An interesting take on immigration

Angry Bear has an interesting discussion of legal and illegal immigration. In the end he's for more immigration:

This in turn relates to the still deeper question of why we allow immigration in the first place: is the goal to improve the US, or is it to improve the lives of the individuals who want to immigrate?

For me, both goals matter, at least to some degree. I'm more sympathetic toward that poor Mexican farm worker than I am toward the Nigerian doctor, but the Nigerian doctor will probably make me (and the rest of the US) a tiny bit richer than the Mexican would. To me, those two effects roughly balance out. As a result, I’m not particularly in favor of changing the rules to only allow high-skilled immigrants in to the US. I can see the logic of it (it’s really an economist’s logic, after all), but it doesn't satisfy my sense of morality.

...

Putting this all together, I find that I don't worry about illegal immigration any more than I worry about legal immigration. I'd like there to be fewer illegal immigrants, but only because I'd like more of them to be able to enter the country legally. Put another way, I could possibly favor harsher treatment for illegal immigrants, and I’d even be willing to pay for stricter border enforcement... but only if those policy changes were accompanied by a much more liberal legal immigration policy, and a policy to bring current illegal immigrants into fully legal status. Note that I am not advocating completely open borders - I think that some sort of limit on legal immigration is reasonable, simply because overly rapid population growth in the US would cause its own set of problems. However, current population growth in the US is only about 1% per year, including immigration. That is near the lowest levels of
population growth ever experienced in the US - only in the 1930s was it lower. I
think the US can handle a bit more than that.

Robert Reich was also on Market Place this morning arguing for stricter enforcement of laws against employing illegal immigrants since companies often employ illegal immigrants since they are less likely to complain about poor pay and working conditions.

Sadly, I think these types of arguments are not likely to be persuasive to middle America. Instead, immigrants will steal our jobs and rape our women.

On Beards and Malcontents

The metrosexual backlash has begun.

Paul Bunyan, Modern-Day Sex Symbol - New York Times: "Whenever a countercultural trend becomes a mainstream one, there is a natural tendency to look for deeper meaning. Do beards that call to mind Charles Manson suggest dissatisfaction with 'the system'? Are broody beards, like the dark and somber mood of the fall fashion collections, physical manifestations of a melancholia in the air? Are they a reflection of the stylistic impact on mainstream fashion of the subculture of gay men known as bears, who embrace natural body hair?"

Reid Threatens Filibuster on Immigration

Ok archair strategists and progressive purists. How should the Dems position themselves on immigration? Are you with the Dems on this or is what they are doing not progressive enough?


BREITBART.COM - Reid Threatens Filibuster on Immigration: "Reid said the overhaul must include heightened border enforcement, a 'guest worker' program and a 'path to citizenship' for the estimated 11 million people in the United States illegally. He called legislation by Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and John McCain, R- Ariz., a 'good place to start.'"

Poll: opposition to gay marriage declining

Less people now strongly oppose gay marriage than they did two years ago. Assuming the poll is right, why and how did this change in public opinion occur?


AP Wire | 03/23/2006 | Poll: opposition to gay marriage declining: "In 2004, opponents of gay marriage were able to pass ballot initiatives banning the practice in 11 states, from Georgia to Oregon. Those gay marriage initiatives also helped conservatives rally their voters to the polls.

The number of people who say they strongly oppose gay marriage has dropped from 42 percent in early 2004 to 28 percent now. Strong opposition has dropped sharply among senior citizens and Republicans."

Harper's Magazine for March 2006 (Harpers.org)

I heard Lewis Lapham on C-SPAN this morning arguing for impeachment. The article is not on the web.

Harper's Magazine for March 2006 (Harpers.org): "The Case for Impeachment
Why we can no longer afford George W. Bush
Lewis H. Lapham"

Bush Using Straw-Man Arguments in Speeches - Yahoo! News

Bush Using Straw-Man Arguments in Speeches - Yahoo! News: "Bush Using Straw-Man Arguments in Speeches"

Here's a Difference Between Dems and Repubs

Last night 60 Minutes had a story on how the Bush administration has censored and altered what James Hansen, the government's leading scientist on climate change, can say about global warming. In the course of the interview, Hansen claimed that the Clinton administration wanted him to play up the dangers of global warming, whereas the Bush administration actively changes his reports to read that global warming is not occurring. Hansen gives us 10 years before global warming hits a tipping point from which we cannot turn back.

