JackelopeBreeder

This has to be one of the most ironic articles I''ve seen in a while. Let''s charge legal immigrants more and give it up for free to illegal aliens.

WASHINGTON — The Homeland Security Department is studying whether legal immigrants seeking citizenship and other benefits should pay higher application fees.

The fees now charged don''t reflect the full cost of doing business, Emilio Gonzalez, director of the department''s Citizenship and Immigration Services, said Wednesday.

Applying for citizenship now costs $330. Applying for a green card conveying legal residency costs $325. Applicants also now pay a $70 fingerprinting fee in each case.

"American citizenship is priceless," said Gonzalez, a naturalized citizen. "I think people will pay."

The study will review costs of facility improvements, training, equipment and technology and determine how much of a fee increase is needed to cover them. If the agency needs new facilities, it ought to be able to build them and pass on that cost, Gonzalez said.

The Senate passed a bill last week that would offer a chance at citizenship for many of the 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants already in the country. It would require the immigrants to pay at least $3,200 in fees to get on the path to citizenship. The bill must be negotiated with the House, which passed a very different bill focused on immigration enforcement.

The agency — which is financed by the fees it collects for naturalization, permanent residency and work permit applications — is required to do a fee analysis every two years. Its fees were last raised in 2004 to cover increased security costs.

Immigrant advocates have long argued that the agency''s costs cannot all be absorbed by application fees and have pressed Congress to appropriate money to pay for some costs, such as fees for indigent, asylum or refugee applicants. Fees for such applicants are waived on occasion and the costs are included in charges to other applicants.

Crystal Williams, associate director for programs at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, welcomed the analysis, saying it would help decision makers comprehend the costs the agency faces.

But Rosalyn Gold, director of policy and research for the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials, said she is concerned the study could mean more fee increases.

Fees for such applicants are waived on occasion and the costs are included in charges to other applicants.

Methinks somebody is looking at waiving those fees millions of times -- and let the honest immigrants pay the excess freight.

I may have a rather elegant solution for Citizenship and Immigration Services'' budget woes.

The Border Patrol catches over a million illegal aliens along the southern border every year. Most are given voluntary deportation back to Mexico. Most immediately try again and quite a few are caught repeatedly.

How about we start charging each deportee a nice fee for services rendered? Say $100 a head each time they are escorted back to the gate.

The other choice could be time spent in a tent city jail doing community services until we get around to involuntarily deporting them.

If you haven''t signed up for the Minuteman Forum, check a couple of posts down from this and follow the link to get registered. Looking forward to seeing you there.

Buenos nachos, muchachos! This just in -- a last minute addition to the Senate Amnesty Bill.

Senator Dodd''s S.Amdt.4089 contains the following language:

(b) CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT.--Consultations between United States and Mexican authorities at the federal, state, and local levels concerning the construction of additional fencing and related border security structures along the United States-Mexico border shall be undertaken prior to commencing any new construction, in order to solicit the views of affected communities, lessen tensions and foster greater understanding and stronger cooperation on this and other important issues of mutual concern.

Hmmm. I''m not rightly sure, but I don''t think we consulted with anyone other than the land owner over this weekend''s border fence project. Guess I''ll have to email Senator Dodd his own personal set of photos of the festivities.

Yet one more good reason why this Senate bill should have a stake pounded through its heart, be buried in unconsecrated ground and then be overplanted with garlic and poison ivy.

Buenos nachos, muchachos. Tonight''s contribution to the debate comes from Mac Johnson. I am posting his essay in its entirety as it is one of the best I''ve seen. This is highly recommended reading for all of you as it shows a good bit of what we Minutemen can accomplish -- and shows the real impact of Jim Gilchrist''s candidacy for Congress.

It’s seldom a good idea to elevate a single editorial to the status of representing an entire side’s thinking in a major debate, such as the current debate over illegal immigration. This is especially true when the editorial is really quite bad.

But, just occasionally, a piece appears that is so poorly argued, so broad, and so internally flawed that it does seem to encapsulate every possible weakness in an opponent’s logic. The Wall Street Journal published such an editorial last Friday, trumpeting the Editorial Page’s long-held belief in the economic wisdom of America entirely abandoning her borders.

