Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

[SJHovey]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

I think you underestimate the strength of the push to secure the border first, talk comprehensive reform of any sort later, nationwide, but especially in places like Arizona. Here in Arizona it's such a strong issue that the Dems who are running this fall are now criticizing the administration and saying a lot more needs to be done on securing the border first. Even a decent chunk (though likely a minority) of Hispanics are on board with the issue. The border issue has turned Jan Brewer's political star 180 degrees, going from someone hardly anybody thought could be elected this fall to, as an AZ Republic article today says, rock-star status among conservatives. Securing the border first is a rock solid campaign winner in way more places than it isn't. And it's in the cards that Obama will make tepid steps at the most to secure the border unless he gets comprehensive reform at the same time. I just don't see it lining up for comprehensive reform until a significant shift takes place on the issue.

Securing first, reforming second sounds nice in principle, more difficult in application.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Securing first, reforming second sounds nice in principle, more difficult in application.

Certainly true, but there's a lot of sentiment among the populace that this is how it should be done. Thus a major roadblock in achieving some sort of comprehensive reform all at once.

Of course in practice, it's been done the opposite in the past. Grant amnesty, etc. and then never bother to secure the border. So, if you take a long term perspective, the feds should follow through on past commitments before considering another go around on amnesty and such. We should all know from past reform that once amnesty is granted, the motivation for sizable chunks of the federal government largely evaporates. That isn't going to fly in a place like Arizona where we have to deal with the real life consequences of this fiasco of a federal policy.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

You're speaking to the original video and gaff. My comment you responded to was talking about a subsequent, supposedly clarifying statement from her where, instead of saying she botched it on the original comment, she tried to weasel out of it by saying she really meant that Texas had a longer border. So her second botch just builds on the first one and makes her look even more clueless.

I think you misinterpreted what I said. Which, going back and reading my post, isn't surprising because I didn't phrase it right.

I was trying to address her second statement and not what you had posted. I agree with what you said about the two statements. I just didn't phrase it right. I wrote it almost like I was responding to her. Sorry about the confusion.

 

[Patman]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Securing first, reforming second sounds nice in principle, more difficult in application.

So says you and the rest of the people that want amnesty. In other words, horse feathers.

 

[Rover]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

So says you and the rest of the people that want amnesty. In other words, horse feathers.

Lets play conservative buzz word Bingo! "Amnesty" almost gets me there. Now I just need "bootstraps" or "welfare queens"....

Don't let me down Patman.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

That's a nice labor pool that they can now dip from legally, and keep wages for everyone down nice and low.

It'd certainly suppress wages, but it would cost the businesses more than it does now since they'd have to pay social security taxes and abide by the minimum wage law - a couple things that currently don't apply to illegals obviously.

This is the reason why immigration reform gets done. Its serves a purpose for both sides. At some point in time, sooner rather than later, people in the GOP will look at the polls and realize they can't afford to get killed again with the fastest growing segment of the voting population.

Why exactly would the GOP want to grant citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants when the majority of them will vote Democrat?

The status quo works best for them politically: it gives them an easy opportunity to rip on Obama for failing to carry out a coherent immigration policy, and it also continues to provide ultra cheap labor for businesses.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Uhhh.."lefties" don't all want to hand out citizenship. And not all righties oppose the idea. Some "lefties" see handing out citizenship as big business' solution to its labor problem. There are a lot of "righties" who see making 12 million people legal as the answer to their problems. That's a nice labor pool that they can now dip from legally, and keep wages for everyone down nice and low.

Well, thank you for touching on the "lefties" and the "righties" but what I really want to know is... what do the "fatties" think about this?

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

The status quo works best for them politically: it gives them an easy opportunity to rip on Obama for failing to carry out a coherent immigration policy, and it also continues to provide ultra cheap labor for businesses.

It's not just that.

They'll be ripping Obama for invading Iraq and flying planes into the World Trade Center if they think enough morons will believe them. It's just the way politics work.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Lets play conservative buzz word Bingo! "Amnesty" almost gets me there. Now I just need "bootstraps" or "welfare queens."

Darn it. I only had "appeasement" and "activist judges."

 

[Kepler]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

It's not just that.

They'll be ripping Obama for invading Iraq and flying planes into the World Trade Center if they think enough morons will believe them.

Already there.

 

[Foxton]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

It's not just that.

They'll be ripping Obama for invading Iraq and flying planes into the World Trade Center if they think enough morons will believe them. It's just the way politics work.

<table style='font:11px arial; color:#333; background-color:#f5f5f5' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='360' height='353'><tbody><tr style='background-color:#e5e5e5' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com'>The Daily Show With Jon Stewart</a></td><td style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; text-align:right; font-weight:bold;'>Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c</td></tr><tr style='height:14px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;' colspan='2'<a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-29-2010/blame'>Blame<a></td></tr><tr style='height:14px; background-color:#353535' valign='middle'><td colspan='2' style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; width:360px; overflow:hidden; text-align:right'><a target='_blank' style='color:#96deff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/'>www.thedailyshow.com</a></td></tr><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><embed style='display:block' src='http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:313843' width='360' height='301' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='window' allowFullscreen='true' flashvars='autoPlay=false' allowscriptaccess='always' allownetworking='all' bgcolor='#000000'></embed></td></tr><tr style='height:18px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><table style='margin:0px; text-align:center' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='100%' height='100%'><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/'>Daily Show Full Episodes</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com'>Political Humor</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/videos/tag/Tea+Party'>Tea Party</a></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

 

[Rover]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Why exactly would the GOP want to grant citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants when the majority of them will vote Democrat?

