The feds like to do night raids, usually between midnight and sunrise, so thats when I would watch out for a surprise raid on the church the most Supporters should be prepared for that.

I'm glad CIMC is leaving so many of Kurts posts in the threads, it let's people know there are creepy crawlers out there. It also shows how heartless and ignorant the opposition is.

You can be sure they will be cheering any ruthlessness applied by the Feds, and any sadism applied by the CPD if they become involved.

kurt,

can you explain why the staunchest defenders of "free" markets suddenly go ballistic when confronted with a "consumer" who attempts to exercise a choice of labor market? don't you think that if people like elvira were offered a reasonable and attainable choice of venue for their labor, they'd take it lawfully? when markets price people out of their desires, they will find other ways to satisfy them. can you blame them?

Kludge,

By the way, I'm not an anarcho-capitalist. In any case, I think that the current immigration policies need to be reformed and modernized, but in the meantime offenders of existing laws should receive the legal, appropiate punishment. I don't believe in exceptions. No sympahty for Elvira, but I won't lift a finger for or against her.

One of the points Krudge is implying is that NAFTA is the biggest reason that the Mexican economy is stifled from growing enough to make it reasonable for a lot people to stay there.

So, why then should you blame an industrious motivated person to seek a better existence someplace where they can make more profit?

The same politicians who are blowing smoke about the border, are the ones voting for NAFTA and other disasterous policies that are mostly responsible for the situation with the border.

Do you think perhaps these deportations are just showpieces to show the more ignorant elements of the Republican Party that their party is tough on border issues? In spite of the fact it is the true Corporate base of the Rep. Party that mostly benefits so much from the inexpensive labor that the immigrants provide?

The Republican Party is actually splintered on the issue, but the Coporate sector is smart enough to keep quiet, because they know that the large groups of sheep in the Party need to be deceived into thinking that the border is going to close down or something, in order for their global agenda to go forward.

Since the Corporations own the media in this country, you never hear the other side of the story. You just fall for the propoganda hook line and sinker, and you feel clever.

Self-righteous rantings from a natural citizen regarding the plight of a hard-working and passionate immigrant are so unattractive. Especially when your understanding of the issue is so limited. Really. Thank you for providing the clear deliniation between our points of view.

The funny part is, in the next couple of years, maybe sooner, the dollar is going to be looking a hell of a lot more like a peso, and folks like you won't know how to deal with it. Except to keep on voting for the people who threw you into this situation in the first place, and pretended to care about the fact that a bunch of poor people from the US were "threatened" by a bunch of poor people from Mexico who "invaded" them from across a border in the middle of a desert that has been at one with itself for millenia.

There is no such thing as an "anarcho-capitalist". That is an oxymoron created by the morons from the Libertarian camp.

Of course we are all too stupid to understand that.

Anarchists are non-authoritarian, and therefore do not subscribe to authoritarian structures such as capital.

Please Kurt... enough with the stinky.

It's getting really bad.

She should take her son with her. Why is that that my friends can come to this country legally, but the Mexicans cannot?
By the way, how long did her hunger strike last? I had a bet of three days.

Whose social security numbers did she use? Was it yours maybe. She is a criminal X2 and should go to jail.

RZ,

Are you such a dogmtic extremist that you consider yourself the absoloute authority in semantics? The term "anarchy" precedes you ideological identification by at least 2000 years. Murray Rothbard decided to coin the term "anarcho-capitalism" which perfectly represents his utopia: a global, stateless Capitalist society. Last but not least, I am not suprised that you resort to insulting and belittling your political rivals. You can't help it, because you are a self-righteous, moralizing, dogmatic extremist.

Kurt,

At this point, it is your confusion that preceeds you.

You simply cannot semantically or otherwise reconcile the ideas of capitalism and anarchism. It doesn't matter who coins a phrase or when. By their respective definitions and their histories these two concepts are juxtaposed.

It's not my decision to define these terms, so it is impossible to try and paint a picture of me as an extremist or dogmatist. You can try to put that jacket on me, but my associations know better. Which you are not, so the idea of trying to create the impression of me in this way is even more absurd.