More than anything else, in my opinion, it shows that the central failing of the right-wing of the open borders lobby is viewing human beings as interchangeable parts -- to be self-traded like commodities across any frontier according to the simple dictate of supply and demand. But men and women are not some sort of sentient pork belly. Men and women are what nations are made of. They carry in their hearts and minds the culture and beliefs and common experiences that make one nation rich and free and another poor and corrupt.

When you discuss the idea of unrestricted human migration across national borders, you have to recall this. Immigration has economic consequences, but it is not exclusively an economic issue. It is not even primarily an economic issue. It is primarily a social or political issue. And when the immigration in question is illegal, then it becomes an issue of the rule of law as well.

That is the second great failing of the WSJ editorial. It seamlessly confuses the disparate issues of legal and illegal immigration, complaining about enforcement of law as if such were merely a costly inconvenience, not one of the foundations of America’s success. The editorial ended up as nothing less than a snotty, aristocratic assault on the rule of law. Current immigration law harms the business class for which the WSJ speaks, they claim, so it should be ignored until it can be done away with entirely.

The editorial began by trumpeting the outcome of last week’s special election to replace former Rep. Chris Cox (R.-Calif.) as a major victory for the proponents of unrestricted immigration. Or, as the editorial propagandized, it was a defeat for the “anti-immigration lobby,” and their backers, “anti-immigrant conservatives.” Together, these two groups compose what the editorial refers to ominously as “the restrictionists.”

Apparently, anyone who supports any restriction on immigration is a dangerous “restrictionist.” From this, we can gather that the WSJ supports a world in which there are no restrictions upon immigration into the United States whatsoever. Keep in mind that 95% of the world’s population does not currently live in the United States and that, if just 5% of this pool decided to walk across a truly “unrestricted” border, Americans would become a minority in their own nation. So you decide who the ungrounded ideologues in this argument are and who deserves to have a silly-sounding political term applied to their beliefs.

Perhaps the editors at the Journal should henceforth be known as “Anti-nationalists,” for what they are really proposing is the end of nations, or at least the end of the one nation in which they have influence, the United States. As I have said, a nation is nothing more than its people and their beliefs. When you propose immigration in excess of the ability of a nation to assimilate immigrants (and the only alternative would be to “restrict” immigration) you are proposing to end the current nation and its culture.

So what was the outcome of the special election that so buoyed the anti-nationalists? It was simply that the Republican candidate won -- in a district gerrymandered to ensure that only a Republican candidate could win. But the outcome was actually in doubt for a time, because a third party candidate, Jim Gilchrist, had entered the contest on a platform of punishing illegal immigration.

The election laws and customs of the United States are set up to explicitly discourage the success of any third party. By traditional standards, “successful” third party candidates are those who can garner more than 4 or 5% of the vote. Ross Perot, the most successful third party candidate of modern times, garnered 19% of the vote for President in 1992. Jim Gilchrist won 25% of the votes in last Tuesday’s special election.

Without an established party, without corporate funding, without any real skills as a candidate, and with the system stacked squarely against him, Mr. Gilchrist equaled the performance of the entire Democratic Party in this district (28%) -- all while having only one issue in his platform: enforcement of immigration laws.

According to the Journal, this meant that the Republican candidate won the election “in a walk with 45%” of the vote. But as the Journal points out just a few sentences away from this semantic gobsmacker, the district is “one of the most conservative GOP districts” in the country. Representative Cox won the district just a year ago with 65% of the vote. 45% is thus hardly “a walk.” It is a warning. Being on the wrong side (the anti-nationalist side) of one issue kept a major party from getting even a simple majority of the votes in a district specifically engineered to give it a predictable and overwhelming victory. Everything one needs to argue against the editorial is contained within it.

This is a pattern that continues, as the Journal argues that supporting open borders (i.e. anti-nationalism) is politically wise for the Republican Party. According to this foray into fantasy, Republicans must not restrict immigration because the large number of immigrants and their kin already here will then vote for the Democrats. You know, unlike today. Or as the Journal puts it:
“The real political danger for Republicans comes from the vocal restrictionist minority who want to drive GOP candidates back into the demographic box canyon they''ve walked into so often in the past. If they become the overtly anti-immigration party, Republicans run the risk of permanently alienating another fast-growing ethnic constituency, in this case Hispanic Americans.”