Ok so both the parties lie. I'll take the democrats lies thank you. And it does make a difference.

Rewriting The Science - CBS News: "Politically, Hansen calls himself an independent and he’s had trouble with both parties. He says, from time to time, the Clinton administration wanted to hear warming was worse that it was. But Hansen refused to spin the science that way. "

Kos C�l�bre - New York Times

Daily Kos blogger interviewed in NYT.

Kos C�l�bre - New York Times

When Latvian Eyes Are Smiling - New York Times

When Latvian Eyes Are Smiling - New York Times: "And here are some more glorious and sorrowful mysteries: how race and nation, faith and place, define and divide us endlessly; how ethnicity makes fast friends of strangers and also poisons the well of humanity; how religion calls us to worship and so miscalculates our Gods. If there is only one God — as all Muslims, Christian and Jews believe — then isn't the one we believe in one and the same? If there is no God, aren't we off only by one? And if there are many, aren't there plenty to go around?

Consider the shamrock. Consider those famous 40 shades of green Ireland is said to have. It's Disney, an illusion, a fake Irish bar. The world we live in is 40 shades of gray, and in each of them still 40 more.

The barkeepers know this in Milford and West Clare, in Boston and Baghdad, in Dublin and Darfur, wherever they are — it's always the same human thirst and hunger, the same longing for the shared feast and safe harbor, the home fire and known place, the common table and place at the bar. The green beer and blather, the old songs and good craic notwithstanding, until all are safe in their own place, a Great Day for the Irish, or the Americans, is just pretend."

Political Action: Democracy in Action

I'm putting up $20 for any Liberal Malcontent who gets a letter to the editor published in a newspaper.

MoveOn.org Political Action: Democracy in Action: "As we hit the three year anniversary of the Iraq war, the president is trying to distract the public. We must remind the country that the Bush pre-emption doctrine has been a disaster in Iraq--making America and the world less safe. Will you write a letter to the editor to help do that? The Letters to the Editor page is often the most-read page in a newspaper. Coming on the anniversary, your letter will be very timely."

NJ assemblyman reintroduces English bill

On January 10th, assemblyman John Rooney introduced another bill into the NJ State Assembly to make English the official language of the state. That’s all the bill says. I don’t know what it means. It may mean English, like the eastern goldfinch, the violet, the honey bee, the horse, the Hadrosaurus Foulkii, the brook trout, the shell of the knobbed whelk, the schooner A.J. Meerwalk, and the highbush blueberry, is simply officially designated by the government as being representative of New Jersey. I assume though that it means something more.

A bill like this has regularly been introduced every two years since at least 1996. They never go anywhere. So hopefully this one won’t either. Still, in 1999, Clifton, NJ adopted an English-only policy. It has apparently been repealed, but at the time the Bergen Record reported:

Anzaldi's sentiment is shared by state Assembly members Marion Crecco (R-Essex)
and John Rooney (R-Bergen), who have long proposed legislation making English
the official language of New Jersey. The state officials feel English provides a
cultural tie that binds diverse groups together.
''If you don't understand English, you are not going to succeed in the U.S.," said Rooney, who, like many English-only proponents, also takes issue with bilingual education. "People say I'm being prejudiced. I'm not being prejudiced. I'm trying to give them an opportunity."

I can see that attitude taking hold here.

For example, I live in Hawthorne, just across the mighty Passaic river from Paterson. The area that includes Hawthorne had been part of Paterson at one time, but Hawthorne separated from Paterson in 1898. Still the US Postal Service gives Paterson as an “acceptable city name” in the zip codes for Hawthorne: 07506 and 07507.

Paterson was once a thriving city. It was a center of textile manufacturing and the movie industry—Abbott and Costello filmed there, among others. It is the home of both William Carlos Williams, who wrote many poems about the city including an epic, and Allen Ginsburg.

Like most New Jersey cities*, Paterson is in decline. According to the 2000 census, the population is about 150,000 today. And it’s losing people (down about 6% from 1990s). About 22% of the residents live under the poverty level.

It’s also racially diverse. About 50% of the residents are Hispanic and 33% African American and 31% White. (These numbers include people who self-identify with more than one race so they don’t add up to 100%.). Also 33% are foreign-born and 56% speak a language other than English at home.

