Freedom Folks

Thursday, November 16, 2006

A Dog In The Fight?

Source: centredaily

So I'm reading this assertion laden, mildly retarded "immigration" op-ed by Roberts S. Nix and he manages to hit just about every canard you can imagine...
THE OBJECTIVE economics of illegal immigration are non-controversial. Economists agree that immigration, including the illegal kind, is a net gain to the national economy.
Actually they don't chuckles.
But there's a subjective side apart from economics, a deep-seated nativist resentment that resonates at a purely emotional level: "They broke the law to come here."
So, let me see if I understand Karnak. If I feel resentment toward an amnestied illegal immigrant, feeling that they have been forgiven something they shouldn't have been, that makes me a "nativist?" You sir don't even know what that word means.
The world's mightiest economy needs a supply of cheap labor the U.S. work force can't meet.
And since we've been flooding the market with cheap labor since at least 1965 this is without a doubt something we could know, jack ass!
Post-Sept. 11, it's nearly impossible for the workers essential to our economy to get into the country.
Over a million a year teacup, more than any other nation on earth, how many would make your insane ass happy? A billion?
And because we've all benefited from undocumented immigrants' hard work, we share the blame for this situation: anyone who has eaten anything grown in this country, gone to a restaurant, stayed at a hotel, bought a house, hired landscaping or janitorial services.
Canard; canard; canard and...Tired canard!
Suddenly, we want to blame the undocumented for all sorts of problems and scapegoat them with measures to criminalize or starve them away, as if the mess we're all complicit in is somehow only their fault?
Nice attempt to substitute guilt for argument peckerwood, but I ain't buyin'. Maybe YOU are complicit, I'm not.
An earned pathway to citizenship, combined with a guest-worker program, effective border security, internal enforcement and a fixed visa system (comprehensive reform) meets the realities of our economic and security needs.
By swinging the door all the way open, allowing in floods, hordes of people that our government agencies can't possibly deal with, we make the country safer? Ice your head down pally-boy.
And it wouldn't "reward illegal behavior."
Yes, it would.
It is an equitable and practical solution to a complex problem for which we all share responsibility
No it isn't, and no WE don't!
But if we don't want to cripple our economy
Oh, getting rid of de facto slavery will cripple the economy? Good, bring on the crippling.

This mild fisking was really just for my own entertainment, I was actually stunned by this tid-bit in the byline...
Robert S. Nix is chairman of the government relations committee of the Hispanic Bar Assn. of Pennsylvania.
Hmmmm, the "HISPANIC" bar association? HISPANIC? I wonder if he's got a dog in this fight? I mean as a HISPANIC, and a professional HISPANIC to boot, it's not as if he would have some, you know, personal interest in any of this, right?

Perhaps that's why he's so allergic to those pesky facts?

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,



Create a Link

<< Home