« One More Reason to Subscribe | Main | Musician, Heal Thyself »
May 01, 2006
Hurry Up And Wait
By Ezra
Our nation's brave leaders:
WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL) today made the following statement about the immigration demonstrations taking place across the United States:
“Today’s activities are largely counterproductive to the effort for comprehensive reform. Boycotts, walkouts, or protests are not going to get this done. This is an issue that isn’t going to get fixed on the streets; it’s going to take thoughtful action by Congress,” Martinez said.
Put another way, it's not that Mel Martinez doesn't think blacks deserve equal rights, he just wishes they weren't so uppity and aggressive about it. Leave this one to the benevolent, enlightened beings gliding through the halls of that platonic realm known as Congress.
Of course, it's no surprise that Martinez and his fellow Republicans fear today's march. For the Republican Party, this is the nightmare scenario: the political activation of the mammoth Hispanic electorate, all at once, all centered around a Republican bill that seeks to render their neighbors and friends felons. Were I Martinez, I too would counsel calm, warning against extremism in the defense of liberty. I too would explain that the nation's 40 million Hispanics should throw their lot in with the Senate, which is two percent Hispanic, and the House, which is six percent. I too would argue that it's one thing for businesses to hire scores of undocumented workers and pay them sub-minimum wages and no benefits. And so too is it one thing for the American economy to run off these workers, and for the American consumer to enjoy the lowly priced fruits of their labors. But it's quite another to demand that America accept such toiling, productive members of society as, well, members of society, offering them labor protections and civic inputs. Were I Mel Martinez, funded by business and standing atop a cracking coalition of business interests, angry white males, and Cuban immigrants, I would counsel calm, and quiet, and patience. And were I the Hispanic electorate, I wouldn't listen for a second.
May 1, 2006 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/19450/4781871
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hurry Up And Wait:
Comments
I just got back from the start of the rally in San Francisco, and I posted pictures. The rally was packed. I knew there would be many people, but I didn't realize how many.
Posted by: Pepper | May 1, 2006 4:48:53 PM
I forgot to add that perhaps Martinez should crawl out of his shell once in a while, just to see what's going on in the rest of the world beyond his office.
Posted by: Pepper | May 1, 2006 4:49:44 PM
My recollection is that the Cuban immigrants got special Congressional action to make their path to citizenship easy (and many of the Cuban immigrants vote Repub), so Mel doesn't have quite the problem speaking against latin peoples' protests that many others would have.
I'm sure hoping this issue DOES NOT GET RESOLVED in this Congress, because in the dark of night the Repubs are highly likely to make any law on this subject worse than imaginable.
With apologies to B. Goldwater, and a message to the Democrats in Congress: Obstructionism in the defense of liberty is no vice
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | May 1, 2006 5:06:31 PM
Imagine if a politician told the truth just like Ezra did here, word for word? He or she would probably be forced out of office.
Anecdote: My mother is a teacher in a heavily hispanic city in MA and the students were all worried about this on Friday. They (5th and 6th graders) were literally thinking that the government was out to get them today. Rumors got spread so crazily that parents were showing up at school worried if there was going to be class on Monday for fear of what, I don't know. But imagine living with fear like that?
Posted by: Adrock | May 1, 2006 5:42:55 PM
With apologies to B. Goldwater, and a message to the Democrats in Congress: Obstructionism in the defense of liberty is no vice
Please remember that the guarantee of liberty and justice for all is reserved for citizens and lawful residents. The illegal squatter has no such protection under our constitution.
Posted by: Fred Jones | May 1, 2006 6:26:07 PM
Please remember that the guarantee of liberty and justice for all is reserved for full citizens and lawful residents. The negro, being only 3/5ths of a person, has no such guarantee under our constitution.
Posted by: Ezra | May 1, 2006 6:28:07 PM
Fred: My obstructionism comment was directed at CONGRESS (the Dems, specifically) to not allow a bill to pass this year, by obstructionist tactics if necessary. My comment was not directed at protestors, whether citizens or not.
I am assuming that you were not deliberately trying to hijack and divert the conversation here (concerning congressional issues, such as Martinez suggests), although that could be (and very often is) your motive.
Were you disruptive in kindergarten too?
