OPINION & EDITORIAL
Illegal immigrants not welcome
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Letters to the Editor:
- Voting: a civic duty (November 3, 2008)
- Fighting for a writer's freedom (October 31, 2008)
- No excuse to avoid election (October 30, 2008)
- UW should not stifle debate (October 28, 2008)
- Herald wrong on ASM (October 23, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Greenfield's 'broken' logic (April 8, 2008)
- 'Immigration rights' demonstrators lack credible message (April 13, 2006)
- Immigration argument flawed (April 14, 2006)
- Sensenbrenner wrong on immigration (March 27, 2006)
- The key word is 'illegal' (December 4, 2003)
Share This:
by Letters to the Editor
Friday, September 14, 2007
In response to the Sept. 12 article “Immigrants rally at Capitol” by Pratha Muthiah:
Illegal alien apologist Jorge Carrera, who says enforcing our immigration laws represents “repression” of the people, displays the arrogance and disrespect that is commonplace among those who demand “respect and dignity” but show neither for our laws and the sovereignty of the American people.
If he is looking for someone to blame for “tearing apart” families, he only has to look at illegals themselves, who put their family members in harm’s way when they made the decision to enter this country in violation of the law.
People who are here illegally belong back in their own countries, where they should be demanding that their own governments act responsibly and begin providing for the well-being of their own people. Nobody has the “right” to come here, and our government is under no obligation to let them in. This is true of all sovereign nations.
Dave Gorak
Executive Director
Midwest Coalition to Reduce Immigration
LaValle, WI
(608) 985-7864
www.immigrationreform.org
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 7:53am):
blah blah blah
You're just scared that white people will be the minority by 2040. Get over yourself. This is a country of immigrants, always has been always will be.
Do I think there is an illegal immigration problem? Yes. Do I think it warrants such anger and hate from the right? No.
If people on the right would quit with their unrealistic demands once in a while, maybe we could accomplish something on this issue.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 7:55am):
I encourage legal immigration, but strongly oppose illegal immigration. Why doesn't America just build a fence on the border to keep people from illegally coming to the country and sharply increase legal immigration?
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 8:42am):
I'm sure LaValle has been overrun by now, hence his contempt. Can anyone confirm there is a LaValle, WI? Sounds made up to me, which is un-American
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 9:27am):
I'd much rather live in a majority Mexican country than one populated by racist rednecks.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 9:28am):
"You're just scared that white people will be the minority by 2040. Get over yourself. This is a country of immigrants, always has been always will be."
That's right, white people have every right to protect themselves. I oppose immigration for that very reason. If non-whites are going to be racist, then it's time to keep their numbers down. What exactly is your hangup with white people anyway? Care to explain it?
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 9:49am):
"You're just scared that white people will be the minority by 2040."
Think so? Only if you live in one of a handful of large metro areas are whites actually a minority. Most U.S. cities are still predominantly white. Virtually all of the small towns across the country are overwhelmingly white. So before you categorize whites as a minority, I suggest you take a closer look at the demographics.
If whites really do become a minority in this country, how would you treat them? I'm really interested in hearing a response to that.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 11:03am):
"This is a country of immigrants, always has been always will be."
But didn't most of the immigrants enter legally?
And I don't want to hear any "Native American" stories- they were immigrants too.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 11:26am):
I'd bet that Europe would trade their immigrant problems for ours any day.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 11:30am):
Maybe if they hadn't called their organization "La Raza", THE RACE, I would take your "redneck" remark better.
PS. It pretty much due to "Rednecks" that you aren't under the Nazi boot right now.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 11:41am):
"Think so? Only if you live in one of a handful of large metro areas are whites actually a minority. Most U.S. cities are still predominantly white. Virtually all of the small towns across the country are overwhelmingly white. So before you categorize whites as a minority, I suggest you take a closer look at the demographics."
Statistically, because of higher birth rates amongst African-American, Hispanic-American, and Asian-American populations, and the influx of immigrants, and the white population of the country not growing, around 2050 or so caucasians will dip to about 45-50% of the total population.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 11:55am):
"Statistically, because of higher birth rates amongst African-American, Hispanic-American, and Asian-American populations, and the influx of immigrants, and the white population of the country not growing, around 2050 or so caucasians will dip to about 45-50% of the total population."
