I have a new talk radio station in town, AM 860, and in the afternoon I can now listen to Michael Medved rather than Schnitt. I've been listening to Schnitt for a few years now -- not really by choice -- and he has failed to grow on me. I missed Medved from the days I was working in Seattle. The guy is a treasure trove of knowledge and a darn good debater. You might say he's a master debater. Anyway...
Yesterday he was celebrating the news of the Senate compromise on immigration. All of his callers, without exception, were against it, thought it was terrible, felt betrayed, etc. He asked them what the problem was, what bad things would happen to the US, if the compromise went into effect. I can answer that in three words:
Too many Mexicans.
And then I'd say, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." That's a lot more than three words -- it's 15, actually -- but let's look at Too Many Mexicans first.
Let's presume that the best people to be Americans in the world are Americans. Who is second best? If your answer is Mexicans, and you like Mexicans so much you want to import 20 million or so, then I think the burden of proof is on you. What is so great about Mexicans and Mexican culture that we want to import millions of them, to the exclusion of the rest of the world?
First, shut up, there's nothing racist here (as if Mexicans were a different race from me, which they're not). As a contractor, I've worked closely with a lot more Mexicans than you have, and without exception -- to the degree that language permitted -- I have found them to be hardworking, pleasant, and rather quiet people. So what? Are they so hardworking, so pleasant, and so quiet that they're tops in all the world? What are you, some kind of Mexican-uber-alles reverse osmosis bigot? Madre de dios!
Let's say we, as we should, first seal our borders. No one gets in without our say-so.
Then, second, we decide whom to let in.
Next, why would we want to let people in? Let's assume the obvious that lots and lots of people around the world want in, which is a fact. We're buying, not selling. We're in charge and the world is on sale.
I say asylum is a very good reason to let people in. Some people are so oppressed or their lives in so much danger that we should let them in.
For instance, I'd bet you there are millions of women in countries suffering under Sharia law who would love to get out. I say let the Yemeni, the Saudi, and Iranian, the Algerian women escape their jailers/fathers/husbands and come here. Not the men. Muslim men can stay home and fix the mess they've made.
For instance #2, there are or soon will be many people wanting to flee communism in Venezuela. If we're not planning to head down there and throw Chavez out, then let's bring the cream of Venezuela in. Sorry, China, this offer is not for you; there are just too damn many of you, you'll have to fix your own mess.
For instance #3, how about the millions of orphans and broken families left behind by the tsunami? It was nice of the US Navy to help with water and medicine, but how about some really nice opportunity right here?
Then there are some folks out there so much like us already that we ought to let as many of them as want to come on in. Their countries are pretty all right, so there wouldn't be that many, but who wouldn't welcome an Aussie or Brit neighbor? Jolly good, mate.
And why not reward behavior we like? Let's open our doors to the coalition of the willing, the UK, Australia, Italy, Japan, Poland, Mongolia (yes, Mongolia) -- as much emigration as they want, let them immigrate. Thanks for your help and come on over.
Speaking of behavior we like, how about Iraqis who've risked their lives working as interpreters for us? That's a damn dangerous job, indispensable for us. I think we open some doors there, and it's not like we're not going to need Arabic interpreters for a long time to come.
Then we can get greedy. What could we do to piss off France more than skim the best and brightest off the top of her population? I know for a fact (because I've met them) there are a lot of good French people who already speak English, who would love to be Americans but can't get in. Well, M. Dennis, if I were in charge, you could. Let the idiots of Europe stew in their socialist cesspool -- the productive, the brilliant, the ambitious, them we know what to do with. Same with Germany and Russia. This could become a nice weapon in the hands of a John Bolton -- if you piss us off, we'll steal all your smart people. Ha!
Anyway, Mr. Medved, explain to me why Mexicans are so much better than the people I've mentioned above that we should accept the status quo. As to those who are already here illegally, let them stay here, illegally. We'll send them home as we catch them. Yes, Thomas Sowell is wrong to compare illegal emigration to murder, but you are wrong to compare Mexico to prison. There is nothing wrong with sending them home. As to the "permanent underclass", those are the terms under which the Mexicans came here illegally. They, at great risk and with great, even admirable daring, accepted those terms. Their children born here are Americans and will eventually assimilate willy nilly, if we do not bring in too many more.
American citizenship is a great prize. We should give it out with great care and to our maximum benefit.