“The GOP did this with the Irish and Italians in the 1920s, with Asians in Hawaii after World War II, and with Hispanics in California with Proposition 187 in the 1990s. A Republican in California will soon be able to win 70% of the white vote and still lose statewide if he can''t pick up more Hispanic votes.”

So you see, 20 years of unrestricted illegal immigration has led to a situation in which Republicans will soon be able to win 70% of the white vote and still lose the election, and that’s why Republicans should support more unrestricted immigration. The logic is astounding. Consider also the historical examples provided by the editorial itself.

The Irish and Italians and Asians were overwhelmingly Democrat immediately after arriving. They naturally gravitated to the party claiming to represent the poor and strange, when they were, in fact, poor and strange. As they became assimilated and middle class (i.e. Americans), however, they became increasingly Republican.

The message should be clear: new immigrants tend Liberal/Democrat; their assimilated descendents then tend increasingly Conservative/Republican with each generation. Restricting immigration thus favors Republicans. Unrestricted immigration clearly favors Democrats. The Republicans did not “permanently alienate” these constituencies at all. They simply had to wait for them to become less alien. The dependent “Irish and Italians” of the 1920’s went on to produce conservative icons like Ronald Reagan and Antonin Scalia just one or two generations later. Consider also, that Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo, the leading “restrictionist” in Congress, is himself the grandson of Italian immigrants.

But a Reagan could never become a conservative icon today, because no conservative Republican could today be elected Governor of California -- due to the same sort of unrestricted immigration that the Journal says Republicans should now support.

The Journal editors then go on to complain that the “restrictionists” have somehow successfully labeled them as part of an out-of-touch “elite” -- a conceited thing to do. The same non-conceited, non-elite editors state later in the piece: “We get the same message from nearly every business executive who comes through our offices…” The conceit of the restrictionists is painful, isn’t it? I mean, we all have the world’s most powerful business executives wandering in and out of our offices on a daily basis and yet no one calls us an out-of-touch “elite.”

If wages become depressed, then let them eat options. Who you calling “elite”?

Finally, the editorial finished with the most corrupt message I have ever seen in a major newspaper:
"Republicans seem intent not merely on increasing border patrols but also on further harassing law-abiding businesses that happen to hire illegals, as if anyone can tell the difference between real and fake immigration documents. Only Republicans would think it''s smart politics to punish their supporters for hiring willing workers."

And only those who see the world through the soda straw of economic self-interest could editorialize against law enforcement and in favor of the right of a self-denied elite to be able to openly disobey whatever laws they find too “restrictive”.

It’s as if a local paper were to have the gall to complain that an overzealous vice squad were making it hard for friends to profit from prostitution. I mean, every pimp that comes through our offices says the same thing.

And that sort of elitist conceit on the part of the anti-nationalists is why the immigration issue is creating enough frustration among American voters that they are even willing to experiment with unknown and handicapped third parties to try to make their voice heard by the same politicians and executives to which the editors of the Wall Street Journal have such easy access.

Men are not widgets, and immigration affects more than just numbers in an abstract spreadsheet. America is not merely an economic opportunity zone for all comers to profit from. America is a homeland. America is a home to a distinct culture and the people that created it or have been assimilated into it. It is possible that the philosophical bookends of rightist globalism and leftist multiculturalism have squashed the instinct of that people to protect their culture and to claim the right to restrict entry into their home. But I doubt it.

Unrestricted illegal immigration is a problem for both major political parties and it may well destroy one of them –- but not because, as the Wall Street Journal claims, anyone is listening too much to the “restrictionists.”

Mr. Johnson, a writer and medical researcher in Cambridge, MA., is a regular contributor to Human Events. His column generally appears on Mondays. Archives and additional material can be found at www.macjohnson.com.

I highly recommend all of Mr. Johnson''s writings.

Buenos nachos, muchachos. I’m sitting here laughing my fanny off.

It seems the United States was blessed with yet another visit from Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez. As is his wont, he continues to bray like a jackass about a guest worker program and legalization of every illegal Mexican in our country. So I’ll address this insane screed to Don Luis personally:

Thanks Luis – I really needed the laughs. I’m beginning to like you in a strange way. You’re totally silly, but you almost write my material for me. I can sit here and guzzle Virgin Islands rum and type at random while the spell checker corrects my somewhat impaired typing.

