Getting Past False Debates

I am a proud legal Immigrant from Central america, I will never accept a food stamp! I speak the language and pay my taxes carry a Bible and save guard a gun., help the poor, donate to orphans. Believe in individual resposibility.
Specific..Nathaniel that seems to be what this administration ran by and won by being 'Un-specific' for a reason. They can not possible speak their true purposes, for just about any issue, remember because the change they talked about was 'fundamental transformation' of this country which they knew would not be popular. How on earth is it acceptable that a president will not enforce the laws because it's too troublesome and will cost money? They budget money to help Brazil's oil drill and undermind our own enterprises? today they want to fill the Medicare post with no congress approval, the candidate is a flamboyant socialist, just like Valery Jarret, his best advicer. Is my opinion that they, 'Including Mrs Willis here' will not get into specifics until its too late for america. its pretty obvious for me, don't know what is keeping them to say it loud and clear. The 'talking' about a social justice coming from the goverment, and Willis knows it, is wrong! The justice he should be 'preaching' about should be from the goodness of the individual person to help his fellow contryman!

I prefer it in the frame of: Why do we care about the American above the American way?

Besides federal action against Arizona's new authoritarian police law, President Obama owes America a down payment on immigration reform this year. Enough stalling; a DREAM Act and an AgJobs Bill would be two good down payments, starting with the DREAM Act. Read on: http://www.economicrefugee.net/president-obamas...

True. I am not criticizing the action of those individuals. I am asking for clear, uncompromising communication, carefully laying out the precise position we as Christians ought to adopt. Or at least an attempt at such a description, so that a conversation might ensue. But Sojo continues to specialize in politics, that is, opaqueness. They do this to corral as strong a symbolic presence as they can. But this symbolic presence embodies real political force, which can then be brokered for purposes the well-meaning supporters of Sojourners really intended. We ought not to be encouraging vagueness in public discourse, nor the manipulation of political mechanisms. We ought to be about clarity and the dismantling of political mechanisms. The best path to achieving these ends is greater employment of market mechanisms.
Nathanael Snow
ndsnow@gmail.com

I bought a copy of Michelle Malkin's book, "Invasion." She cites her sources thoroughly, which is good, because it enabled me to show that only one quote in the entire book was from an economist. The rest were all reporters.
What you call an invasion is better described as the natural flow of labor to its highest earning potential. We don't complain when workers leave Detroit for South Carolina, so why should it matter if workers leave Juarez for St. Louis?
Sure, American workers might take a cut in pay. It is called competition. We like it when burger joints have to compete for our business, because we get better burgers at lower prices. The owner of the burger joint would prefer not to have to compete, but we know that that is unfair. Why should American workers be protected from competition?
Again, yes, they will take a cut in pay. They will be worse off. But the migrant worker will be better off. Why do we care more about the American than the Mexican? Is there any Biblical justification for such tribalism? Not at all.
Nathanael Snow
ndsnow@gamil.com

Many of Wallis's followers do work on behalf of emmigrants.

Is the merger the reason we need a passport to get into Canada and Mexico?

Well, maybe I went off course in my later post...
The laws stablished by our constitution have not been enforced for quite sometime ( including immigration ) They only need to be reinforced! rules for legal immigration, for temporaty workers, students, etc. Don't let yourself get blinded, what is going on right now and for quite some time is an Invasion, people need to start calling it what it IS. Ilegal immigration is a crime and should be stopped. Arizona's law is a good beginning., Its doing the right thing. I hope and pray that all border states would join in., and start the process on enforcing the immigration law. Then of course, this is not convenient for politicians. And it all comes back to good all Integrity! It needs to return to Washington or please just 'some' of it, or we are doomed.

Greater employment of market mechanism? hmm. You are citizen of the world aren't you., A globalist., well, if I can't balance my checkbook at home I can't run from treasurer in my community or my state right? make sense,. What makes you think the progressives are going to be better off turning us global, when they screw up our economy in a very short while here. Only the Conservatives - Republicans or liberals- and our constitutionality are going to be the heroes here, with our integrals ways, when we are done straighten congress and the house and make them see that the constitution is boss! and then tell the rest of the world what they can do with globalism. We have been and continue to be the most generous country to the world anywhay, That is real HOpe and that would something you can honestly call Change you can believe in.

RoxaneO5

Don't worry. Congress and the President are already acting to cure the immigration problem.

The reason they have not acted is because they are in the process of combining Canada, Mexico and the US into, essentially, one country. This officially started during the George Bush's second term and continues today.