If you feel belittled or insulted, it may not have anything to do with me. It may just be that your views are not consistent with reality, and you are therefore frustrated. So, you lash out at what or who is frustrating your efforts to get on people's nerves here. That is typically adolescent behaviour very often displayed by Libertarians and other "patriotic" knuckleheads who come here to harass and annoy people.

So believe me, you are not alone. You have lurky creepy friends monitoring this site... so feel encouraged there little soldier.

RZ,

A few points. "Anarcho-capitalsm" is just a term. Period. You don't need to be offended, because somebody else is using the term "anarchy" (absence of rulers). In any case, I am not the one offended here. I just pointed out the fact that you use offensive terms (i.e. morons) to trivialize your political rivals. Your reasoning goes along these lines "why debate? they are just morons...". Very mature, isn't it?

Well,

How about answering the questions I posed in my post. Wouldn't that be a great way to prove you are not a moron?

"So, why then should you blame an industrious motivated person to seek a better existence someplace where they can make more profit?"

"The same politicians who are blowing smoke about the border, are the ones voting for NAFTA and other disasterous policies that are mostly responsible for the situation with the border.

Do you think perhaps these deportations are just showpieces to show the more ignorant elements of the Republican Party that their party is tough on border issues? In spite of the fact it is the true Corporate base of the Rep. Party that mostly benefits so much from the inexpensive labor that the immigrants provide?"

I don't think anyone is offended about someone using the term anarchy. I think it's more about wanting to use terms properly.

I mean, you don't say "I need to cow for the pool and bowl a fork". It does not make any sense. I'm not offended by it, but it's like saying "anarcho-capitalist", it's nonsensical and I'm not a fool. I'm going to be sure the content and context are understood.

You can say whatever you want, I won't be offended. It may help you to do a little research though. Try to know something about the subject you are addressing.

You will continue to embarrass yourself by making all your racist remarks in these threads (all over the place), and then trying to sound intelligent when someone presents you with the facts behind an issue you are trying to pretend you can even come close to ridiculing.

RZ,

There you go again, with the old dirty trick of saying "You will continue to embarrass yourself by making all your racist remarks". If you can't debate, then call'em "fascists", "racists", right? Please find ONE statement where I speak of a superior or an inferior "race". See, unlike you, I am not obsessed about skin pigmentation.

In any case (as a potential immigrant myself), I favor a relatively open immigration as proposed by the pro-business wing of the GOP. In the meantime, I expect the government to enforce the rule of law. Can the law be changed? Yes, that's why we have elected officials in the executive and the legislative branches.

You make racist comments all over this medium. In several threads.

You're telling me I'm not debating, but that you feel insulted by my comments, but I'm waiting for you to debate. You keep making weird claims about me and falling behind failed policies that do not stand up.

That's not debate, because you're still not answering the questions I asked.

You obviously have nothing intelligent to say, so you just keep avoiding debate.

I think you've proven all my points for me.

RZ,

Again, where are those "racist" comments? Please be specific (and do not lie).

Yes, the current immigration system of this country is flawed. It's flawed because the existing law is not being enforced. It's flawed because Bush's rhetoric about homeland security is frivolous at best. The borders and the airports are not secure. It's flawed because police departments and federal agencies can't share immigration records. So what needs to be done? It's detrimental for the economy (and logistically nearly impossible) to deport all the illegal immigrants. Thus, some sort of legalization process for these people needs to be implemented. A clean criminal record should suffice (Elvira gets the boot). The coming stream of immigrants needs to be regulated by enforcing existing immigration policies. In essence, it's not that complicated.

You are contradicting yourself. You say in a prior post you are party to the business sector of the GOP. That sector needs the cheap immigrant labor to drive down wages for the purpose of maximum (short term) profits.

So you are incredulously saying you believe both in NAFTA type tragedies, and also a crackdown on the border. The whole point of NAFTA is to drive down workers wages Continent wide, creating higher profits and dividing the labor force into controllable sections. The effect is lower standards of living, less pay, and more work hours per week. We are working three times as hard and making three times less money. For this reason, the immigant labor coming across the border is essential for the sector you say you belong to, because those people coming over are fleeing the worst conditions created by your policies, and getting paid the least amount for their increasing work load. That's the whole point of NAFTA, that is what your sector of the GOP is achieving, I don't think you know which position to take. NAFTA and the current border situation are working perfectly for your sector of the GOP.

