I ask you whether a single instance written about in the New York Times proves -- as your allies claim -- that Latino gangs are "EVERYWHERE," that "they love to take over small towns," and that "they want to move into your house after they have taken control of your town" .... and you send me a link to the same New York Times story.

* I observe that a longtime public employee would have a helluva hard time hiding a traitorous agenda, and point out that there would be at least some recorded evidence of his perfidy ... and you refuse once again to show me any of that evidence, and instead respond lamely as if the L.A. Times is the only source of news on the planet. No, bro, it's you who needs to show some of that truth. You've got John & Ken and Terry Anderson and a bunch of other radio jocks, you've got Michelle Malkin & all her pleasant fans, you've got a thriving online community, you've got Lou Dobbs and Bill O'Reilly and Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan working overtime on this ... will one of you brave defenders of my sovereignty at long last show me how Antonio Villaraigosa is going to sell my city, state and country down the river?

Or maybe you just prefer complaining that The Media Doesn't Do Its Job, muttering darkly about conspiracies whose evidence consist on little more than 1999 Mickey Kaus blogposts, whining pre-emptively about charges of racism, and tossing off casual accusations of treason. I'm dying to be convinced, pal, but the more I ask for reason to believe, the more you call me "deluded." I'm beginning to think your gun is empty.

|5.6.05 @ 1:54AM|#

"The terms "Mexican" and "Swiss" refer to nationalities, not races."

My... what an inane response. I would expect a response like this from a 13-year-old, but an adult?

But three quarters of today's adults would agree with his sentiment: that it is okay to discriminate based on country of residence even if it's not okay to discriminate based on race.

At one time the notion that women had no rights separate from their families' was normal. At one time Jim Crow laws were normal. We have advanced past these and many other forms of bigotry.

But the fact that laws limiting immigration exist at all indicates that the society has not gotten past bigotry based on nationality.

The problem most see with the tragically named Minutemen is not that they are nationalist protectionist bigots. It's that the more civilized bigots among us have elected bigots to Congress who employ professional rights abrogators to prevent free migration, and the amateurs make the professionals look bad.

Jim Walsh|5.6.05 @ 2:01AM|#

(What follows is a hypothetical conversation based on some real conversations I've had with real people. Nothing but a Straw Man, you say? Nobody's really that hypocritical? Yeah, you wish...)

Me: I was just reading a story about illegal immigration...

Them: Don't stories like that make your blood boil? Why can't we, as a nation, see the problem? Why am I paying into the coffer so that these people can come over here and use up court resources, court funding, and even the food to feed them while they sit in jail?

Me: Interesting you would feel that way. Ya know, out on the east end of Long Island, where I used to live and work, they've had a serious influx of illegal immigrants in recent years...

Them: That's an outrage! They're gonna ruin America! Where are they from, anyway?

Me: Ireland.

Them: Ireland?

Me: Yeah, Ireland.

Them: Oh, so they're white...

Me: Well, yes...

Them: ...and Christian...

Me: Presumably...

Them: ...and speak English...

Me: Well, obviously...but that shouldn't make any-

Them: Why are you picking on those poor people? They're just here to make a better life for themselves...

|5.6.05 @ 2:05AM|#

"But three quarters of today's adults would agree with his sentiment: that it is okay to discriminate based on country of residence even if it's not okay to discriminate based on race."

But that's not the point. The point was that when someone says "Mexican" it's certain that they are speaking of a Latino, and when someone says "Swiss" it's an awfully high probability they mean a Caucasian. Drool-boy was playing a juvenile word game to dance around the issue of his apparent racism.

|5.6.05 @ 2:18AM|#

Of course, as a good friend pointed out, if the Minutemen and their Know-Nothing allies have their way, then the economy of the Southwest will dry up and blow away when there is no one to do entry-level and agricultural jobs that the prissy Anglos believe they are too good for.

Hopefully, before that happens, the business community will use every bit of clout they have to squash these goons.

|5.6.05 @ 2:23AM|#

I've got twenty bucks that says that even when called out directly, Lone Wolf will attack whomever's "credibility" before he links to anything.

|5.6.05 @ 2:28AM|#

Jim: I assume the other fellow was Pat Buchanan? (Sure an now, a fine, fine Cherokee name he has, faith an begorah!)

|5.6.05 @ 2:41AM|#

Lemme tell ya, there's nothing worse than foreigners with strange languages and religions coming in without permission and not respecting anybody else's sovereignty!

|5.6.05 @ 9:47AM|#

"There are certainly bad people who support reduced immigration.

