From: Bob Turley (e-mail him)
Re: Brenda Walker's Blog: Million Dollar Mexican Moocher
I realize Los Angeles Times reporter Anna Gorman (e-mail her) probably did not choose the title for her newspaper's absurdly named series, "Life in the Shadows" of which her story about Van Nuys resident and illegal alien Ana Puente is a part.[Immigration Debate Hits Home for Liver Transplants, By Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times, April 13, 2008]
But it is preposterous for the LAT to suggest that Puente is "in the shadows". After all, Puente (or someone in her family) called ICE to report that she is in the US illegally and thus could qualify for full Medi-Cal benefits because of the serious nature of her illness.
When and where does the madness end?
And, in an action that I'm quite sure did not take place "in the shadows", Puente spoke openly to Gorman when she uttered this priceless gem:
"It doesn't matter if I'm undocumented. They should take care of me at UCLA for the rest of my life because I've been there since I was a baby."
As a Los Angeles resident, I know (as does Gorman and the LAT) that no illegal alien—and certainly not Puente— is "in the shadows".
You see them walking along the streets, driving their children to school, hanging out at day labor centers and waiting in clinics for a variety of treatments.
I read the comments to Gorman's story—110 when I stopped. They were overwhelmingly opposed to the system that favors illegal aliens over many hard working Californians.
The Los Angeles Times is a major cause of California's disaster, lobbying ceaselessly, as it does, for more immigration.
A few years ago the paper did a series on the pitiful Los Angeles Unified School District that it published over a span of four or five weeks. Never once was illegal immigration mentioned, as if it had nothing to do with the woeful condition of LA schools.
Like Walker, I'm a registered (and disgusted) Democrat. And, also like Walker, I'm pro-choice, pro-gay rights and pro-environmental causes, but also 100 percent opposed to illegal immigration and the anti-American entitlement attitudes it brings with it.
I recently bought a house in Maine—as far away from California as I can get.
Once the Southland real estate market improves and I can sell my existing home for a reasonable price, you can count me gone.
My most fervent wish after I leave is to hear that California has fallen into the Pacific Ocean.
My late, lamented Golden State could have been saved with reasonable enforcement laws and if our governors and Senators had taken strong anti-illegal alien positions.
Instead, they have all failed miserably. In the end, they deserve each other.
I could go on forever. But why harp on the obvious?
Simply stated, California's finished.
From: Peder Knudsen (e-mail him)
I am a Norwegian Social Democrat with great reservations about immigration, legal or otherwise.
However, may I respectfully make one point of criticism?
The economics of immigration is the most powerful argument that can sway politicians toward our side. At times VDARE.COM offers only the conservation viewpoint, obscuring the fact that both sides of the immigration argument may be of one mind.
Politicians, as well as the public, are most amiable to inter-party cooperation when there is agreement on both sides of the conservative/liberal divide in academia.
This is how "conventional wisdom" is born.
Therefore, it follows that it would be a good idea to emphasize that the mainstream consensus is that low-skilled immigrants are a negative for the overall economy – a statement that runs counter to all the "we need immigrants to do the jobs Americans will not do" that we so frequently hear.
As an example of this I point to Paul Krugman, the liberal New York Times columnist and respected scholar who admitted in his speech to Columbia University that such laborers have a negative impact on the economy.
If we apply the MainStream Media's logic that since Krugman is a liberal he therefore cannot be a racist, we have scored an important point.
The danger for the immigration restrictionist movement both in Europe and America is that we are always derided as right-wing bigots when, in fact, the left wing agrees with us on at least one key economic issue.
Joe Guzzardi comments: Krugman has come a long way in his immigration realization over the last few years. He now joins Robert Samuelson and George Borjas—among scattered other intellectuals—who acknowledge the negative impact low-skilled, poorly educated illegal aliens have on the overall economy.Perhaps one day Krugman will have influence on the NY Times and Wall Street Journal