Before the white flight beginning in the 50s, Paterson had a large Italian population. Now many of them live in Hawthorne and view Paterson warily. Apparently, the river between Hawthorne and Paterson is not enough, the local weekly newspaper, the Hawthorne Press, had this in their editorial last week (March 9, 2006):

Another federal bureaucracy—the US Postal Service—already considers us part of
Paterson. Hawthorne’s two zip codes—07506 and 07507—often come up “Paterson, New Jersey” in our magazine subscriptions and on national address software programs. It’s annoying and a recent postcard to borough residents was the final
insult.

Addressed to “postal customer,” it was an announcement about an
upcoming passport fair at Paterson’s Ward Street office. It would have been
welcome news except that it’s predominant language was Spanish. The English
translation was in much smaller type, intended to be a secondary language.

Instead of a positive public information campaign, (solicita tu
pasaporte en este evento del servicio postal™ cerca de ti) it turned out to be a
public relations disaster to those of us who consider English our country’s
official language.

I got this post card and threw it out without a thought. I have a hard time understanding why this is a “public relations disaster.”

*I have a theory that New Jersey cities suffer more because of their closeness to New York. New York is like a cultural black hole, any middle class who might be interested in an urban lifestyle would much rather be in New York than a city in New Jersey.

MoveOn.org Political Action: President Bush Must be Censured for Breaking the Law

Subject: Censure President Bush

Hi,

Yesterday, Senator Russ Feingold introduced a resolution to censure President Bush for breaking the law by illegally wiretapping American citizens.

When the president misleads the public and the Congress and willfully and repeatedly breaks the law, there need to be some consequences --that's how the law works for everybody else.

Censuring the president is a reasonable first step in condemning the president's actions. Now it's up to us to show broad public support for Senator Feingold's resolution. Can you sign this petition asking Congress to join the call for censure?

http://political.moveon.org/censure/

Chinese Bloggers Stage Hoax Aimed at Censorship Debate

Ok we're stupid and know nothing about China, what can we say. Except the guy from Reporters without Borders, who can't resist going in to lecture mode.


WSJ.com - Chinese Bloggers Stage Hoax Aimed at Censorship Debate: "In an interview, Beijing-based journalist Wang Xiaofeng of Massage Milk says he shut his blog down to make a point about freedom of speech -- just one directed at the West instead of at Beijing. He calls the Western press 'irresponsible' and says that the hoax was designed 'to give foreign media a lesson that Chinese affairs are not always the way you think.'"

US History 101

Just a reminder that it can and has happened here. For a real downer, stay with the article to find out what happens to the deportees after they've been in the Soviet Union for a while. The 20th century's a real bitch.

Palmer Raids - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "The 1918's and 1921's Palmer Raids were a series of controversial raids on American citizens and resident and non-resident aliens in the United States, based on their assumed political beliefs."

On what to say as you shake George's hand

Linked from the blog "allspinzone.com"

From: "Bill Hangley, Jr."
Subject: His Gift To Us
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 19:05:38 -0400

So when the President was here on July 4, I had the opportunity to shake his hand. I wasn't sure if that was a good idea or not but I did it anyway, and said to him, "Mr President, I hope you only serve four years. I'm very disappointed in your work so far."

He kept smiling and shaking my hand but answered, "who cares what you think?" His face stayed photo-op perfect but his eyes gave me a look that said, if we'd been drinking in some frathouse in Texas, he'd've happily answered, "let's take it outside." A nasty little gleam. But he was (fortunately) constrained by Presidential propriety.

But that was the end of it, until I turned away and started scribbling the quote down in my notepad, so as to remember The Gift forever. When he saw me do that he got excited and craned his neck over the rubberneckers to shout at me, "who are you with? Who are you with?" People started looking so he made a joke: "make sure you get it right." But he kept at it: "Who do you write for?" I told him I wasn't "with" anybody and pointed to one of his staff people, who knows me a little, and said, "ask him, he'll tell you." Then I split.

Half an hour later, my boss (who had helped organize the event we were at) came up to me and said, "did you really tell the President that he was doing a 'lousy fucking job'?" No way, I said, I was very polite, I just told him what I thought. Fortunately, he believed me. He wasn't happy with me, but he believed me.

But anyway, if you ever wondered if the Prez really was kind of a jerk, I'm here to tell you, he is, and I got The Gift to prove it. I'm thinking of making up t-shirts so we can share The Gift with everyone:

"Who cares what you think?"