You just might get that guest worker program you want in a couple of years, but only after we gringos slam the border shut to anything but acceptable legal traffic. No more mojados; no more narcotrafficantes. As a high ranking government official you might want to consider self-imposed exile in a country several time zones away; the natives will be getting restless and the gentlemen in the drug cartels may not have much further use for you other than as an “example”. Let’s be honest, Señor Derbez. Your oil revenues, tourist industry, and remittances from illegal Mexicans in my country combined do not quite manage to match the revenues generated by your drug cartels. If you can’t keep the border open, you’re a burnt tortilla.

Perhaps I digress too far.

Let’s say that a couple of years from now the United States decides that it does in fact need some sort of guest worker program. Is there any reason at all why we should show your country any sort of preferential treatment over the other nations on this globe? I most emphatically think not. What have you done for us lately? (Sound of crickets chirping while I await an answer.)

Let’s imagine that in the year 2009 we need 1,000,000 guest workers. In the interests of international fairness and political correctness, those openings should be open to all – pro-rated in accordance with their percentage of the world’s population. With the world population currently running at something just over six billion, Mexico’s share of the pie is about 1.5%. So tell me Don Luis, who makes up the 15,000 you are allowed to send to El Norte?

I await a reply, but I’m not holding my breath.

Sincerely, JackelopeBreeder (Cazamigrante by choice.)

Buenos nachos, muchachos. It has been a fun weekend and it ain’t over yet.

For the past few days Las Vegas Minutemen Pat Moore and Rodney Heiselman have been visiting Cochise County, Arizona for a close up look at the current situation on the border. Pat and Rod probably got far more of an orientation trip than they originally planned – definitely more than most Minutemen have received in the past.

Upon arrival they were asked to assist with a joint Minuteman – American Border Patrol technology and tactics demonstration. Both quickly volunteered and saw aspects of the border usually limited to local residents. To make their trip even more memorable, the French TV documentary crew that has been following the Minuteman Project since April was also in town again and both gentlemen learned the joys of wearing a wireless microphone while their every word and action was recorded on videotape for posterity. Pat and Rodney proved to be most admirable spokesmen for the Minutemen.

The technology and tactics demonstration was a simple proposition. American Border Patrol had just completed installation of some new upgrades to their Border Hawk M surveillance aircraft. Testing of the new capabilities was needed, along with a tactical demonstration of how fast ground assets could be moved to exploit what was seen by the airborne systems. The Minutemen provided the “boots on the ground”.

The fun began Friday night with a trip to the border fence just west of the San Pedro River to give the video crew an orientation. This produced some very bizarre video footage in infrared and I hope it makes it into the final cut of the documentary. No moon, just starlight; a few stunted ghostly-looking trees, the barbed wire strands of the border fence, and one of the border monuments – a squat obelisk looking like it had been transported from ancient Egypt.

An hour later, a coyote scout got a bit careless with a flashlight. He suddenly found himself standing in the warm glow of a two million candlepower spotlight with the sound of a pair of American Border Patrol’s ATVs roaring into life. I believe he made Olympic record time getting back into Mexico.

Saturday consisted of day and night flights by Border Hawk M. A number of small groups were spotted gathering near the fence, but the highlight of the day mission was the overhead surveillance of a Mexican load vehicle that dumped its passengers at the east banks of the San Pedro River. The Minutemen were able to observe this both on the video feed from the aircraft and with binoculars as the drop off point was less than a mile from our position on the plateau west of the river. The Minutemen escorted the video crew into the area for possible footage, but scanner traffic indicated that the Border Patrol had chased them back into Mexico. Still, we got a nice hike along the San Pedro and eastwards along the border road towards Los Corrales.

(Before someone in leadership throws a conniption, we were unarmed. The San Pedro Riparian Conservation Area is a no gun area so the most lethal implements we had were pocket knives.)

The night mission provided a grim reminder of the more violent aspect of border security. A vehicle crashed the fence west of Naco in a bid to make its way north. Border Hawk, with Glenn Spencer at the controls and Mike King on the thermal imagery system, was able to stay on top of the action and we watched the Border Patrol vector additional vehicles in to make the stop before reaching the highway. The stop was made, but then we heard the call over the scanners for all available backup followed by the code for radio silence. In all likelihood this was a drug runner and he wasn’t feeling cooperative. Our last view of the action was of a small sedan literally surrounded by Border Patrol vehicles and nobody getting out of the sedan. The details may come out in a Border Patrol press release this week – or maybe not.

