Illegal Immigration Debate is Xenophobia Disguised

Reading about the illegal immigration laws passed in Price William and Loudoun counties, I am struck by the foaming-mouthed obstinacy of those who stop at the word “illegal”.

The upstanding citizens of both counties that refuse to debate any aspect of the multi-faceted relationship we have with immigration in America if the word “illegal” is present. It really defies all rational thought. Until you replace the word “illegal” with the word “foreigners”.

And in this context, I mean the definition of “foreigners” as people who are different in language, culture, and maybe physical appearance, and almost importantly, who are perceived as having a lower socio-economic status.

To test out my proposition, let’s take a few quotes as an example, and substitute “foreigners” for “illegal” and you’ll see what I mean.

Sue Flemining of Help Save Manasas

“If we turn our heads and permit illegal foreigners entry into our county without making any effort or identification, we are saying our language, our culture, our Constitution, our neighborhoods and our flag are inconsequential.”

Eugene A. Delgaudio (R-Sterling>

“We need help in Loudoun. We are struggling. We are a small county, and we can’t handle the hordes that are coming here and using up our services. Illegal Foreign immigration is taking a greater and greater toll on our community.”

Reading these two quotes in their new form, do you see what I mean? The upstanding citizens of Price William and Loudoun counties really don’t care about legal or illegal, that is a red herring. They are really scared about “those people” the different ones who do not conform to the accepted norms of sterile suburban life. Or as Woodbridge resident Chris King said:

“I’m tired of pressing ‘1’ for English” on the phone.

And I am tired of obscene hypocrisy of people like Ms. Fleming and Misters Delgaudio and King. The hypocrisy of their desire to discriminate against the very foreigners who built the houses those very upstanding citizens sleep in, pick the fruit they eat, wash the dishes they eat off, mow the lawns they take pride in, and pretty much do every menial minimum-wage-at-best job none of those very same upstanding citizens would ever demean themselves with.

Especially since we are all immigrants in the end.

59 Comments so far

  1. L Brown (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 1:24 pm

    The real savings at wal-mart come frome the fact they no longer buy American products, most of it is from over seas. Next time you walk through Wal mart make sure you look to see where the product you put in your shopping cart came from. When good ol’ Sam was still alive wal-mart was ran a little differently.

    Since illegals, at least those with stolen/fake SSN pay into SS but dont get a return back the difference is made up by them soaking up other tax dollars (not always federal)in class rooms, hopital emergency rooms, ect or do they just pay cash after services rendered? WHO PAYS FOR THAT?

    PLEASE explain how illegals working for less than fair market value benifits me. How does it benefit the average American who has a land scaping business and pays his LEGAL employees $12.00 per hour, when the competition using illegals pays their illegal employees $8.00 per hour. The LEGAL business man goes out of business and his employees are jobless. I forgot that never happens. Prior to the mass illegal invasion since 1986 those jobs never got done because there was’nt an illegal to do them. Remember before the mass influx of illegals these type jobs were done by LEGAL Americans.

    The only thing about quoting studies is that illegals don’t get things like health benifits so if an illegal helps a business make a larger profit through receiving lower wages. Its the tax payers who make up the difference in health benifits, education (since they don’t pay local income taxes in communities that have income taxes).

    Besides it being illegal using someone else’s SS# it endangers any benifit the legal person (SS card owner) actually may receive. Ill explain it this way. John Smith in Kansas receives $750.00 per month because he is unable to work due to his age or injury (this is just an example of what is going on). Now because of an illegal using his SS# he stops getting the only income he was receiving. John earned the SS income via years of putting into the SS system, now because an illegal using Johns SS# is showing that John has an income, this makes John ineligible to receive the SS income he needs, earned and deserves. Screw those people right, think about it. There are no victimless crimes.


  2. L Brown (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 1:50 pm

    WAYAN,TOM,DON- WHO IS NEXT, PLEASE, someone who reasonable if not about immigration itself at least about enforcing the LAWS of this COUNTRY. I can do this all day, because there is no benifit to amnesty/illegal immigration. A third grader can tell you that. According to CNN the unemployment rate in the U.S. is 5% and the percentage of illegal employment in the U.S. is 5%, thats CNN news reporting the the home of Anderson (I hate religion) Cooper.