Once this officially takes place (and I don't know how long that will be) there will be no need for immigration reform. The illegal aliens will no longer be breaking the law. And the borders will be open.

hmm? what? I know Malkin, have not read the book, she sounds too hype for my taste in reading., Remind you that this is the United States. Mexico is another country which by the way have very tough immigration laws. Pretty country good food love to visit. Don't you be confusing the two.,
Do you mean, can your neighbour come eat from your refrigerator freely? and take a shower. What is wrong with temporary workers? to fill up any gaps in labor or whatever. You are confused, my dear jurisnaturalist, really. Competition and cut pay? that would be irrelevant for now, you need to settle who is who here. What this enourmous amount of immigrants are doing to the economy, say for now California or New York I don't have numbers here, but its not difficult to ' eye ' that both of them are broke. Name ONE of the big reasons - not the only reason - just a major reason., and all the implications that no ones really can pin point., Its much better to let people immigrate at a slow pase, in a meassured way, not to affect our economy. Since now, i.e. what is going to happen with people and illegals in California when it gets completely belly up? At least if things are done properly, many legal immigrant, students, etc will benefit themselves and their family, at this point is neighter., Boat sunk no survivors. Whos next? Tribalism, we are civilized people, we go by rules if we all follow them/ reinforce them, we would have less worries, as group a country and as a world.
I don't believe US thinks its better than anybody else, it just got to be the superpower it has been due to Integrity to the constitution and what we inherited from the Founding Fathers. We have been like NO other country in all sense of the word., ( not perfect - just the best out there ) Until FDR and their progressivenes, ( Big government, nanny state, etc ) and now Obama with his revolutionary ideology of revenge - to finish us up.

I bought a copy of Michelle Malkin's book, "Invasion." She cites her sources thoroughly, which is good, because it enabled me to show that only one quote in the entire book was from an economist. The rest were all reporters.
What you call an invasion is better described as the natural flow of labor to its highest earning potential. We don't complain when workers leave Detroit for South Carolina, so why should it matter if workers leave Juarez for St. Louis?
Sure, American workers might take a cut in pay. It is called competition. We like it when burger joints have to compete for our business, because we get better burgers at lower prices. The owner of the burger joint would prefer not to have to compete, but we know that that is unfair. Why should American workers be protected from competition?
Again, yes, they will take a cut in pay. They will be worse off. But the migrant worker will be better off. Why do we care more about the American than the Mexican? Is there any Biblical justification for such tribalism? Not at all.
Nathanael Snow
ndsnow@gamil.com

I agree with Jim. We need to get past these false debates.

The real issue behind the immigration debate is the economic and political merger that is already being implemented between the governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States which officially started during the Bush Administration. Immigration and other issues between the countries simply provides a smokescreen.

I agree with Jim. We need to get past these false debates.

The real issue behind the immigration debate is the economic and political merger that is already being implemented between the governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States which officially started during the Bush Administration. Immigration and other issues between the countries simply provides a smokescreen.

hmm? what? I know Malkin, have not read the book, she sounds too hype for my taste in reading., Remind you that this is the United States. Mexico is another country which by the way have very tough immigration laws. Pretty country good food love to visit. Don't you be confusing the two.,
Do you mean, can your neighbour come eat from your refrigerator freely? and take a shower. What is wrong with temporary workers? to fill up any gaps in labor or whatever. You are confused, my dear jurisnaturalist, really. Competition and cut pay? that would be irrelevant for now, you need to settle who is who here. What this enourmous amount of immigrants are doing to the economy, say for now California or New York I don't have numbers here, but its not difficult to ' eye ' that both of them are broke. Name ONE of the big reasons - not the only reason - just a major reason., and all the implications that no ones really can pin point., Its much better to let people immigrate at a slow pase, in a meassured way, not to affect our economy. Since now, i.e. what is going to happen with people and illegals in California when it gets completely belly up? At least if things are done properly, many legal immigrant, students, etc will benefit themselves and their family, at this point is neighter., Boat sunk no survivors. Whos next? Tribalism, we are civilized people, we go by rules if we all follow them/ reinforce them, we would have less worries, as group a country and as a world.
I don't believe US thinks its better than anybody else, it just got to be the superpower it has been due to Integrity to the constitution and what we inherited from the Founding Fathers. We have been like NO other country in all sense of the word., ( not perfect - just the best out there ) Until FDR and their progressivenes, ( Big government, nanny state, etc ) and now Obama with his revolutionary ideology of revenge - to finish us up.

