Friday, March 24, 2006

Clinton's conversion and ransom insurance

So much for Hillary Clinton moving to the right of the Republican Party on immigration reform:
Surrounded by a multicultural coalition of New York immigration advocates, Clinton blasted the House bill as "mean-spirited" and said it flew in the face of Republicans' stated support for faith and values. "It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures," Clinton said, "because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself."
I expect the Senator to turn for biblical guidance on issues like abortion and same-sex marriage today and tomorrow, respectively. She'll also presumably be calling out Bill to repent for his extra-marital affairs in the Oval Office. But Hispanic advocacy groups agree with her:
About 30,000 protesters on Thursday marched into downtown Milwaukee as part
of a demonstration titled "A Day Without Latinos" in which Latinos were encouraged to take time from their jobs to march, according to Voces de la Frontera, which organized the event. A police spokesman said the crowd was between 10,000 and 15,000...

The Milwaukee march was one of several recent protests organized across the nation by groups opposed to immigration bills considered by Congress.

Clinton's obvious pandering aside, the Messiah might not have agreed with her. Jesus was not a booster of balkanization. "If a country divides itself into groups which fight each other, that country will fall apart. If a family divides itself into groups which fight each other, that family will fall apart," Mark 3:24-25, recorded as Jesus' spoken words (this is where we get the phrase "A house divided cannot stand"). Using a religious figure to bolster a political position strikes me as a direct violation of the Third Commandment, so I try to steer clear of it, especially given that I'm not a religious person. In any case, the Bible presents ample material to be used to further virtually any position so it's disgraceful to see Clinton trying to invoke it in this way. Meanwhile, the protests:
Other protests are planned in Atlanta, where an alliance of Hispanic organizations is encouraging Latino residents to participate in a commercial boycott and work stoppage Friday to demonstrate how Latinos help bolster the Georgia economy.
I wonder if the Latinos marching in protest of US sovereignty will, on the same day they stop working, also stop committing crimes at over three times the white rate or if they'll stop taking in more government benefits than they pay for.

Of course there is going to be a short-term disruption if the unskilled do not show up for work when they are expected to, but that is not a legitimate argument for their putative necessity. If in 1860 plantation slaves stopped working, the Southern economy would have been jolted in the short-run, but in the long-run abolition fueled technological innovations that made slave labor uneconomical in addition to being morally abhorrent. Yet our third-worlders are essentially wage slaves. The work they do merely requires warm bodies and is easily fungible with natives. Sure, employers might have to pay higher wages, but why shouldn't they? Why should you and I, as taxpayers, subsidize the labor of big business? I am not interested in Tyson's bottom line. If the company cannot turn a profit without taxpayer assistance, it's not a value-adding firm. I'm interested in America's standard of living, educational system, economic viability, and long-term competitiveness.

It's not just agriculture and cleaning services that are enjoying open borders:
Don’t waste your time looking it up on the Internet. It is advertised here exclusively by word of mouth. And even though it is not cheap, it is now selling like hot cakes.

Kidnap insurance traditionally associated with the lawless coca groves of Colombia or the tribal wetlands of Nigeria is now conquering south Texas.

Faced with a wave of crime, major U.S. insurance companies are quietly selling abduction coverage here to address the needs of businessmen on both sides of the U.S.-Mexican border.
While Mexico exports its social problems to us and imports $17 billion in cash in return, we become more like our southern neighbor each day. The federal government warns us not to travel to several northern Mexico provinces because of the anarchy and drug wars that are ongoing there. Mexican mobsters have made armed excursions onto US territory, and now if you live in Laredo it has become prudent for you to buy ransom insurance in case you are kidnapped.

We need a wall. While it is being built, we need the National Guard to back up the Border Patrol and light up any vehicle or person who dares take a pot shot at our nation's sentries. We do not need low-value adding, uneducated net-costs in this country. We need a merit immigration system that brings in immigrants that are going to benefit natives, not immigrants who will be benefited by natives at the native's expense.

The House recently passed HR4437. The Senate is now dealing with it. Email your Senators (they will have a link to 'contact' and then 'email' on their Congressional websites) and let them know your position on immigration. Feel free to copy anything you find here in the letter.

(Immigration)

5 comments:

xxMario said...

racist crap. America was built by IMMIGRANTS because everyone in America is AN IMMIGRANT. who is going to do the manual jobs without hispanics? Your fat white ass? i will write my senataor and tell him we need a safe and effective way to get hard workers in here without making them criminals. thanks for the inspiration.

crush41 said...

Yes, virtually all of the American population had ancestors that immigrated here within the last five centuries. And look how that turn out for the native Americans. I have only a tertiary interest in bettering the existence of foreigners. I do not want to sacrifice the standard of living of democratic cohesion of compatriots to help members of corrupt and inefficient countries that benefit from shipping their social problems here.

Regarding who will do the manual jobs, it's really basic economics. As the supply of workers decreases, the price for each worker increases. Of course the jobs will get done. So the local construction company has to pay people more. Big deal. The company has to start pulling its economic weight, instead of throwing the burden of the working underclass onto the net taxpayer.

I am a racial realist. I strive not to be irrationally racist, and see things as they are rather than as I'd like them to be. Pretending people, and by extension groups, are identical is irrational. One hundred years of psychometric testing has shown consistent differences across racial and ethnic groups. For 95% of human history, populations have been exclusively removed from large scale contact with one another, and have had very different environmental pressures acting upon them. Evolution affected humans too, you know. Indeed, humans are, next to domesticates like dogs, among the most genetically diverse species on the planet. We see this all around us everyday. Ignoring it is done at our own peril.

crush41 said...

Economist Robert Samuelson has an excellent op/ed in the Washington Post, summing up the immigration debate as I see it (excepting, of course, the uncomfortable human biodiversity aspect of it, but nonetheless it's convincing).

snpp said...

The host has linked to the Simpsons episodal archive.

crush41 said...

The Simpsons link was in reference to Ned's Job role, where he shakenly cries out to God:

"Why me, Lord? Where have I gone wrong? I've always been nice to
people. I don't drink or dance or swear. I've even kept Kosher just to be on the safe side. I've done everything the bible says, even the
stuff that contradicts the other stuff."

The point being that, taken literally, the bible seems to contradict itself on countless occasions.