    How about this North of the U.S. border (or South of the border, to me)Canada, yes socialist, free-health care, maple syrup pouring, round bacon eating Canada has said they have had enough. Canada has gotten rid of ANCHOR BABIES, how about that. Just a small (really not that small) step but a vital one.

    When a expectant mother in this country gives birth on U.S. soil back up the WELFARE trucks for the next 18 years. At least going the anchor baby route generates an actual legal SS#, you have to love the Gov’t.


  3. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 1:57 pm

    L Brown, all of your arguments thus far can be equally applied to citizens of the US who are not wealthy. Should we cut them off, too?


  4. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 2:08 pm

    Also, L Brown, economic theory suggests that there’s never 100% employment. It just doesn’t happen. There are multiple types of unemployment, even, and statistics don’t often break them down. I would suggest that much of the unemployment in the US is frictional, structural, cyclical and technological, most of which isn’t entirely undesireable. We’re not a place with Marxian unemployment, or Classical unemployment, honestly.


  5. Wayan (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 2:16 pm

    Tom,

    Psychological theory suggests that L Brown has now lost all understanding of reason or connection to logic, in fact, he’s foaming-mouthed obstinate now that the word “illegal” is mixed with the word “immigration”.

    In other words, he proved the whole point of my proposition in this post.


  6. Don (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 2:22 pm

    WAYAN,TOM,DON- WHO IS NEXT, PLEASE, someone who reasonable if not about immigration itself at least about enforcing the LAWS of this COUNTRY.

    I’m happy to discuss this issue till the cows come home, but if you’re going to get off onto a slavish we-should-just-follow-and-accept-all-laws kick we may as well stop now. In the history of this country we’ve had laws that range from supporting owning people as property, banning black-white marriage, interring innocent Japanese citizens during WW2, making consensual oral sex between a man and wife a jailable offense and you still can’t legally get yourself a vibrator in Texas.

    So just because someone makes something a law doesn’t mean I will or should respect it.


  7. L Brown (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 4:26 pm

    1) In response to Tom’s statement of
    L Brown, all of your arguments thus far can be equally applied to citizens of the US who are not wealthy. Should we cut them off, too?

    Here is the difference U.S. CITIZENS are here LEGALLY.

    2) Tom, I agree with you about there never being 100% employment, it will never happen in a FREE-SOCIETY. Marxian unemployment (defined as: the reserve army of the unemployed — is normally needed in order to maintain work discipline in jobs, keep wages down, and protect business profitability) Classical unemployment (defined as:the number of job-seekers exceeds the number of vacancies. However, the problem here is not aggregate demand failure. In this situation, real wages are higher than the market-equilibrium wage). Congrats Tom you were able to use to terms which are completely illrelevant to 99% of the American Society. But I’ll address them both. They are ideas, concepts, have no form or structure outside the confines of your business 101 classroom. Believe it or not we used to make most of our own goods and American Companies thrived with the use of a very small number of illegals.

    Foaming at the mouth. I provided a fiscal account of why illegal immigrants do not benifit my community, based on several studies. Can a foaming at the mouth person do such a thing. You provided a, well, nothing except stating big business gets rich(er) from illegal workers. I could have never came to such a conclusion. GREAT WORK TOM and by the way 2+2=4.

    But I do agree not all laws provide Justice, if that is what you meant by your last statement.

    However, regarding your (partial) sentence of:

    ‘but if you’re going to get off onto a slavish’, wait the word ‘slavish’ is incorrect (laws through out history don’t benifit slaves) what you meant to say was ‘if I was going to have an automaton mindset in regards to the law’ (that makes more sense and would have extend your use of useless big words which no one uses. Poor attempt Tom, WAYAN made more sense, correction he is just as confused as you.

    I do agree with your point of ‘we may as well stop this now’ you have no valid points and like WAYAN the more you write the more you expose your weak, factless based ideas.

    Befor you go (tail between legs, head hung low) show your counter points to my examples.

    1)American who hires legal workers at $12.00 per hour being for forced out of business by a American who hires illegals for $8.00 per hour. How did you explain this being good for America?

