|
Saturday, April 08, 2006Woman dies after 911 operator refuses to believe childKARE, MN - A 5-year-old boy called Detroit 911 to report that his mother had collapsed in their apartment, but an operator told him he should not be playing on the phone ... When I saw the headline on AOL, I wondered where. But after a lifetime of reading the Freep I couldn't be surprised it was Detroit. But I'm probably a racist holding a good city back for my making of that comment. 
posted by gbarto at 11:40 PM On immigration, etc. Recently this page has taken a rather tough line on a) illegal immigration and b) the need for Mexico to get its own house in order or face the consequences, not use us as a pressure valve. On the other hand, this page has long railed against the excesses of the INS or the idea immigrants are bad. So, where do we stand? Roughly where we always have. To drag out, yet again, our "for shame" immigration story... Ten years ago or so, a young girl left France to teach at a small midwestern Christian college. She filled out her visa paperwork as best she knew how, noting that she was a teacher - per the university's recommendation. She then discovered she should have applied as a professor - the INS and 99.99% of academia have different distinctions between teacher and professor. When she filed an amended request for her visa renewal, she was deported for filing false statements - the statements she had a) sought to correct and b) had made a good faith effort in making in the first place. For the trouble of attempting to comply with U.S. immigration law, the young lady was arbitrarily deported by a bureaucrat who doubtless more in sorrow than anger had to enforce the laws of the country. Five years ago or so, on the other hand, a visa renewal request was approved and sent to Mohammed Atta. Months after he and 18 friends murdered 3000 people in cold blood in a series of suicide attacks. One year ago, a girl took a job in a Chinese restaurant in return for lousy wages and cheap rent in one of the restaurant owner's rental properties. She came here legally - student visa - but became illegal by working when a family member back home lost his job and could no longer support her. A few months later, she went further underground after leaving the restaurant - and thus, necessarily, the place where she rented - when working conditions at the restaurant became untenable. United States immigration policy today knows who the real threats are: people with jobs, people with improper paperwork, people whose lives failed to follow exactly the intended course. I'm quite certain that the ideological descendants of Mohammed Atta - people whose miserable lives and purposes don't vary - face fewer barriers in getting by here than the people we want here. As we consider amnesty, etc, what we need more than anything is to find our humanity and find some association with reality. Up to 9/11, life was a helluva lot easier for a wealthy Arab with no apparent purpose than for a migrant worker struggling to pay rent. Compliance efforts were plainly easier for Mohammed Atta than struggling students or aspiring educators. We need to get our heads out of our patooties long enough to look for immigration policy that finds a place for those working toward the American dream, rather than focusing on nativist "protect our jobs" idiocy that prefers visitors with no love of America and no intention of staying. Bottom line, the visa application for students and others needs to stop focusing on how soon you're leaving and who's going to pay for you and start focusing on the understanding that if you come, you pay your own way in return for basic social protections. If a Saudi wants to come here to learn to fly a plane, I don't care whether it's to park it in the Empire State Building or to shuttle his countrymen between Riyadh and Cairo. I see no reason for us to bust our humps to find a place for him. But if he wants to come here and start on the path to citizenship and assimilation, that's fine. Right now, our visa policy's a mess. And why? Because we invite in tons of people we don't really have a place for if it looks like there's a short term cash infusion involved. In the meantime, those who would come here to build lives invite the real suspicion, lest they clean a toilet for $6.75 that a white guy could make $12 cleaning. Those who are here illegally should, of course, either be deported or face a rough road getting accepted in. For those who say it's impossible, it's time for a "If they can put a man on the moon" speech. At the same time, though, we need to create conditions where coming here illegally isn't the logical course. We need to make life painful for government bureaucrats who block the paths of, rather than clearing the way for, those who make serious efforts at compliance. And missing those who just ignore the law is still more painful. We need a policy focused on letting in people who want to stay, not those who have agreed to leave. That way we can reduce the risk of the sort of occupation Europe is experiencing. We need, in short, to get back to a healthy bit of our mythology: It is time for an immigration policy that tosses out the salad metaphor and sends those who aren't committed to American - or at least thoroughly democratic and western - principles right after them. From there, we should get back to the melting pot and accept those most eager to assimilate into our society, making the American dream as universal as possible. This requires opening up our hearts and borders to those who want to come here and play by the rules at the same time that we crack down on illegals and take a good hard look at how much we should really be doing for those who want to come here, gather our knowledge and wealth and then leave with it for their own purposes and the purposes of their countries.
posted by gbarto at 8:41 PM Friday, April 07, 2006Precisely.(Krauthammer on immigration.) And Hewitt.