Pat and Rod head back for Las Vegas this afternoon with stories their fellow Nevada Minutemen may find hard to believe – but it’s all documented on video tape. Local Minutemen will continue to assist the video crew over the next week.

Buenos nachos, muchachos.

The White House Press Office just provided me with a laugh big enough to wipe out the disgust following the President’s speech here in Tucson. If you missed the speech, you missed – nothing. It was the same old lame old stuff we’ve been hearing for the last few years. Word order was changed a bit and there was some fancy footwork with figures, but the bottom line was – nothing. It would have made a nice musical comedy moment if “Let’s do the Time Warp again” had been playing in the background.

You may have noticed a recent fad amongst our politicians: titling bills so they form some sort of catchy acronym to make it more popular – PATRIOT Act, DREAM Act, etcetera ad nauseum.

Shortly after the speech today, the White House Press Office dumped a fact sheet to the masses in an attempt to puff up the content of the Administration’s proposals. However, somebody had a Freudian moment and entitled it “Securing America Through Immigration Reform.”

Logically, we can now refer to this as the SATIRE proposal.

I suppose it also gives the White House a way to dodge when the outrage mounts. I can hear it now: “Didn’t you read the title? We weren’t trying to pull the wool over your eyes; we were just pulling your leg!”

Anyway, somebody in Washington DC is in for an unpleasant moment back behind the woodshed when the Boss catches on.

Buenos nachos, muchachos. The Devil made me do this. The two of us are sitting here knocking down strong drink while I occasionally hose him down with Old Spice to curb the odor of brimstone. We made a deal; he helped write it and sometime in the next few days I am required to make disparaging remarks about someone''s hairstyle. Anyway...

Welcome to southern Arizona, Mr. President. I would say welcome to the border, but you’ll actually be 60 miles north of it on an Air Force base before jetting north to join the more urbane crowd in Phoenix at a fund raiser.

Reportedly, you plan to speak upon the subject of border security. I would like to offer some unsolicited advice on your pontifications, particularly some advice on a couple of things not to say. You may have heard rumor that the natives who live along the border here are a bit restless; certain sound bites tend to get them thoroughly riled up. Believe it or not, there are a lot of people down here who strongly object to being considered acceptable collateral damage while our politicians dither.

First off, do not use that hackneyed phrase, “Family values don’t end at the Rio Grande.” This is Arizona, not Texas; our border is not a river, it’s 260 miles of kittie litter, generally delineated by a few strands of rusty or busted barbed wire. The only wet backs around here come from sweat, not riding an inner tube.

To be brutally honest, a very large number of illegal aliens crossing here display no values whatsoever. If an alien falls behind, they’re left behind as buzzard chow. On the bright side, this affords the occasional American hiker with the opportunity for a true Shakespearean moment: “Alas poor Yorick; I knew him, Horatio.” as they ponder the significance of a sun-bleached skull.

Maybe you should consider the “values” displayed in the context of the depredations the aliens inflict on us as they make their way north. Your ranch in Crawford is almost 300 miles from the border, so your perceptions might be a little bit different. How often have your fences been cut or smashed down simply because they were in the way? How many dogs have you lost simply because they barked at an inopportune moment? When was the last time a bunch of complete strangers ransacked your house while you were out shopping?

You have the benefit of a large Secret Service detail. You will not wake up in the morning to find your bullet-proof limo or Pickup Truck One missing or find your south forty covered with cast off trash and human waste. I really doubt you have ever stumbled out of bed at 3:00 a.m. to find a number of rude strangers standing on your porch demanding (that’s demanding, not asking) food, water, use of the telephone, and rides into town.

Welcome to the reality of life along the Arizona border. Geronimo was never this much of a pain in the fanny. The almost unknown Naco Border Patrol Station catches more aliens in an average day than Geronimo had followers at any given time – and we still talk about the famed Apache War like it was as epic as the Trojan War.