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | May 1, 2006 6:42:52 PM
Ezra - you're doubly wrong: a, as of course you know, that's been amended, and b, the constitution doesn't mention race, it just talks about slaves vs. freemen.
As an interesting sidenote, it was the Northern states that wanted that 3/5ths compromise. If it were up to the Southern states, each slave would have counted as a full person, to increase those states' representation.
Posted by: Floyd | May 1, 2006 7:30:02 PM
Aside from the fact that our intrepid totalist's argument about liberty and justice is utterly and insipidly wrong, Ezra's takedown simply undercut the eventual fallback argument, castrating the entire thread hijack. Why start nattering about something facially unrelated to the point?
Fred, in case you're wondering, one of the things that distinguishes the mythical America from Stalinist Russia is that protections of liberty and justice, at least in the ideal, are not restricted to a small, favored party elite. For someone who claims to be a thinking conservative insulted by my analysis of your thinking, it is almost uncanny how often your thinking returns to the stalinist paradigm. Have you considered rereading Animal Farm?
Posted by: wcw | May 1, 2006 8:03:52 PM
Wow. Thinking illegal immigrants aren't entitled to constitutional rights = Stalinist. Okay then. Let's not forget, whatever you think of the issue, these people are, by definition, criminals.
On the larger issue, I think the whole premise of this post is flawed, which is that Hispanics are somehow united in favor of uncontrolled borders. That's just not true. According to this site, a 2000 poll showed that "43% of Hispanics nationwide think the government is not doing enough to stop illegal immigration".
Posted by: Floyd | May 1, 2006 8:41:14 PM
Floyd seems to think someone here, or the hundred of thousands on the streets are advocating uncontrolled borders. Quotes please, with links.
The contested question at hand in the Congress is how to deal with those already in the US. Everyone seems agreed that greater border enforcement is needed although most Republicans don't want to punish employers who provide jobs to workers without documentation.
Some Republicans want to arrest those here already and send them somewhere on the other side of our borders (or make them work in the fields as prisoners). Other Republicans want guest worker programs but no path to citizenship, ever.
The specific bill being protested in the streets is the House Bill, which makes those here into felons (currently being in the US without papers is a civil penalty, not even a criminal misdemeanor). That same bill has no provision for making any workers into citizens, ever. It would split up families, many parts of which may have been in the US for decades - paying taxes in almost all cases.
So, please Floyd, no strawman arguments. The protesters (and their supporters) are not talking about open borders.
Posted by: JimPortlandOR | May 1, 2006 9:36:21 PM
Sure, no problem:
These protesting Harvard students seem to, judging from their signs ("No One Is Illegal").
The group called "People's Global Action" calls for "a world without borders".
Of course, there's a whole bunch of "Reconquista" types too, who say the land actually belongs to Mexico, but that's a whole other can of worms.
Posted by: Floyd | May 1, 2006 9:51:27 PM
"Liberty and justice for all" is, I believe, a guarantee from Superman. Unfortunately, I have not seen anything that establishes his opinion regarding illegal aliens, and whether he would ensure the same for them.
I'm not sure how he would establish their legality, since we as yet do not have a national standard for identification. Of course, being super, there may be a way for Superman to quickly ascertain one's status when responding to an emergency.
At any rate, the idea that illegal aliens do not have equal protection under the law is quite disturbing. One of the many great things about the USA is our willingness to extend the rule of law to all people, even those who have been breaking it. That is why it is important that punishment not be "cruel and unusual," and why our justice system presumes innocence, placing the burden of proof upon the prosecution, no matter how distasteful the defendant may be.
At any rate, those of us who wish the USA to continue as a beacon of hope and freedom can be comforted by the fact that illegal aliens do, in fact, enjoy constitutional protections to the same extent as citizens.
Illegal aliens are not, "by definition, criminals." The infraction is civil, not criminal, another distinction I am happy to see still in effect.
It is disturbing to see people like Floyd and Fred who brand illegal aliens as automatic criminals. It is reprehensible that they think it reasonable to refuse to extend the rule of law to everyone within the borders of the United States. There are many protections built into the American justice system. They may irritate or even infuriate us, but they are necessary components of what it means to be the United States of America. To wish their removal is to turn one's back upon all that our founders and greatest patriots have held dear.