You can't have it both ways. Then, based on your most previous post you are saying you want to curtail immigration. You seem to be more in line with the xenophobic minutemen and others who want to build walls and stop the immigrants from "taking American jobs".

Which is it?

And if you are so concerned about the supposed fraud you claim has been committed by Elvira, what about your party leaders? Bush has practically dismantled the constitution, DeLay is the biggest cheat in US government history, your whole party is falling apart due to the fraud, deception, illegal lobbying practices and illegal activity, and YOU sir, as well as the rest of us are going to be paying for it for decades. The Texas GOP has rigged the districting in that State so that there will be a permanent GOP majority there and they STILL won't be able to keep the House as long as there is some semblance of vote counting.

And you are going to go all irrational and ridiculous over these single moms with their kids coming over the border of Mexico?

Dude, where's your head?

You don't make sense. I'm finished with you now. It has been fun but there are bigger and more significant mice to swat. You still have not answered my questions from the previous post. That's really all there is to say about that, by your avoidance, you concede that you are either ignorant about the issue or have no adequate response.

ok, now here are just a couple of your racially charged comments I've gathered in 2 or 3 minutes regarding Elvira alone:

""Emergency ecumenical service"???

This is just getting better. Maybey I should show up with a bucket of holy water and "San Martin de Porras" candles."
--
"Heads up for siesta time as well!"

RZ,

You are hilarious! the comment "[...]I should show up with a bucket of holy water and "San Martin de Porras" candles." is meant as a mockery of religion. And let me tell you something, religion is not a race. And by "Heads up for siesta time as well!" I am ridiculing your buddies' warning of the Feds usually doing raids at night.

In any case, I'm not a member of the GOP and I'm not even an American citizen. Here are my views in a nutshell: free trade, free markets, deregulated economy but regulated immigration and strong law enforcement. And this is a concept I propose for the USA, for my country of origin and for every single country I lived in.

What are you to do about the all of the contradictions to that post which you provided previously?

This is just one of your quotes: "I favor a relatively open immigration as proposed by the pro-business wing of the GOP." Did you forget already? Are you sure that you are not American? You certainly don't have much of a memory.

But then you call for cracking down on the borders and kicking out single moms. It does not matter which country you are from, you still refuse to address the issue of NAFTA, you refuse to address these issues, you concede the argument by this inaction. You are likely ignorant of the issue since you refuse to address them. Why do you attempt to continue to argue the point if you are unaware of them?

I'm an atheist myself, but I could not justify ridiculing my fellow citizens by belittling their beliefs. You claim those issues are about religion and not melanin. Regardless, these are realities that are closely related tom Mexican Culture, you ridicule Mexican figures and customs in your disrespectful references to the saint and the custom of siestas, and that is in the very least insensitive, and just perceived by most as racist. If you were a Mexican person, that would be one thing, but it's highly unlikely that you are. Although you may claim to be now since it would serve to help your pathetic attempt at being credible in your criticisms.

I am an American, I am born and raised in the States, I've lived side by side with Mexican people my whole life. I'm very proud of that relationship, and if you have a problem with it, you are the one who needs to leave, not Elvira. She has far more legitimacy in this land than you do, that is for damn sure.

If you are so offended by the friendship that we Americans have with our Mexican neighbors, why don't YOU leave? You jackass.

I reiterate. You still avoid my original questions to you about NAFTA. This avoidance, again, proves your ignorance. You are obviously a buffoon, but I am glad that you provide the opportunity to show you for what you really are, and to provide a clear deliniation of our respective identities.

I am very proud to not share your classification.

I realize at this point that it is in your interest to avoid all of the valid points I'm making in these posts, and that in ignoring them you continue the tradition of the right wing ignorance, and that you will deny your previously pronounced associations for the sake of trying to be perceived as valid, and that you will accuse me of ridiculing you even though it is YOU who refuse to be honest about your position, obviously; regardless of all of that, I want to make clear to you and to express that you are a creepy little weasel, a jackass, and a coward, and that it is your actions and ignorance that have served to effectively destroy my country, and certainly not my actions, and even more certainly not Elvira's.