Ah, but you forget two important facts:
1) nonwhites have a much lower life expectancy rate than whites, more likely to live in poverty, less educated, incarcerated at a disproportionately higher rate, higher suicide rates, higher substance abuse rates, etc. give it up, homey. You aren't in any position to take anything over. Even if you did, what kind of future would you create for your children? One of savagery? One of gangs? You wouldn't stand a chance. And that is why you are stuck where you're at.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 3:54pm):
Let me get this straight, if I am for legal immigration and not illegal, I am a racist? So does that mean if I think we should enforce the law I am racist? Which laws does that apply to? Just those that deal with illegal immigration or all laws in general? I think it is amazing that I live in a country where people do not have the intelligence to separate enforcing a law and racism. If I were you, I would go back to your basket weaving class so a liberal re-education prof can teach why the US is a bad place to leave (while he or she think they have a right to their job).
Gosh, I ramble a lot :)
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 4:09pm):
Perhaps if we didn't destroy the economies of Mexico and the rest of Central America through Cold War politicking and careless development policies, there wouldn't be such an immigration issue.
On the other hand, no matter which ethnic group was coming in, legally or illegally, there was intense directed racism. And even still, blacks, whose families didn't choose to immigrate, were treated with even worse hostility, often with the same rhetoric. So if it weren't for Mexicans, us Irish, Germans, Poles, Italians, and Jews would be accused of taking "your" jobs and destroying the cities through street gangs and crime.
And 11:55-- no mames guey.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 5:36pm):
"nonwhites have a much lower life expectancy rate than whites, more likely to live in poverty, less educated, incarcerated at a disproportionately higher rate, higher suicide rates, higher substance abuse rates, etc. give it up, homey. You aren't in any position to take anything over. Even if you did, what kind of future would you create for your children? One of savagery? One of gangs? You wouldn't stand a chance. And that is why you are stuck where you're at."
Stuck where im at?? Im a UW student who will be graduating in only 3 years with a triple major and most likely with honors. Dont you DARE compare the lives of people of color to a life of savagery.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 8:59pm):
"Even if you did, what kind of future would you create for your children? One of savagery? One of gangs? You wouldn't stand a chance. And that is why you are stuck where you're at."
Oh please, apparently the television set has been conditioning your pea brain quite impressively.
Anonymous (September 14, 2007 @ 11:10pm):
"Dont you DARE compare the lives of people of color to a life of savagery."
Ooooooh, I'm so scared! Watcha gonna do, huh, watcha gonna do?
Anonymous (September 15, 2007 @ 11:43am):
"apparently the television set has been conditioning your pea brain quite impressively"
Or maybe listening to rap "music" lyrics?
Anonymous (September 15, 2007 @ 12:11pm):
"So if it weren't for Mexicans, us Irish, Germans, Poles, Italians, and Jews would be accused of taking "your" jobs and destroying the cities through street gangs and crime."
Irish, Germans and Poles are all white. Italians are, well, almost white. And Jews are not a distinct race. Judaism is a religion, not a biological identity.
Anonymous (September 15, 2007 @ 2:39pm):
Guess who said this:
Back in 2004, after Bush's reelection, she told Manhattan's WABC radio: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants. Clearly, we have to make some tough decisions as a country, and one of them ought to be coming up with a much better entry-and-exit system so that if we're going to let people in for the work that otherwise would not be done, let's have a system that keeps track of them....People have to stop employing illegal immigrants. I mean, come up to Westchester, go to Suffolk and Nassau counties, stand on the street corners in Brooklyn or the Bronx. You're going to see loads of people waiting to get picked up to go do yard work and construction work and domestic work."
Anonymous (September 15, 2007 @ 3:53pm):
"Irish, Germans and Poles are all white. Italians are, well, almost white. And Jews are not a distinct race. Judaism is a religion, not a biological identity."
Nor are Irish, Germans, or Poles separate races or distinct "biological identities." They were all discriminated against in housing, employment, etc.
They're all white today, but they weren't a century or less ago. Race and racism are socially defined. Really, Irish workers were discriminated against and considered "not white" (how this is, I don't know, since I could sunburn in Alaska in winter at night)-- take as evidence the "Help wanted: Irish Need Not Apply" signs.
Anonymous (September 15, 2007 @ 5:19pm):
If those darn Swedes and Finns were invading our country illegally, they would be treated no different than the Mexicans who are doing so now. It is not a racial issue, it is a legal issue. Once the left stops trying to confuse the issue, perhaps we can actually solve it.