Of course, the last few years have shown that many so-called "conservatives" are nothing of the sort. They actually seek to rework and/or revoke much of the constitution and the ideals of the framers. They are bigoted, fearful authoritarians who debase themselves and the rest of us with their irrational bloviating.
Posted by: Stephen | May 1, 2006 10:36:25 PM
"This is an issue that isn’t going to get fixed on the streets; it’s going to take thoughtful action by Congress,"
Given that this is coming from a guy whose party claims that "government doesn't work," it's kind of hard to take this statement seriously.
Posted by: Constantine | May 1, 2006 10:45:58 PM
For someone who claims to be a thinking conservative insulted by my analysis of your thinking...
Not at all.....I have much thinker skin than that. It's a free country....have at it.
Posted by: Fred Jones | May 1, 2006 11:04:18 PM
Wait for it .... student of McA at Washington Monthly.
Ersatz tbrosz.
Fat White Guy's great hope.
I could go on, Fred.
Posted by: opit | May 2, 2006 3:13:41 AM
It is disturbing to see people like Floyd and Fred who brand illegal aliens as automatic criminals.
I knew you were smart!
Actually, I was *shocked* that it was not at least a misdemeanor to be in this country illegally. Perhaps we should turn our attention to Europe. How do you think it would be for an illegal alien caught in Germany or poland? How 'bout South America or even Mexico? I am just speculating, of course (that's right....guessing), but I would wager they do not treat illegal aliens with the citizen-esque manner you do. Why do they care so much about their borders and you don't?
Bottom line, being in the US illegally should be a misdemeanor...yes, a crime...simply because it gives law enforcement much more power to enforce the borders. Law enforcement is loath to enforce civil issues.
So, if you truly wish to be able to control the border and enforce any solution that is decided upon in Washington, illegals must be criminals in order for it to succeed.
Posted by: Fred Jones | May 2, 2006 10:33:08 AM
Fred,
I'm surprised at your willingness to emulate other countries and their legal systems. Are you also in favor of the Supreme Court doing so? (/loaded question)
Certainly the phrase "illegal alien" makes us assume that a crime has been committed. However, maintaining unauthorized presence in the USA as a civil offense actually makes it easier to deal with the situation. If we start to address illegal immigrants under the criminal code, then we will have to abide by its standards of evidence and presumption of innocence. If the person is not actually caught in the act of crossing the border outside of our border stations, it could become problematic to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There would be the added costs of legal representation, etc.
Of course, all of this goes away if we just decide that constitutional rights and protections only extend to citizens and aliens here legally. Unfortunately, the problem is once again being able to identify those who are here illegally so that we can then deny them these rights. The absence of picture id and an accent are not good enough, or at least shouldn't be. And if we catch somebody using a fraudulent SS number or some such thing, they can be prosecuted for that, but not necessarily deported, since the burden of proof would be on the prosecutors to determine that they had, in fact, come into this country illegally.
If the preceding doesn't make much sense, well, there's a good reason for that. The simple fact is that our current system is one that actually gets around constitutional protections given to those accused of crimes. It allows us to legally deport people when the burden of proof required in criminal cases has not even come close to being met.
I'm not trying to say that progressives should then support Sensenbrenner's odious legislation in the hopes that it would so tie up the legal system as to cease deportations altogether. That's not what progressives want.
We want a sensible solution that will allow those who wish to come here to actually come here easily and in an organized, safe fashion. If too many immigrants come into the US, the job market will dry up for them and they will stop coming. Despite what conservatives often like to say, the welfare system in the USA is not a gravy train, and immigrants have extra obstacles to accessing it. If there's not enough jobs, immigration will slow down. Conservatives should just trust in the market sometimes, instead of looking for the government to solve all of our problems.
Hee hee.
Posted by: Stephen | May 2, 2006 4:14:14 PM
Please remember that the guarantee of liberty and justice for all is reserved for full citizens and lawful residents. The negro, being only 3/5ths of a person, has no such guarantee under our constitution.
I am truly diappointed in Ezra for this stupid, stupid statement. Even though Floyd did the easy, easy takedown of it, it was not a good faith discussion point and reminded me more of pandagon, where everything is tied to race.
Floyd tore your post a new asshole and exposed you for your ignorant comment.
Posted by: Fred Jones | May 3, 2006 10:17:31 AM
