Immigration: put me on the stoop
The Montana blogosphere heats up on the issue of immigration. In fact, it was surprising how long it took to heat up. Well, finally Eric Coobs over at “What’s Right in Montana[?]” came out, guns blazing:
No amnesty, No guest-workers, and start enforcing the border. If you want to come here, apply for citizenship, and do it right.
Coobs goes on to describe how to immigrate “right.” (Hint: it involves Germanic heritage.)
Pogie tackled the inherent racism in Coobs’ post, comparing it to rhetoric written by Goebbles, and Matt Singer talked about the practical costs of doing it Coobs’ way. (Funny how conservatives are willing to tax and spend to criminalize people, but completely unwilling to spend a dime on, say, the poor. I must have missed a lesson in Sunday school.)
Personally, I’m not at all interested in this debate other than to delight in how it’s splitting the Republican Party. My disinterest doesn’t reflect dispassion; I recognize problems that illegal immigrants cause, but I also have much sympathy for their desire to come to the U.S. and make some decent money. Poverty gives wings? Is that a quote?
No my disinterest stems out of the fact that the solution is inevitable. Mexican works will win a right to guest-worker visas that will lead to citizenship. Current illegals will receive amnesty. No wall will be thrown up along the border. There’s no suspense in this debate. The outcome is foreordained.
The way I see it, a wall is impractical, not granting amnesty is pointless (does anyone really think we are going to round up all the illegals?), I am not convinced by arguments that illegals are an economic drain or boon (if I had to make an uneducated guess, I would argue it is a wash), and if terrorists want to sneak bombs in, they will find a way that does not involve illegals.
The fanatic anti-immigration stance that Coobs so ineptly parrots is vastly unpopular with American voters. In a recent poll, some 72% of voters believe Mexicans should be able to get guest worker permits that lead to citizenship. Coobs’ proposed border tightening is too expensive, as is making felons out of illegals. Politically, taking a hard line on illegals is a recipe for future political bankruptcy. The Hispanic population is the fastest growing group in the country. Karl Rove understands this; it ain’t rocket science as is evidenced by President Bush’s support for a kinder, gentler immigration reform. The GOP professionals over at Coobs’ new site are mum on the issue, too.
But the delicious part of the debate is this: the base of the Republican party hates illegal immigrants and will probably doom the party because of it. Why? Who knows. Probably because they don’t want brown-skinned people moving in next door, brining their “Mexicanist” lifestyle with them. Or, to quote an article linked to by Coobs:
Will millions of unassimilated Mexicans Mexicanize America? We don’t need the worst of Latin America—- endemic corruption, miserable poverty, an impassable chasm between rich and poor. Already the Democrats and Leftist media are delighted by the prospect of a new underclass to exploit and seduce for political gain; they have tried to change the English usage from “illegal immigrant” to “undocumented worker.”
Never mind that creating an “impassable chasm between rich and poor” is a plank in the GOP platform, never mind that Democrats might support illegal immigrants because in their numbers there lies a potential to create from its population of honest, hard-working members fantastic U.S. citizens. Or to quote Coobs’ source again:
The United States became the envy of the world in the 20th century, in ways that could not have been predicted when waves of poor, ignorant, and unassimilated people came ashore at Ellis Island.
(By the way, I suggest that Coobs actually read the articles he links to. While it’s a tad difficult to say exactly where the article’s author, James Lewis, comes down on the issue due to his general mismanagement of words, it seems…ready?…it seems that maybe he kinda likes the idea of lots of Mexicans coming up into the U.S….)
Basically the two camps in the immigration debate can be described thusly: Those that view the U.S. as a gated community of liked-minded and similar-looking people who want to shut out the world; and those that view the country as a stoop on a busy block full of noise, smells, and sights and filled with neighbors.
Put me on the stoop.
-
1
Pingback on Apr 14th, 2006 at 6:29 pm
[...] I’ve said this before, the solution is inevitable, and it’s going to have to include amnesty and fast-tracking citizenships and guest worker visas and everything illegal-haters hate. [...]
-
2
Pingback on May 3rd, 2006 at 6:45 pm
[...] It goes on and on. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: the solution is inevitable and it involves amnesty, guest worker visas, and no border wall. [...]
-
3
Pingback on Aug 12th, 2006 at 10:46 pm
[...] You all know where I stand on the issue of immigration. I jes’ plain think it’s too impractical and expensive to do anything other than ease immigration standards for Mexican seasonal workers and offer some sort of amnesty program for them. [...]
April 5, 2006 at 10:35 pm
I was wondering if he had read the Lewis article, too. :)
April 6, 2006 at 9:00 pm
I believe my stance on immigration is correct.
I didn’t say I agreed with James Lewis 100%, but he made some very good points.
Thanks for the blurb -
April 6, 2006 at 9:27 pm
Np, and welcome to 4&20, Mr. Coobs! And welcome to the poli-blog world. I admire your efforts, and wish your other posters were as human as you!
BTW, what do you think of Singer’s practical problems with your stance? The cost to criminalize illegals would be enormous. Where’s the money coming from?
We can argue all day about ideology, but dollars and cents are practical matters…