posted by gbarto at 11:53 AM Thursday, April 06, 2006Mary Katherine Ham points to this bit at Wizbang on Borders and banned books, complete with sniping in the comments.I think this commenter hits the nail on the head: Irony abounds here, Free Inquiry is published by the Secular Humanist Socity and it's read by "humanists, atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, rationalists, skeptics". I doubt many Whizbang regulars have read it, if they did, they probably oppose every printed word.As I noted earlier, this doesn't speak well for Borders. That's not to say that it speaks poorly either. It just suggests that the banned book promotions and the like are for marketing, rather than on pure principle - it sells with their demographic - in the same way that Frosted Flakes is part of a balanced and nutritious breakfast.What is interesting, as the commenter points out, is that the same people who mock the rubes from the American Family Association, save us all from the Moral Majority and assure that America remains America instead of devolving into a proto-fascist Bushitlerian police state can be cajoled into rolling over when the Islamonutters get antsy. It may be true that Muslims at large belong to a religion of peace whose practice gives life greater meaning and dignity, but the lofty left isn't taking any chances on the ones who didn't get the memo. Patrick Henry said, "Give me liberty or give me death." Much of the free world is saying, "Give me liberty, or don't, it's really up to you, I don't want to give offense." Now, were I kidnapped by Islamonutters and told that I might escape with my life if I declared Mohammed the one true prophet, I would cross my fingers and chant Allahu akbar. So I don't want to hold Borders to too high a standard here. It's just interesting that they won't hold themselves to the standard to which they traditionally pretend. Which tells us something really useful: The really dangerous people out there today aren't Republicans, aren't conservatives, aren't the folks in the religious right. The really dangerous people are the Islamonutters, and for all the mouthing of pieties and all the denial that there's a war on, the left knows it. Otherwise, they'd pull Heather Has Two Mommies, not The National Interest. The left today is experiencing an awful fit of cognitive dissonance: they rant freely about the fascist right that is chilling their speech. But their actions show what their words deny: they are as fearful as any pro-war partisan of the real threat to liberty today, the real fascists - the Islamofascists.
posted by gbarto at 11:25 AM Wednesday, April 05, 2006Lest my silence be mistaken, as has happened to bigger fish, I really don't give a rat's patootie one way or the other about DeLay. As the mighty Instapundit notes, he was sort of a backroom guy. When that meant assembling a ruling coalition for Gingrich, that was good. For Hastert, less so. It's the folks setting the tone that mattered, and the problem with the GOP today is not that DeLay was corrupt - or not - but that the larger party has fallen into a "holding down the fort" mentality where it doesn't want to devolve power or cut spending since that would mean reducing its own power and of the purse.The downfall of Newt Gingrich was a tragedy because it slowed an ideological movement with the potential to bring real change. Which is why his critics fought so hard to destroy him. The downfall of DeLay, though, is a matter of personal bad judgment wed to partisan score-keeping. What it means is that Denny Hastert will have to work harder to hold together a lackluster coalition at a time when the real idea people are in the Executive and Congress feels a bit bitter about it. But in the war of ideas, the consequence will be relatively small, much more like the downfall of Trent Lott and the drifting off of Bob Dole.
posted by gbarto at 12:10 PM I was almost ready to take the Democrats seriously, when I saw this quote from Harry Reid: "We are a country founded upon fairness and justice," Reid said. "An individual in real threat of torture or long-term incarceration because of his or her political beliefs can still seek asylum. But this bill closes the door to those who want to abuse America's inherent generosity and legal system."The quote, which started on Drudge, indicated that the Democratic leader in the Senate might be able to go toe-to-toe with Bush on immigration. Too bad it's from 1993.
posted by gbarto at 11:54 AM Monday, April 03, 2006We periodically direct people to the Conservative Observer, where our venture in Iraq is opposed from the right. There is also sober criticism of the war to be found on the left, though sparingly and in small pockets.A central problem, though, with the anti-war movement of today is its near complete failure to recognize the existence of evil outside the confines of America's borders, not to say the White House. When one proposes that George W. Bush is the true monster, ipso facto Saddam is an innocent victim, the expectation of being taken seriously is too much to ask. I am a conservative libertarian and have no intention of running with the anarcho-socialist crowd. Hell, I support what we're doing in Iraq and see the case for doing the same in Iran, even if I am tired of ugly newspaper headlines and prattle about Bushitler. But, from the anarcho-socialist side, there is an effort - however small - to purge the nutcases who define enslavement to the bureaucratic left and unconfessed fear of the Islamists as necessary to freedom from the Bushitlerian monster. Here it is, sober, cynical but wholly clear-eyed about how much evil the world can actually hold... The World Can't Wake. A sample passage: To oppose the carnage in Iraq while marching under the auspices of those who espouse authoritarian dogma is a sign both of cognitive dissonance and ethical bankruptcy. And for those protesters who will splutter in righteous indignation at anyone who impugns their militancy, it is worth pointing out that the question of ends and means also includes the matter of whose cause one associates with, and not merely whose war one opposes.As I say, this ain't my crowd. But the authors are at least aware that being anti-Bush at all costs - including the cost of one's reason - is not an option for those who want a better world and don't think the Bush administration has the right approach to getting there.
posted by gbarto at 12:45 PM |
Archives
|
Day By Day© by Chris Muir.Old TurkeyBlog here.