The status quo works best for them politically: it gives them an easy opportunity to rip on Obama for failing to carry out a coherent immigration policy, and it also continues to provide ultra cheap labor for businesses.

Because at some point in the near future the Republican party has to broaden its appeal beyond an ever shrinking base of old white males. They can do this in a variety of ways, but they may choose to go after this demographic with this legislation. I'v read FWIW that Hispanics tend to be more aligned with the social conservativism of the modern day GOP, so there's a possible opening there for the party. Once people fall into a pattern however, sometimes it takes generations to break it. That's the calculated risk the Republicans will have to weigh. In a 2012 Presidential campaign, its going to be tough to win several crucial swing states if they can't do better amongst these voters.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Because at some point in the near future the Republican party has to broaden its appeal beyond an ever shrinking base of old white males.

As an old white male, I think that is an overbroad description of their base.

Catholics seemed to be an ideal social conservative constituency, yet, despite a very good start with legacy Reagan Democrats, the GOP is going the wrong direction with them. Hispanics' social conservatism is similar to white Catholics' (as is that of evangelical blacks, who the GOP also has problems with) so even if they can somehow rehabilitate themselves on their racial rhetoric, they still aren't necessarily going to appeal to that constituency.

There's no intrinsic reason why this should be so -- nothing in the conservatives' intellectual underpinning is white-only (in its best form it ought to be purely color-blind). It is more a historical / regional accident that the outrage that energizes the few conservative movements that are actually growing, like the Palin types, has roots in fairly recent white and male resentments combined with age-old rural choler.

 

[unofan]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

As an old white male, I think that is an overbroad description of their base.

Catholics seemed to be an ideal social conservative constituency, yet, despite a very good start with legacy Reagan Democrats, the GOP is going the wrong direction with them. Hispanics' social conservatism is similar to white Catholics' (as is that of evangelical blacks, who the GOP also has problems with) so even if they can somehow rehabilitate themselves on their racial rhetoric, they still aren't necessarily going to appeal to that constituency.

That's because Catholics actually value education - especially the Jesuits. Hence the thousands of Catholic schools across the country, let alone the numerous Catholic colleges and universities.

Catholics may be pro-life, but they're generally anti-stupidity even more. And the current GOP is nothing if not insanely stupid.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

And the current GOP is nothing if not insanely stupid.

The Dems aren't exactly bright, either - unless you consider "cash for clunkers", a misguided short-term homebuyer credit (demand for homes has plummeted since it expired, just like it did following the idiotic CfC program), and $1 trillion+ annual deficits to be brilliant policy.

 

[unofan]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

The Dems aren't exactly bright, either - unless you consider "cash for clunkers", a misguided short-term homebuyer credit (demand for homes has plummeted since it expired, just like it did following the idiotic CfC program), and $1 trillion+ annual deficits to be brilliant policy.

I'm not saying the Dems have made brilliant policy, but at least they generally believe in the power of education. The GOP actively courts morons, not only as voters but also candidates. There is a significant amount of intelectual conservatives out there who not only cannot support the GOP while it's being run by knuckledraggers who think getting intelligent design into biology classrooms is a top priority, but are forced out of the GOP for not being "conservative enough." (always on the social side, too).

For god's sake, the GOP's own proposed litmus test makes it logically impossible to be on board with all of the porposed beliefs; some are completely contradictory.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

Because at some point in the near future the Republican party has to broaden its appeal beyond an ever shrinking base of old white males. They can do this in a variety of ways, but they may choose to go after this demographic with this legislation. I'v read FWIW that Hispanics tend to be more aligned with the social conservativism of the modern day GOP, so there's a possible opening there for the party. Once people fall into a pattern however, sometimes it takes generations to break it. That's the calculated risk the Republicans will have to weigh. In a 2012 Presidential campaign, its going to be tough to win several crucial swing states if they can't do better amongst these voters.

If (and I do realize the magnitude of this "if") the GOP can make people believe* that it is the party of fiscal conservatism/responsibility, then it will not have to worry about piddling details like demographics in 2012. In say, 2050, when whites will be a clear minority, the story will be different - but not in 2012.

*this could happen in a variety of ways. Unfortunately, actually being fiscally responsible is probably not one of them.

 

[ExileOnDaytonStreet]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

The Dems aren't exactly bright, either - unless you consider "cash for clunkers", a misguided short-term homebuyer credit (demand for homes has plummeted since it expired, just like it did following the idiotic CfC program), and $1 trillion+ annual deficits to be brilliant policy.

The homebuyer credit was pre-Obama, pre-Democratic majority.

Obama just kept extending it.

 

[WeWantMore]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

I don't think the GOP needs to be in full pander mode to Hispanic voters just yet. Maybe down the line, but if Obama continues to drop in popularity with whites, I think that will be enough come 2012. After that, sure. But I definitely wouldn't go all pro-amnesty pre-2012.

 

[Bakunin]

Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?

For god's sake, the GOP's own proposed litmus test makes it logically impossible to be on board with all of the porposed beliefs; some are completely contradictory.

Both parties have their share of contradictions - such is the nature of being a collection of special interest groups. On the Dem side, the biggest wedge I see is between the industrial unions and environmentalists.