Don’t use phrases like “earned legalization.” That’s just a nicer sounding phrase for that word you politicians fear – amnesty. If you do use this phrase, do be so kind as to explain to the rest of us exactly how many high crimes and misdemeanors are going to be forgiven? Will it include things like document fraud, identity theft, tax evasion, fraudulent use of government welfare services, driving without a license or insurance, or any of the other fun addenda to being an illegal alien? You know – those little social faux pas that send American citizens off to prison.

Is there any sort quid pro quo in the form of an amnesty for Americans? Overdue library books? Insufficient postage? Failure to wear a seatbelt, maybe?

Of course I am asking a rhetorical question – there is an unstated amnesty in almost every guest worker proposal wending its merry way through Capitol Hill. I have seen nothing substantial about going after the true perpetrators: the employers of illegal aliens. It isn’t about “jobs that Americans just won’t do”, it’s about employers who don’t want to pay an American what the job is worth. It’s about employers who get the slave labor wage break and pass all other burdens off on that ripe sucker, the American taxpayer. This practice is rightfully known as “Privatize profits; socialize costs.”

While you’re in front of the microphone bloviating on the above listed ideas, it would be a polite gesture on your part to apologize to one particular group of American citizens. They used to own their own businesses but were driven out because they had too much personal honor and integrity to use illegal labor. I believe you and your friends refer to them as “the dumb ones.”

In closing, you might be well advised to just give the troops at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base a rousing wartime inspirational speech. Send a minion out for a copy of the movie, Patton. It’s opening minutes are chock full of good material.

Buenos nachos, muchachos. Just what’s bueno about it I really don’t know. I’ve been doing a slow burn since I read this piece of crap ffrom the New York Times.

A Fence on the Border

The anti-immigration politicians certainly know how to get attention. Representative Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California, attracted a full battery of TV cameras the other day with his latest proposal to build a big strong fence along the Mexican border. The idea is to stop the illegal immigrants who enter the country mostly to take hard, low-paying jobs that Americans refuse. Only as a bumper sticker does this "fence ''em out" plan work. As immigration policy, it will just cost billions.

As the likes of Mr. Hunter tap into this politically rich vein, more thoughtful lawmakers in Washington are doing the harder work of seeking a more comprehensive approach. These lawmakers would secure the borders, of course, although probably not with a fence. They would also create a temporary workers program for those who want to fill the unwanted jobs. And finally, any workable immigration plan must deal with the 11 million illegal immigrants who are already in the country.

At this stage Congress seems to be slowly circling in on a policy. The House is focused on enforcement of border security first and, in some cases, finally. So far the Senate seems to be offering hope for a more comprehensive approach early next year, with Senator John McCain, the Arizona Republican, leading a rare bipartisan effort. The White House wants a comprehensive plan, but Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has moved ahead, promising more security guards on borders and changes in policy that would allow guards to send all of these trespassers back the way they came.

That may help in the short run, but it''s a little like adding more buckets to carry out the flow from a broken water main. As Representative Jim Kolbe, another Arizona Republican, pointed out after Mr. Hunter proposed his big fence, there are 10 times as many border guards on patrol in Arizona than there were a decade ago, and a lot more people crossing the border.

Here is my reply to the perfumed presstitutes at the Times.

Greetings from Cochise County, Arizona. There are only about 125,000 legal residents of this county despite the fact you could drop Connecticutt and Rhode Island in here and still have room for overflow parking. In the last two or three years between 20 and 25% of the illegal aliens crossing the border came right through here. The Border Patrol caught between 150,000 and 175,000 illegal aliens here in each of those years – and only caught a small fraction of those who jumped the fence. Most of those caught were given voluntary deportation and just tried again until they hit the home run, so the apprehension figures are all but meaningless.

On their way to the Promised Land of El Norte, these illegal aliens ripped us a new one.

Is your fence in the way? It will be cut or knocked down. Just misdemeanor mischief – until one of your cows wanders out on the road and a motorist finds out in a last split second before Eternity that Elsie the Cow is perfectly configured to slide up the hood of a Honda Accord, through the windshield, and turns them and any passengers into bloody hash.

If your dog barks at the wrong time or objects to having its territory invaded by strangers, it will probably be time for a trip to the pet cemetery.

If a group of illegal aliens runs shy of food and/or water, they won’t be stopping at Safeway or 7-Eleven. It’s going to be five-finger discount at any remote house. Or the occupant suddely finds themselves facing a crowd of rude strangers at the door demanding – not asking, demanding – food, water, use of the telephone, and rides. (This phenomenon will really give you a desire for a flamethrower as a home defense weapon.)