Yes, I am ridiculing you and calling you names, what else should I do to a person who makes claims that they cannot back up, and shows no interest in trying to understand an issue that they want to speak about and ridicule others about.

Please go back to hell now.

I got an email this week asking me to contact my legislators and urge them to support the passage of a private bill "for the relief of Elvira Arellano. The text of the bill was not provided, so I looked it up to see what I was being asked to support. Basically, the bill asks for amnesty for Elvira now, and for the number of legal immigrants allowed from Mexico next year to be reduced by one, to account for her.

I don't support this bill at all. Elvira has come to this country illegallly not once but twice, and already been deported once. I would imagine that when someone decides to take the risk of entering another country illegally, that the risk of being caught and sent back is probably on their mind as well. This bill would bump Elvira to the head of the line over Mexicans who are entering the country legally, as well as absolves her of responsibility for her past criminal actions. I fail to see the injustice being perpetrated on her personally in this instance - she did the crime, got caught, and is now expected to do the time for it.

That being said, while I am not inclined to support Elvira staying in the country just because she wants to, I do believe that she should be permitted to stay as the parent of a U.S. citizen who is a minor. This is a loophole in immigration law and in this instance I support being resolved in favor of the U.S. citizen. The feds (rightfully) can't deport Saul, but it's heartless and cruel to deport his mother and force the issue of him staying or leaving that way. If the current administration wants to be the party of family values, they need to walk that walk all the time, not just when they want to. Separating parents and children is wrong; thus, I can support Elvira staying on that ground alone. I did contact my legislators to urge that this aspect of immigration law be clarified - either some kind of parental amnesty be granted to someone in Elvira and Saul's situation, or that the law be changed to eliminate the "you're born here, you're a citizen" aspect. It's got to be resolved one way or the other.

I'm writing this today because I'm genuinely puzzled about Elvira's story and unsure of why I am being asked to support her. Is this issue about -her- rights being infringed upon? I don't see how she is being wronged - she broke existing immigration law on multiple occasions and should not be surprised she is being asked to take the responsibility for her actions. Is it about her son's rights being infringed upon? That's the only argument where I am finding the justification for support. I realize that a majority of people that read this site will not agree with me, and that's fine - I'm genuinely open to reasoning from Elvira's supporters, because right now the issue is very muddled to me. Everything I have heard from Elvira's side so far is simply about "let her stay" but does not acknowlege that SHE IS HERE ILLEGALLY. Why does that not matter in this case? If Elvira is permitted to stay and her case becomes precedent, do we just throw out the entire law and allow open immigration indefinitely? What exactly is the change that is being sought here?

I'm hoping for some honest, thoughtful discussion in response to this.

Personally, my position is that there should not be blanket laws. Each case should be looked at individually, subjectivley, circumstancially.

The border relationship with Mexico is heartbreaking. Ultimately, we should have an open border. Right now, our main concern should be not splitting up families, and creating a trade policy that does not weaken Mexico, but strengthens Mexico, and all of the economies. NAFTA needs to be revised or overturned. This way, people from Mexico may choose to stay there and build the economy with new policies that allow them to have opportunities in their land. How great would it be if Mexico had a strong economy, and we could have an honest open relationship. NAFTA is destroying all three of the Continent's economies.

Ireland is a good example of how to turn around an economy. So many of the Irish who were here in the 90's and early part of the 2k's have gone home to participate in that growth. It has made not only our relationship with Ireland stronger, but it has improved the relationship with the Irish and the British.

We could learn so much from that.

Basically, people on the ground need to be supporting one another, and not let the tragic policies implemented by the Government destroy our relationship. By taking this position, we ensure that in the long run, if the current authoritarianism does not win out, and we get to have a Democracy again, we can retain strong friendships and have an increasingly open relationszhip.