But, there are also bad people who favor open borders.

The problem is you have sneering "liberals" who are able to highlight the first group, but who refuse to even discuss the second group."

Yeah, you know, those liberals who never have a bad word to say about how Wal Mart or Merry Maids exploit immigrant labor? You remember, THOSE liberals.

|5.6.05 @ 9:54AM|#

"Then why, Congressman Asswipe (R-Jesusland),why every time I get into an discussion over immigration--legal or illegal--my opponent usually resorts to describing them as "spics," "wetbacks," "greasers," "gooks" "rice-eaters," "towel-heads," "punjabs," or a host of other racial pejoratives?"

That's not fair, Akira. Most anti-immigration activists put in a great deal of effort to make sure racial epithets like those don't escape their lips.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.6.05 @ 10:14AM|#

>>>>When I lived in Washington state, I got the impression that there were only 8 to 10 people there who didn't hate Californians. It would've been interesting to see some local minutemen guarding the Oregon border against the influx.

Jesse, Remember that sign on the billboard on I-5 as you crossed into Oregon from Californicate? I can't remember exactly what it said anymore, something about Californians should stay home. Right behind it was the cop with the radar gun that seemed to only be effective on California plates. Then we stopped going to Oregon and their economy withered. They took the sign down.

Point being, they didn't need vigilantes in Oregon because the state was doing it for them (indirectly saving Seattle from the hordes). I suppose that ain't much of an analogy but it's the best I can do here. :-)

The Wine Commonsewer|5.6.05 @ 11:04AM|#

Drooling, believe it or not I understand your example, which many here do not. Understanding it doesn't make either of us a racist.

We all know what the problem is, it's the services offered by the state that attract citizens and non-citizens alike. When my friend Willie walked across the border in the 1940's there were no services available to him except the opportunity to have a job.

I was in the emergency room at the county hospital with my feverish (105 and climbing) son on Christmas morning.....175.00 for a cup of juice and two children's tylenol and we don't take Blue Cross neither and we'll make sure the insurance won't pay for it as an emergency by mucking up the paperwork and charging you for copies of the doctors notes.

And you resent that you are paying taxes to support that hospital. And everybody there but you is getting the same worthless service for free because they're broke and poor. And there is no question that Spanish is the predominant language spoken in the waiting room.

You start putting that information together and you get a lot of backlash from a lot of people. That isn't necessarily racism and even when it is it is born and bred by the government that can't pave the roads but can provide free medical care to any comers, legal citizens or not.

That's bullshit and a lot of people are pissed about it. I understand that but apparently most other people here don't.

That doesn't mean I'm a racist so don't even start with that. I've seen all the studies, I know that LA is lying about how much illegals cost them in tax money. I know that illegals contribute more than they take. I know that most illegals are men whose families are not here. I know that hispanics partake of social services at levels that are less than their numbers in the general population. But that stuff is all diffused and difficult to track or explain. It's so vague and indirect as to obscure the reality to a point where people simply throw up their hands.

Minimizing that problem or dismissing it as the musing of petty bigots amounts to the Ostrich approach. I'm afeared that this whole issue is a powder keg of Biblical proportions.

Lone Wacko may be over the top but there are millions who, rightly or wrongly, agree with him.

|5.6.05 @ 11:07AM|#

"I do not think you know what the word "equivocation" means."

Well, maybe I do, and maybe I don't, smart guy.

;-)

|5.6.05 @ 11:29AM|#

"We all know what the problem is, it's the services offered by the state that attract citizens and non-citizens alike. When my friend Willie walked across the border in the 1940's there were no services available to him except the opportunity to have a job."

You don't see any problem putting these sentences in close proximity?

Jesse Walker|5.6.05 @ 11:30AM|#

Wine Commonsewer: I never drove that far south on I-5 -- when I drove all the way through Oregon, I always took the desert route -- but I wish I'd seen that sign.