Let’s try what seems like a fairly benign aspect of illegal aliens – the trash and sewage they leave in their wake. The Federal Bureau of Land Management estimates that every illegal alien jettisons 8 to 10 pounds of trash before making that magical ride north – normal human waste isn’t mentioned. Is any of this going in garbage cans, dumpsters, or Porta-Potties. No. Does our government do anything about it? No. Clean up is handled by local volunteer groups – and that fact is giving our local public health officials a screaming conniption fit. Try wearing a hazmat suit under the Arizona sun; you’ll look like a Thanksgiving turkey in short order. Drug resistant TB, anyone? Hepatitis A, B, or C? Chagas? Leprosy? All are making a strong come back here in the land of the flea and home of the slave.

Who do we blame?

Latin American politicians from here to Tierra del Fuego to begin. Face it, 99% can’t talk about concepts like honesty and integrity without the pee stains of guilt showing up on camera. Or how about the greedy little dung beetles here in El Norte who insist they need their cheap labor fix? String them all up by their heels from lamp posts and use them as piñatas.

As for our home-grown politicians, I have only one word of hope. Maybe Pfizer Pharmaceuticals can put its ultra-smart prople to work on mutating Viagra. This country is sorely in need of a drug that can fix spinal erectile dysfunction.

Buenos nachos, muchachos! My originals plans for this evening after departing the day job was to take a short nap before following the yellow dirt road to the land of the illegal alien trails. I just do not consider the evening a success unless I manage to make someone''s journey a little more interesting.

Unfortunately I just stumbled on an article that I truly believe should be required reading. It is by Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D., a most prolific writer on our border and immigration woes. The nap is now out of the question for me and I figure I might as well inflict high blood pressure on everyone else who hangs out here.

I would post it here, but it is l-o-n-g, detailed, and has a large number of hypertext-linked references. Despite its length, the article is marked "Part 1" and one wonders what will follow in future parts.

Click the link below and after arriving at the article, bookmark it for later reference. Enjoy...

Insanity Reigns -- Gov''t ''Aids and Abets'' Illegal Aliens! (Part 1)

The current usage of the phrase “immigation reform” easily qualifies as one of the most savagely twisted examples of semantics in current politics. Absolutely none of the proposals I have read to date has anything to do with immigration.

Nowhere in all the rhetoric and sophomoric sound bites is there a single reference to that forgotten group – legal immigrants. Remember them? They’re the honest people who are trying to reach this country using the legally prescribed channels. They spend thousands of dollars in fees, submit reams of paperwork, undergo thorough background and health checks – and wait for years while the bureaucracy shambles along and randomly loses key documents. It’s a miracle we have any legal immigration at all.

Has anyone reading this screed seen any proposals to fix legal immigration? If so, I really want to hear about it. Our government can’t even begin to handle the 500,000 still legally waiting offshore at any given moment in anything like a timely fashion. Our politicians must be living in a drug-addled alternate reality if they think the government can even begin to handle the 10 to 12 million illegal aliens estimated to be working here. Toss in their families and we could easily be talking about 30 million “guests”.

First, stop and think of the sheer size of the bureaucracy needed to administer a guest worker program of that magnitude. You would needs tens of thousands of new government workers: clerks, investigators, adjudicators, etc. One of the first things to happen would be diversion of a very large chunk of the legal immigration workforce at Citizenship and Immigration Services to handle the illegal alien hordes. Legal immigration would slow to a virtual halt; is that fair to those who have been trying to get here legally? Does this constitute “immigration reform”?

It is nothing but amnesty for illegal aliens, even if few of our politicians have the spine to admit it. Most politicians would have to put on a double pair of Depends undergarments before uttering the word. Unfortunately, amnesty is a constant aspect of the game on our southern border.

When an illegal alien is caught crossing the first time, it’s a misdemeanor. If they’re Mexican, they are offered voluntary deportation in lieu of charges – a form of amnesty – and returned home. The Border Patrol sees a lot of repeat clientele; under Federal law, each repeat offense is a felony. Still, they are “amnestied” back across the border, sometimes dozens of times. Do we let all the felony counts slide?