RZ,

Do you want to talk about NAFTA? As far as I am concerned, it is a work-in-progress and a relatively poor substitut to a real free trade agreement. I support free trade agreements as long as the abolition of tariffs comes along with drastic free-market reforms. In other words, I demand the elimination of corporate subsidies and hand-outs. Regrettably, that's not the case of NAFTA or the FTAA. Now here's a point that Hernando de Soto clearly demonstrated in book "The Mystery of Capital". An important characteristic of Capitalism is the state protection of private property righs where ownership and transactions are clearly recorded. Did you know that there's a vibrant informal economy in most Latin American countries? Yet these business owners have to improvise to raise capital because they don't have titles on their assets (e.g. houses) that can be used as collaterals when appying for bank loans? Needless to say, this gray market hardly pays any income or corporate taxes. Furthermore, are you aware of the brutal corruption and monetary and logistical constraints that prevents a regular Joe to start his own business in a legal manner? The elimination of corruption and red tape and the establishment of the rule of law (state protection of property rights and enforcement of contracts between consenting parties) are measures that Latin American governments need to urgently implement. This is absolutely possible. You can take the Miracle of Chile as an imperfect example (correct economic reforms implemented by a undesirable government). Of course, Latin America can look at South Korea, Taiwan or Singapur for other references. It is important, though, to highlight that these classic liberal economic reforms are only possible if there's a long-term committment. Bueno compadre, ya me aburri de escribir tanto. Son ya casi las nueve de la noche y ahora toca ver las tonterias que pasan en la television. Y no te preocupes, aun no tengo planeado largarme de los EEUU.

How then can you blame people from fleeing their country from a policy that disenfranchises them?

RZ, thanks for taking the time to offer a thoughtful response. I'm not sure how some of your ideas would be put into play, though - are you suggesting that there be no legal controls over immigration at all? That would make the U.S. the only country in the world to allow that - even Mexico doesn't have open immigration policies, as far as I know. And while I agree with your example of Ireland and the recent strengthening of the economy vis a vis immigration, we did not have an entirely open border policy with Ireland - there were yearly quotas in place the whole time, and I know people who entered the U.S. illegally from Ireland and got deported when they were caught. So while I would hope that we could approach the same type of mutually beneficial arrangement with Mexico, it still wouldn't mean that there was no immigration law in effect and it still would leave us with the question of how to deal with those that enter illegally.

I really do feel for Elvira - I've never been in her position, but I can empathize with her and can imagine how hard this is on her and her son. I've met and talked with her a few times as well, so I am not just talking theoretically there. I wish Elvira a lot of luck and hope for the best possible outcome for all concerned, but I am still having a problem justifying support for her, except as the parent of a U.S. citizen who is a minor - and that's not the reason that's being emphasized by her supporters. I guess I'm just looking for a more compelling reason to actively be on her side, because the message I'm getting so far is pretty garbled. It's hard to write that, as someone who is very active in this community - if I am not convinced of the merits of Elvira's case, what chance is there to reach someone who typically isn't politically concerned in the court of public opinion?

I think you need to read my post more carefully.

Good job.

Could someone just make a comparison involving the Nazis or Hitler so that Godwin's Law can be observed?

Whats the latest news with Elvira?

She is not the best symbol of the community. Think about how it looks to those opposed to illegal immigrants and ask yourself, "Self, could there perhaps be someone that can better represent immigrants to those in a position of power?"

Damn, find someone who wasn't kicked out. Find someone who doesn't organize for illegal immigrant rights. Isn't there someone who is married, goes to church, has an education, and doesn't say stuff that pisses off the right? Shit, get real! This whole process needs to become a lot more rational or those on the fence will be pushed to the other side. What the hell...

This is the truth. I am sorry, but I cannot have sympathy for illegal immigrants. I have lived in SEVEN countries (I just moved to Brasil; I am French-Canadian), I played by the rules and learned the languages of all the countries in which I resided. While I have no problem with illegal immigrants per se, they must realize that there are consequences for being illegal. As much as they claim to "help" the U.S. economy, the fact is, they are not legal. There are millions of people who want to come to the U.S. legally and are denied. If you sneak in through illegal means, be prepared to live with the consequences. First of all, apparently your illegal lifestyle is still preferable to the third-world hell of your homelands or else you'd never spend your savings and undergo horrid travel conditions to break into the U.S. While you are here, apply for student status and learn English. I was SO SICK of having to speak Spanish to people too lazy to learn the language of the country in which they are making money. Talk about disrespect! For any illegals to demand regularization I say this: fill out the paperwork and wait your turn just like everyone else. If you don't, tough luck.