From my inbox

My liberal dad keeps sending me conservative propaganda via email. It’s not like he is trying to keep me up to date on the latest maneuvers of the enemy. He really thinks this stuff is funny. Here’s the latest one he sent:

NBA OR NFL?
36 have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2
businesses
3 have done time for
assault
71, repeat 71, cannot get a
credit card due to bad credit
14 have
been arrested on drug-related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 currently are defendants in lawsuits, and
84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last
year

Can you guess which organization this
is?


Give up
yet? . . . Scroll down,


Neither, it's the 535 members of the States Congress.
The same group of Idiots that crank
out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in
line.

You gotta pass this one on!

I can’t tell if the premise of this joke is racist or not. It seems like, “everyone knows about the criminal element of THOSE people in the NFL and NBA. Wink wink.” And the facts it reports are not backed up. But the message is clear: “Politicians are criminals. Government doesn’t work.”

I could deal with the propaganda if the jokes were at least funny.

Liberal Malcontents

Vermonters call for Impeachment of Bush

Very interesting grassroots suggestion which leads me to believe the Dems are simply waiting for the worm to turn and have gone silent in public in order to prep behind the scenes.

Obama moves

Barack Obama is thinking outside the box.

Trying to jump-start gains in auto fuel efficiency after decades of
inaction, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is proposing an unusual swap for the Big
Three U.S. carmakers: Washington would pay some of Detroit's multibillion-dollar
health costs in exchange for it making cars that get higher gasoline
mileage.
The federal government would pay 10 percent of the $6.7 billion in
annual health costs for retirees that are weighing down General Motors, Ford and
Chrysler if they'll commit to building more fuel-efficient cars, Obama proposed
in a speech last week before a panel at the National Governors Association
conference. He called it a ``win-win proposal for the industry.''

Time to abandon the Dems?

Why is it that you can't find a Dem saying this?

Fearmongering on Dubai

Holocaust denial and Muslim cartoons

In the latest edition of eSkeptic, Michael Shermer has an essay on the Holocaust denier David Irving. (The article was not yet up when I posted this.) Irving was recently sentenced to 3 years in jail in Austria for denying the holocaust. Coming on the heels of the cartoon controversy he draws the obvious comparison.

“More women died in the back seat of Edward Kennedy’s car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber at Auschwitz.”
Is this line more offensive to Jews than an editorial cartoon depicting the prophet Muhammad with a turban bomb is to Muslims?
Apparently it is, because the editorial cartoonists are still free, whereas the man who made this statement — British author David Irving — was sentenced February 20 to three years in an Austrian jail for violating an Austrian law that says it is a crime if a person “denies, grossly trivializes, approves or seeks to justify the National Socialist genocide or other national socialist crimes against humanity.”

I’m not sure it’s a fair comparison; I don’t know what sort of hate speech laws Denmark has. And the Austrian law is very specific to the Holocaust. As he points out, denying the holocaust is a crime in much of Europe.

Today, you may be imprisoned or fined for dissenting from the accepted Holocaust
history in the following countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech
Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, New Zealand, Poland, Romania,
Slovakia, and Switzerland.

The Muslim cartoons were reprinted in France and Germany, so they may have more general hate-speech laws that are relevant.

You can add to that list Sweden, where hate speech laws were used to prosecute a priest for speaking out against homosexuality. Fortunately in that case, the Swedish Supreme Court overturned the verdict. It’s clear that Europeans have a different approach to free speech than Americans.

Shermer defends Irving’s rights and argues against restrictions on free speech. Of course he uses a slippery slope argument.

Freedom is a principle that must be applied indiscriminately. We have to defend
David Irving in order to defend ourselves. My freedoms are inextricably tied to
Irving’s freedoms. Once the laws are in place to jail dissidents of Holocaust
history, what’s to stop them from spreading to dissenters of religious or
political histories, or to skepticism of any sort that deviates from the
accepted canon?

It’s not clear that there is a logical leap from outlawing Holocaust denial to outlawing religious or political dissenters. But personally, I agree with him. Free speech is important enough to protect, even if it’s speech of people you disagree with. I know some of you have different tolerances for what types of speech should be protected. Either way I think it’s important to talk about and to learn from Europe’s experiences.