Akira: Another point might be that Drooling Richard himself said "Jesse Walker just assumes that I am a racist and that I'd be happy to find a 1000 pregnant Swiss girls on my front lawn but be dismayed if they were Mexican."

But at this point I suspect that DR is just trolling, and that he contradicted himself deliberately to get a rise out of people.

Shawn Levasseur|5.6.05 @ 12:23PM|#

Gotta love how all this talk about "Secure Borders" focuses only on our southern border.

Never mind the border crossing of choice for terrorists seems to be our northern border.

I would like better enforcement of immigration laws... If the laws were based on actual security concerns and not the fear of Mexican stereotypes.

|5.6.05 @ 1:21PM|#

>>. I know that Hispanics partake of social services at levels that are less than their numbers in the general population. >the economy of the Southwest will dry up and blow away when there is no one to do entry-level and agricultural jobs that the prissy Anglos believe they are too good for.>Them: That's an outrage! They're gonna ruin America! Where are they from, anyway?

Me: Ireland.>What does this have to do with anything? When my ancestors came here, nobody said to the British "You allow the Irish some home rule and sort out the potato famine and then we'll talk about how many we'll take."

The Wine Commonsewer|5.6.05 @ 2:13PM|#

The Wine Commonsewer|5.6.05 @ 2:15PM|#

Joe said, You don't see any problem putting these sentences in close proximity?"

Ooops, don't quite know how that got left out.

The Lonewacko Blog|5.6.05 @ 2:30PM|#

There's a difference between saying "There's evidence to question his patriotism," and actually, um, providing evidence.

I'm not going to repost the contents of mayorno.com or americanpatrol.com here. Based on what I've seen, as stated above, I question his patriotism and that of the others mentioned.

You don't seem to have done much research at those sites, prefering instead to concentrate on their tone and such rather than doing as future journalists might do: separate the verifiable facts from the POV.

Just like when I challenged you on my website to come up with something specific Villaraigosa might do as Mayor of Los Angeles that we ought to be worried about, and the worst thing you could come up with was that the Mexican government had once donated books to an elementary school in New Mexico.

Gosh, haven't you written about Saudi influence? Should we assume then that you think the Saudis spreading propaganda in the U.S. is OK?

Unfortunately, you seem to be in a state of denial and have a tendency to be unable to put things in a historical context and do research on this matter.

As the Mexican government has stated, they want to have influence over our policies and they claim that the 20 million people in the U.S. of Mexican ancestry - whether they've been here 200 years or 2 days - are all part of the greater Mexican Nation. Now, kneejerk apologists will of course dismiss that. However, those who have some sense will see a problem with that.

And, they'll be watching for the Mexican government to do something about it. One of the ways is giving their schoolbooks to our prospective citizens. Somehow I can't see AV holding the line against that. In fact, I can see him helping them out.

There are many other examples, but I'm not going to speculate on what he might do.

As you yourself said, you don't follow this issue as closely as I do. Until you do more research, your comments don't really hold much weight with me.

Once again, you're also missing the big picture on this issue. It's not about what I think or you think. It's about what millions of, oh let's just say as an example, prospective Democratic voters elsewhere in the U.S. They aren't going to react too very well to Chicano Power handclaps or "for the race everything."

I'd really suggest taking some time off and thinking this whole matter through.

|5.6.05 @ 2:33PM|#

Who has a hangover today from drinking margaritas? Ken?

|5.6.05 @ 3:46PM|#

If a thousand pregnant Mexican teenage girls show up on your front lawn tommorow I want know what your response would be.

Thank the Lord that at least they're not Hondurans?

|5.6.05 @ 4:44PM|#

WC,

If your friend's decision to immigrate here had nothing to do with the availability of services, why assume that modern day immigrants have different motives? It's not as if we stopped being a great place to find a job between then and now.

|5.6.05 @ 4:54PM|#

Jennifer,

I found the Honduran people to honest, hardworking, kind, open-hearted people during the year I was in their country. Even those struggling against the kind of poverty you'd be hard-pressed to find in the US. I'd take some of the friends I made there over most legal US citizens any day.

(While I'd prefer to make an exception for the two knuckleheads who unsuccessfully tried to mug me, I have to say that I was in the wrong place at the wrong time and worse can and does happen here in the States.)