    2)John in Kansas, who stopped collecting Social Security because an illegal stole/bought/uses (pick the one which offends you the least) his Social Security. How is this situation good for America and it is happening.

    Don’t run TOM the readers want to know prior to making their ‘we are all immigrants’ sign (Oh yeah I don’t come from immigrant stock legal/illegal or otherwise, my ancestors were captives, so I guess we are all not immigrants).

    P.S. have WAYAN and DON help you answer those 2 simple questions. IF YOU DON’T ANSWER THE QUESTIONS YOUR READERS WILL KNOW YOU HAVE NO POINT AND THERE IS NOTHING POSITIVE TO BE GAINED BY AMNESTY/ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION and not enforcing the laws.


  8. Tom Bridge (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 5:00 pm

    L Brown, your attempts here have been fairly uncivil, and while I appreciate that you have some points that are valid, I’d prefer to keep things civil, if you please.

    Regarding the two examples:

    1) The markets that exist for $8hr employees are the ones that are full of unskilled labor. If we can train more people out of the unskilled labor pool (which we should do!), it’s not really an issue, is it? As it stands, I-9 violations cost you $25k a pop, so we’re not going to see Illegals showing up at BestBuy or Target or any medium-sized business. Where we see employment of illegal/undocumented immigrants is in the construction business and in restaurants (and then, not in the chains, generally) because there are…more lenient business practices in place.

    If we could improve enforcement in these two markets, much regarding the situation would change. But, is the addition of twenty new agents, in every metropolitan city in America, handling enforcement of Immigration law a cost-effective solution? 20 agents x $50k/yr = $1M/year. Now assume they need offices, and infrastructure and we’re looking at double the cost.

    ICE enforcement is suddenly real expensive. If you offset this by the businesses you’ll run out of town (Housing Industry, Restaurant Industry), where’s the economic gain?

    2) John in Kansas won’t stop receiving SS because someone steals his SSN. It doesn’t work that way.


  9. L Brown (unregistered) on July 24th, 2007 @ 8:00 pm

    THANK YOU FOR RECOGNIZING THE VALIDITY OF MY POINTS. I DO NOT LIE SINCE THE TRUTH IS SO EASY TO SEE.

    Tom B. I appologize for seeming to be rude, it’s just my country at stake, my children’s future and my survival in middle class America. Note to WAYAN, I’m not ‘foaming at the mouth’never was, TOM does everyone have to play nice or just me.

    In response to paragraph 1:
    Why should my tax dollars go to teach an illegal how to do my job? I can’t understand that logic. I would also like to point out that wal-mart paid 11 million dollars for having used illegal clean up crews. I don’t want to lump ‘Bestbuys or Target in with the wal-marts of the world in using illegal labor, but…. who knows.

    20 new agents in every city is a joke. That is like fighting a forest fire with a water pistol. I have a solution on how to provide adequate Custom/Border enforcement with out costing the American Public one dime. If I may:

    1) The gov’t has to re-classify the job positions of the 100,000 employees it has employed in the most wasteful organization ever created by the U.S. government. To get down to it, the Gov’t needs to get rid of TSA (transpo security admin. Prior to 9/11 airport ‘screening was a job done by the private sector. Now its done by the feds. For every 1 employee in the private sector the gov’t employs 4+ at tax payers expense. Think about this: if TSA had been created before 9/11/01 the events of that day would have still taken place. The items the terrorist took on those planes were allowed. In short the problem was the rules, not who was running the screening points at the airports. The Gov’t needs to return airport screening back to the private sector!
    Paragraph 3
    To think that enforcing the laws would run businesses like the Housing Industry, Restaurant Industry out of town, is stating that they couldn’t exist with out illegal immigration, not true. I live in AK I use hotels for busness meeting and social events and they use very, very few hispanics, how do they stay in business with out the illegals, how? MAGIC.

    Final paragraph
    From what I have heard You are completely wrong yes it does. If your benifits revolve around your income, yes it does. I have tried to get final verification via the Social Security Admin, to actually talk to a person is hard to do. So far what I can positively confirm is if your payments stop you have to initiate any type of corrective action with them, they WILL NOT correct the problem for you. When I have more time I will get a answer in gov’t writing for the readers, they demand the truth.



Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2009 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.