Let’s look at the colorful life of an illegal alien and the list of legal issues that make their existence here possible: document fraud, forgery, identity fraud, identity theft, working illegally, tax evasion, tax fraud, fraudulent use of government benefits, etcetera ad nauseum and most are considered felonies. Do we amnesty all of these activities as well?

If an American citizen gets caught at any of these pursuits they end up as a Guest Worker – as a Guest of the State – and amnesties are few and far between for them.

The government owes the rest of us the assurance that any guest worker meets the same background checks as anyone trying to legally immigrate. They at least owe us something better than the existing system that renewed several 9/11 hijackers’ visas six months after they died whacking the World Trade Center and killing a few thousand people.

Most illegal aliens have totally inadequate personal documentation. Many have fraudulent documentation, often in a variety of names. We really don’t know who they are and have little chance of adequately checking their backgrounds in their home countries or here. And remember, their home country really doesn’t want them back, especially if they have a troublesome past.

From a taxpayer viewpoint, just looking at the size of the required bureaucracy for screening illegal aliens to become guest workers, all the cheapness in cheap labor went right out the window. Tax collections go up to pay for it, or tax revenues are diverted away from programs for American citizens.

Now let’s look at the side of “immigration reform” that our leaders constantly promise, but haven’t delivered since the days of Dwight Eisenhower: enforcement. Every “immigration reform” measure since that time consisted of an amnesty and a promise of future enforcement. We certainly got the amnesties, but apparently the future that contains the enforcement has not arrived yet.

So, if it ain’t “immigration reform”, just what is all this bizarre yammering from the District of Corruption?

Well, part of it is economic reform for Mexico. Until recently, their oil revenues were at Number One on the official revenue list. Mexico’s oil revenues for 2004 amounted to $24 billion; remittances from its erstwhile citizens here in El Norte almost matched that. Add in the $8 billion generated by trafficking in aliens and oil comes in second. Those who dabble in diplomacy advise me not to mention this, but aliens and oil are at a very distant second and third place disadvantage when compared to Mexico’s illicit narcotics revenues. Mentioning this rude fact in polite company is the same level of social and diplomatic faux pas as openly remarking on the Queen of England’s buns.

Another part is political reform, again for the advantage of Mexico. The best one can say for Mexico’s government is that it has been totally ineffectual since its independence from Spain. Then again, it was worse before that. Now, however, they have the advantage of being able to ship the discontented, the indigent and uneducated off to El Norte, thus delaying any serious reforms in that benighted country – and our government lets them.

The last part is labor reform pure and simple, but this time on behalf of certain industries in the United States that have become addicted to cheap labor. The more cunning amongst this crowd do not want to see any reforms whatsoever. Why?

Hector, the legal guest worker would have the same protections as an American employee: prevailing wages, Workers Compensation, Social Security, and all those other expenses the employer is trying to avoid. Remember, it’s all about privatizing profits and socializing costs. If Hector costs as much as a gringo, then he’s no longer cheap labor. But hey, there’s always Carlos, the next illegal alien over the fence, to replace him in the under-the-table wage group. Besides, if our previous history of non-enforcement is any indication, our unscrupulous employers can expect a visit from unicorns long before they see a visit from Immigrations and Customs Enforcement.

Do you want a peek at the real dirty little secret of “immigration reform”? Just look closely at the AgJobs bill championed by Congressman Chris Cannon of Utah. Hidden away in the details (and truly the Devil is in the details) is language giving amnesty and official forgiveness to any employer who ever transgressed against hiring illegal aliens. (Now that''s novel -- an amnesty for Americans.) I’m willing to bet the entire bankroll that similar language gets weaseled into any new version of “immigration reform”.

So, if this really isn’t immigration reform, let’s not waste legislative time discussing it. Let’s talk about enforcement instead. Once the government proves the long term ability and will for real enforcement – from the border to the boardroom – maybe we can take another look at some sort of guest worker program in a few years. We’ve seen enough amnesties; now it’s enforcement’s turn. We don’t need new laws for enforcement; we have plenty that have just never been used. We just need the appropriations for the resources to make the system work – and an absence of political interference.

A parting shot at the Cheap Labor Lobby: It’s almost Halloween; a lot of law-abiding citizens really want to see some of you wearing orange for the occasion.