Salud!

Matt Welch|5.6.05 @ 6:45PM|#

Lonewacko -- You need to work on your elevator pitch, pal.

"I'm not going to repost the contents of mayorno.com or americanpatrol.com here," doesn't remotely resemble a persuasive answer in a debate, especially with those who (unlike me) are not familiar with those websites.

Similarly, "There are many other examples," is a totally inadequate answer when someone asks you to name specific examples of how an American political candidate is possibly traitorous and dangerous.

We've wasted thousands of words back and forth by now, and the *best* you can come up with is "you don't follow this issue as closely as I do," followed by some flaccid insults?

I'm not, as you suggest, hunting for lunatic vitriol to shoot down, just so I can ignore the solid argumentation -- if anything, it truly is the reverse: I'm trying to wade through the hysteria to see if there are any relevant points. So far, I have seen exactly 1 -- that AV was wrong in praising a Mexican pol on Mexican soil on behalf of the people in California for opposing a popular state initiative. And I can even imagine that there are other things an L.A. Mayor has the power to do vis-a-vis immigration and Mexico that reasonable people might find hinky.

Since you're full of suggestions about how I might conduct my job, let me offer one about how to conduct your political campaign -- give people concrete reasons, backed by examples, of why this man is inappropriate or even dangerous. Calling him a possible traitor, or stating that his election will lead to the reconquista, is utterly unconvincing except to the obsessives you seem so loathe to criticize.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.6.05 @ 6:55PM|#

Thanks Joe, I see your point now and I agree to some extent (actually I agree to a large extent).

But we can never entirely overlook incentives.
While Willie was here to work and make a better life for himself there was but one incentive, the opportunity itself. Today there are many more incentives and some of those will be a factor in some people's decisions to magrate or remain in the US.

|5.6.05 @ 9:05PM|#

"Minimizing that problem or dismissing it as the musing of petty bigots amounts to the Ostrich approach. I'm afeared that this whole issue is a powder keg of Biblical proportions."

I did seven years hard time in the HIM department of a small for profit hospital in LA County, and I've got a pretty good idea of what you're talkin' about. ...but I'm not so sure the problems you experienced are a function of illegal immigration.

The most crucial statistic to my hospital CFO was "case mix", how many private insurance patients there were on the census relative to how many Medi-Cal/Medicare patients there were on the census. If that ratio dropped too low, we lost money. Show me an area where a relatively small proportion of the local population has private insurance, and I'll show you an area where the local hospitals are in trouble.

...That is to say, a large portion of your private health insurance premium pays for the care of Medicare and Medi-Cal patients that Medicare and Medi-Cal doesn't pay. The last time I saw the statistic, Medi-Cal only paid a weighted average of about 12.5 cents for every dollar billed. If a patient had Medicare, it paid about 25 cents on the dollar. The rest of the hospital's costs were covered by charges to patients with other providers. The money has to come from somewhere, if they can't cover their costs...

Well, they keep talkin' about closing down Harbor UCLA and County USC too. The old hospital I worked at had to change itself into a full lock down mental health facility.

So, I would argue, that some of the biggest problems with the health care system are caused by the fact that Medicare and Medi-Cal don't pay what it costs to care for patients. Forget the typical moral hazard arguments--if Medi-Cal and Medicare simply covered the costs of care, market forces in the private sector would improve both costs and the quality of care.

(By the way, this is all comin' from a vicious tax hater from wayback.)

...Still, the biggest users of Medicare and Medi-Cal aren't illegal immigrants, they're senior citizens. If illegal immigrants got into the hospital at all, they got in by way of the ER, and in terms of costs, the ER was a drop in the bucket.

In terms of costs, illegal immigrants are a drop in the bucket ...but they're highly visible.

The Wine Commonsewer|5.7.05 @ 3:54PM|#

"In terms of costs, illegal immigrants are a drop in the bucket ...but they're highly visible."

Agreed, and I would add that many assume that anyone who doesn't speak English well is illegal, thus making the visibility thing worse.

Reality also says that social service programs will never be abolished so we have a long-term problem on our hands.

Reason Magazine

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices:

advertisements