Letters

Letters 08-25-14

Save America

I read your paper because it’s free and I enjoy the ads. But I struggle through the left wing tripe that fills every page, from political cartoons to the vitriolic pen of Mr. Tuttle. What a shame this beautiful area of the state has such an abundance of Socialist/democrats. Or perhaps the silent majority chooses to stay silent...

Doom, Yet a Cup Half Full

In the news we are told of the civil unrest at Ferguson, Mo; ISIS war radicals in Iraq and Syria; the great corporate tax heist at home. You name it. Trouble, trouble, everywhere. It seems to me the U.S. Congress is partially to blame...

Uncomfortable Questions

defending the positions of the Israelis vs Hamas are far too narrow. Even Mr. Tuttle seems to have failed in looking deeply into the divide. American media is not biased against Israel, nor or are they pro Palestine or Hamas...

The Evolution of Man Revisited

As the expectations of manhood evolve, so too do the rules of love. In Mr. Holmes’s statement [from “Our Therapist Will See Us Now” in last week’s issue] he narrows the key to a successful relationship to the basic need to have your wants and needs understood, and it is on this point I expand...

Home · Articles · News · Random Thoughts · Unwelcome guest...
. . . .

Unwelcome guest (workers)

George Foster - February 5th, 2004

In an administration that is the first since Hoover’s to lose more jobs than gained, George W. Bush’s proposal to let millions of illegal workers become “legal“ seems to be a cruel joke at first glance.
Ironically, it is Bush’s liberal opponents who usually advocate such measures. The justification for similar amnesty plans is that these illegal workers do the jobs that Americans don’t want. That way U.S. companies are able to operate more efficiently with lower costs.
Look, the U.S. policy should either allow unlimited immigration pouring across our borders or have laws restricting the influx of foreigners. Unless you don’t have a problem with 99% of the world’s peoples attempting to squeeze into our 50 states, laws are needed to keep our population manageable.
We have the laws, including provisions for migrant workers and foreign visitors. What we don’t have is enforcement. About 10 million illegal foreigners (a large majority from Mexico) reside in the U.S. – most of them working or looking for jobs. No one can convince me that the 18 million unemployed American citizens are not competing for many of the same jobs that the illegals are seeking.
Also, what about the war on terrorism? Though we give lip service to stemming the flow of al Qaeda and other potential terrorists, thousands of illegal visitors slip into our country every week. Is amnesty offered for illegal immigration the message we want to send to those who consider crossing our borders unlawfully?
There is only one reason behind George W. Bush’s move to forgive the illegals – blatant pandering to the Hispanic residents in this country. The Hispanic population is skyrocketing in the U.S. – already surpassing the number of African-American residents. That can’t be a bad thing… I love the Latin culture. Many experts think the Hispanic vote will decide many national elections in the future, as early as the Presidential election of 2004.
Despite Bush’s heavily accented attempts at speaking Spanish on the campaign trail, Al Gore received most of the Hispanic vote in 2000. Since our president is apparently as difficult to understand in Spanish as English, he knows that giving amnesty to illegal workers is something Hispanic voters can comprehend. But will that be enough to send Hispanics into the Republican camp?
Recently, President Bush attended a special summit for the OAS (Organization of American States) in Monterrey, Mexico. It is safe to say that the ancestral countries of our Hispanic population have the worst relations with the U.S. than seen in years. According to a recent article in the Christian Science Monitor, many Latin American leaders feel the region has not become the priority Bush said it would be when he took office.
In part because of U.S. influence, most of the countries in this hemisphere have leaders who are now democratically elected. Ironically, these heads of state no longer follow the U.S. policies like sheep as in the past. For example, the leaders of Mexico and Chile have followed their population’s opposition to the Iraq War and voted against the U.S. in the United Nations Security Council before the invasion.
The summit was called because of growing poverty in some of the region’s countries and the perception of the rest of the hemisphere that the U.S. has forgotten about their neighbors in the quest to solve national security concerns. Those with this opinion point to U.S. blindness to the freefall of Argentina’s economy, our apparent support of Venezuela’s military coup against a democratically elected president, and our lack of support for the pro-U.S. president of Bolivia who was kicked out of office.
Latin Americans deserve better. With more cooperation from the U.S., their impoverished peoples might not be as desperate to enter our country illegally as is now often the case. Also, if we did a better job protecting our own borders, we might not need to invade foreign countries in the name of national security.
I agree with political commentator Bill O’Reilly who says that the U.S. needs an additional strong military presence to back up our border patrol. The last thing we need is a guest worker plan to encourage millions more to sneak into our country.


 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close