Although Sojourners has made a declaration concerning their own specific position regarding immigration reform, they keep it quite hidden. Every time immigration is discussed here, the specifics of the alternative to the status quo should be laid out. Wallis never does this. He repeatedly engages in merely symbolic rhetoric. I hope all of you sojourners get a lively rise in your moral awareness by reading such empty language. I'm sure it helps him raise money.
What it does not do is promote progress on what remains a very contentious issue.
Debate needs to occur on the specifics of policy changes, including: Which sorts of workers should be admitted? Merely highly skilled workers, or also unskilled workers?
Is it possible to create a second-class status for immigrant workers so that their quality of life is improved from their current position, yet they remain ineligible for social entitlement programs?
Should migration quotas be lifted or relaxed for peoples suffering political or environmental catastrophe? For example, how much better off would Haitians have been today if some proportion of them had been allowed to immigrate to the US, and live in a tent here, instead of living in a tent there?
What if immigration were made available to any individuals who could post a bond for the expected value of costs they might impose on welfare programs? What if Christians volunteered to post these bonds for the sake of immigrants?
Again, my point is that Wallis has not engaged in serious discussion on any particulars. Perhaps he does not have any economists working for him at Sojourners. I've often suspected that to be the case.
I am united, on this occasion, with him on the importance and direction of change on immigration policy. At least I think I am. Its hard to tell when he refuses to be specific.
Nathanael Snow
ndsnow@gmail.com

"For too many years, there have been two signs up at our southern border: "No Trespass" and "Help Wanted." That hypocrisy has placed many vulnerable people in desperate and dangerous situations."
--Perhaps this is just nitpicking, but the same people are not holding up the same signs, thus it cannot be considered hypocrisy. That would be similar to saying that it is hypocritical for Americans to both make heroine illegal and use heroine. It's not generally the same people doing both.

Hypocrisy is a word that's thrown around carelessly a lot these days--usually as an attempt to silence debate from one's opponents.

I should add that saying things like asking "political representatives to put narrow political interests aside" is also an attempt to silence debate, along with "setting aside our differences" and "uniting behind reform." The debate must happen because these issues are complex and offer no easy answers. They will lead even 'people of faith' to disagree on the best solutions.

I don't think too much will be done till after the election. Then like the last election that offered change ,most likely none will come . I don't think its a democrat or republican thing , I think its the specfic career oriented political system we have evolved into.

KansasMennonit You stated "Is the merger the reason we need a passport to get into Canada and Mexico?

I didn't say the merger has become effective. It's still in the preliminary stages. And I don't know how long the projected merger will take.

An I don't see the merger taking place unless and until there is an appropriate crisis, like an.............economic crisis.

How much does the supply of un documented labour which can be exploited to reduce wages generate political pressure not to get too serous about so-called illegal immigration? Or is that supply essential for the effective running of the nation?

If such low paying essential jobs exist, one could suspect that either there is a failure in the capitalization and R&D for that industry, ie get a gape harvesting machine, or just plain callus exploitation. One suspects a bit of hypocrisy. I agree with kevinptr

Other wise, document as guest workers, every body pays taxes and are allowed to organise so that conditions can be negotiated and consider that this is part of effective foreign aid for other nations as many are supporting families in their country of origin.

A question included in this debate is Justice for Whom?

KansasMennonit You stated "Is the merger the reason we need a passport to get into Canada and Mexico?

I didn't say the merger has become effective. It's still in the preliminary stages. And I don't know how long the projected merger will take.

An I don't see the merger taking place unless and until there is an appropriate crisis, like an.............economic crisis.

"The faith community must call out politicians to act responsibly and to shame them if they use undocumented 7-year-old kids for political purposes in elections. And it's time for religious leaders to publicly challenge the demagoguery on the issue of immigration that is regularly practiced by cable television and radio talk show hosts."

Demagoguery is a very subjective concept and usually is applied by those who oppose the content of the message. Let's call on the faith community to shame those who use children of aliens who are her in violation of law as blackmail to allow them to stay. Parents make choices that affect children. To allow someone to violate the law and then use their children as a shield is immoral.

I agree with Jim. We need to get past these false debates.

The real issue behind the immigration debate is the economic and political merger that is already being implemented between the governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States which officially started during the Bush Administration. Immigration and other issues between the countries simply provides a smokescreen.

Someone needs to take down that "Help Wanted" sign on the border. :)