“Emma Vasquez, who lives (nearby to the monkeys’ habitat), said a baby monkey once jumped from a tree onto her roof…’At first we all thought it was cute,’ Vasquez, 60, said. ‘Then it started tipping over all of my plants in the balcony, and growling at me.'”
I once lived next door to — unfortunately — a human being who did the very same thing. I’m just saying, it’s not behavior limited to “monkeys” but it sure is monkey behavior.
I read this story (“WHITE HOUSE FORMS COALITION TO SELL OPEN BORDERS TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC“), and I wondered how much more monkeying the American public has to take about immigration and border security. I’d feel far less suspicious if President Bush had ever or would ever just explain what his position is about border security (or lack thereof) but because he’s padding whatever his non-disclosed position is, I’m now thinking it’s a good indication that he’s not confident that his position is something most Americans will agree with. Thus, another “Coalition” forms.
I voted for President Bush, and I’m not considering changing political party registration (again) from Republican to Democrat (briefly registered as a Democrat until a few years ago, after a life-long registration as a Republican, explained on this site while approaching last year’s Presidential election), but, I am this day and recently taking pause as to Bush’s remarks about “vigilantes” in reference to the Minuteman Project, Bush’s intentions, from what he has revealed about his intentions, that “guest workers” are needed in the U.S. “to do the work that Americans won’t do,” among a number of other things related to illegal immigration and our border security/insecurity issues.
Like the rest of us voters, I am in a “wait and see” position here but that another “Coalition” is now being formed to “sell (President Bush’s) guest worker program” seems a portent of two things: (1.) President Bush isn’t being candid with the American people about immigration and border security issues, and (2.) neither is Congress (I don’t hear/read an uproar about this, as I do about, say, Bolton’s nomination and CAFTA and Medicare and more).
Voters, the overwhelming number of us, from what I’ve read, want far more effective enforcement on immigration legislation — if not just enforce existing legislation for starters — and we don’t support or want “guest worker” programs of any kind. The very notion exudes portent of increased illegal immigration. I can’t believe that President Bush is so naive as to believe a guest worker program would be a solution to border security, so he has to be underestimating the reasoning and intelligence of others because this makes no sense to me:
From an interview with President Bush in July 2005:
“On immigration reform, the president said he hopes to resolve differences with members of the Senate who are pushing for a more lenient law for illegal immigrants seeking work in the United States.
“‘This should not be an amnesty program,’ he said.
“Bush’s plan would provide temporary visas to guest workers. They would have to leave afterward, and program participants would get no special consideration when they apply for legal residence.
“‘It’s very important for the American people to know immigration reform will be done with a border security initiative that makes it clear to the people that we will do everything we can to stop illegal people from coming into our country,’ Bush said.
“He said a well-run guest worker program would help border security by taking pressure off the Border Patrol. If those who wish to enter the country to work can do so legally, he reasoned, fewer will try to infiltrate the border secretly.
“Flush from the series of legislative successes last week, the president expressed confidence that he can cut through strong, opposing political feelings on immigration and come out with a bill.
“‘I think there is broad agreement that the system is not working,’ Bush said. ‘It’s a very important issue and it’s an issue that we’ve got to get right.'”
Well, yes, it’s a broken system and yes, it’s not working but expecting any greater efficiency and function by these suggested means is foolish. Why not enforce the laws we have? Not being enforced, and even more likely to not be enforced with more illegal immigration, greater numbers arriving for even more lax labor requirements. With even more rewards, no less!
The point is that after a point of life experience, most of us learn to stop trying things that result badly. This reasoning by President Bush, in all due respect, about this issue seems to communicate the intent to persist in pursuing something already proven to result badly.
In all due respect.
Employers who employ illegal immigrants need to be penalized effectively to make ongoing violations of labor laws a non-rewarding process. If individual citizens violate laws (any laws), we face fines and sometimes incarceration (and should, depending). If employers violate labor laws and employ illegal immigrants, fail to verify identification documents, all of that, they get the promise of more illegal immigrants with the federal government’s help, at least as to a promise of “guest workers”.
Guest worker programs will only provide greater incentive for more illegal immigration. Perhaps that’s what Bush wants, I just don’t know, but all I can share here is that it isn’t what I want for the United States. The country deserves better. Citizens deserve better.
Just look at the mayhem we already have, and how we aren’t dealing with that — but repairable, fixable, possible to remedy in keeping with our existing laws, mostly. That there is serious consideration of not only not enforcing existing laws but supplanting them with ‘extra helps’ to violate the laws is not a very good indication of common sense, much less responsible leadership. Smashing things up because it’s frustrating otherwise is just monkey business.
In all due respect.