Anonymous (September 15, 2007 @ 7:32pm):
Who was it, 2:39? Dave Gorak of LaValle, WI. No, wait, Rush Limbaugh- I can feel it.
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 12:30am):
"Guess who said this:
Back in 2004, after Bush's reelection, she told Manhattan's WABC radio: "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants..."
Hillary Clinton said it! Now where's my free Badger season passes?
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 10:12am):
free or not america belongs to god and one day the whole world shall end and amirica woont matter at all so go ahead be rasist, some day the time will come.... roy
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 1:03pm):
"If those darn Swedes and Finns were invading our country illegally"
Of course the Swedes and Finns wouldn't have been encouraged by their government to go as colonists to effect "La Reconquista" of lands sold or lost in war, now would they? The Swedes and Finns wouldn't have any plans for annexing the land they settle to their motherland, would they?
Besides the elite Swedes and Finns don't keep every penny for themselves while the lower classes starve, do they?
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 1:06pm):
"Once the left stops trying to confuse the issue:
Whoa there, wasn't it Bushitler that wanted amnesty and open immigration? The "left" left him in a lurch on that one.
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 4:23pm):
Using nationally representative data on consumption, we show that Blacks and Hispanics devote larger shares of their expenditure bundles to visible goods (clothing, jewelry, and cars) than do comparable Whites. We demonstrate that these differences exist among virtually all sub-populations, that they are relatively constant over time, and that they are economically large.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/09/the-economics-1.html
Instead of health insurance perhaps?
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 5:15pm):
If anyone gets a hold of Calderon's secret plans to annex America, let the rest of us know. FeCal himself has family in the US working illegally, and the economy definitely benefits from remissions. Now if only the Americans and Canadians didn't suck out the wealth of the country, and a few monopolists supported by the corrupt government didn't oppress their own, maybe there wouldn't be such flight.
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 6:46pm):
"Whoa there, wasn't it Bushitler that wanted amnesty and open immigration? The "left" left him in a lurch on that one."
First of all comparing Bush to Hitler does nothing more than prove your ignorance.
As I said, the left confuses the issue. Bush is wrong, but at least he does not call it a racial issue, it is the left who makes it a racial issue. Once again, you are confused.
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 7:52pm):
Secret plan??? It's not secret. They don't want all of the USA, just Aztlan. The final plan includes the ethnic cleansing of Americans of European, African and Asian descent.
President Felipe Calderon blasted U.S. immigration policies on Sunday and promised to fight harder to protect the rights of Mexicans in the U.S., saying "Mexico does not end at its borders."
He also reached out to the millions of Mexicans living in the United States, many illegally, saying: "Where there is a Mexican, there is Mexico."
Anonymous (September 16, 2007 @ 9:20pm):
"President Felipe Calderon blasted U.S. immigration policies on Sunday and promised to fight harder to protect the rights of Mexicans in the U.S., saying "Mexico does not end at its borders.""
Calderon will soon learn how wrong he is...when American tanks and humvees roll across the border and seize Mexican oil fields. What's he gonna do about it?
Anonymous (September 17, 2007 @ 9:40am):
"when American tanks and humvees roll across the border and seize Mexican oil fields. What's he gonna do about it?"
Yup, anybody in the Moron.org camp who spouts the "All about oil" BS regarding Iraq needs to take a look at a map.
Mexico and Venezuela would have been MUCH easier to take over for oil. Wouldn't even have to put the tanks on ships.
Anonymous (September 17, 2007 @ 12:35pm):
7:52-- Yeah, and it was planned out by the Illuminati.
9:40-- It would be possibly the least strategic move ever. You can bet that US troops would be destroyed in the mountains by the guerrillas (EPR, BPRS, EZLN, etc), plus the millions of Mexicans that would take up arms. Plus the military, PFP, state and local police, who are more than accustomed to killing and torture. Not to mention the millions here who wouldn't take kindly to their families being murdered, who would probably fight locally, sabotage, etc. And the gringos who would go to Mexico to form the next St. Patrick's Battalions and Abraham Lincoln Brigades. We've been largely successful in overseas wars because they didn't follow us home, but war with Mexico would take place more here than there.
And the most idiotic of your reasoning, where would the millions of refugees and displaced farmers go if we were successful? Sounds like you WANT immigration to speed up.
Anonymous (April 1, 2008 @ 4:32pm):
Its not the fact that the majority do actually fraudulant business practices,but how do you gain the financial payout back when these guys take you?
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
