There IS no flood of Mexican immigrants across the border.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

I'm disgusted that people just take the word of a bunch of right wing organizations at face value. And even those that DO come here illegally, most come here legally first and overstay their visa. There is no flood, there is no invasion.

And I don't give a shit if you are going to tell me "well I see them on the street everyday". How do you know they are illegals? Because they have brown skin? Too many times I've been at the store with my family and been given dirty looks. Too many times someone's been pulled over for no reason. Do you know we were pulled over by THREE squad cars? Reason? They thought my cousin's sticker was out of date (it wasn't).

[7th_Sephiroth]

1. there are alot here doing labor after the hurricanes

most of them have the same model truck all of them have texas license plates, none of em speak a word of english

[SemiCharmedQuark]

2. Oh well, that cinches it then, they must be illegals.

:eyes:

Whatever. My grandma, a citizen, was deported once and someone reported my family as illegals once (because we speak Spanish to each other, or because we have dark skin, or because whatever..).

And "a lot" is hardly a qualitative answer.

[7th_Sephiroth]

5. i asked one

he said a big company was paying good money for them to cross the border and work

[SemiCharmedQuark]

7. Oh well then, my mistake...I guess that proves a flood.

How many were there in that group? A million?

I didn't know you spoke spanish either.

[7th_Sephiroth]

23. i speak a little

not a million, but there are alot, i mean, why hire american unionized labor for $50 an hour and full benifits when you can just SAY you hired the labor for that much, round up some enthusiastic workers from down south, pay em $75 a day and count the riches

[Cleita]

106. Do you not see the problem here, known as

THE COMPANY? Why don't you report them to La Migra, THE COMPANY, that is not the worker? Could it be you need to get these guys unionized so that you can all earn the same amount of money and protect your jobs and you won't have to be afraid of THE COMPANY and about losing your job when you report law violations in the work place.?

You know why? THE COMPANY wants you guys to mistrust the brown workers so that you don't get organized into labor unions for the benefit of all the workers. That includes benefits to you.

[7th_Sephiroth]

113. i have been trying to get acess to this company

but none of the workers know who they are working for, they get paid $75 cash, thier trucks were sitting there waiting for them on the other side of the border

[Horse with no Name]

41. Okay--they SNEAK across the border

STEAL plates for their truck, then casually tell you while you are speaking very little Spanish that they were illegals?
That just doesn't make any sense.:shrug:

[7th_Sephiroth]

46. i saw a guy with a large roll of cash

asked him where i could find some work at

[ultraist]

53. Totally doesn't make sense

Sounds like big fat fucking lie.

"All drive the same truck and don't speak English?"

:eyes:

I DOUBT he could tell us IN SPANISH how he asked them if they were illegals.

That poster always cites the same stereotype: Mexicans driving newer pick ups, with rolls of fifties, and who can't speak English.

[Tomee450]

110. Reminds me

of that old stereotype about all those black men driving new Cadillacs.

[Cleita]

120. I thought they were the welfare queens Reagan tried to

destroy the welfare program with?

He talked about "welfare queens driving Cadillacs".

[Tomee450]

155. True,

Reagan did talk about the "welfare queen" but even prior to his time certain people believed the first thing a black man would do, upon receiving a large sum of money, was buy a Cadillac. That belief was wrong as was Reagan's comment about "welfare queens."

[tubbacheez]

11. Also remember that , part of the time, the motive is harassment

and not immigration policy.


Racism and hate can and do hide well under the guise of immigration enforcement.

If one hates a minority group, continually seeking to have members of that group prove they are here legally is a great way of wasting their time and resources. Perpetually fanning the flames of suspicion is a really sneaky way to limit their opportunities.

The method effectively makes it far more troublesome for them to live here. Simultaneously, it makes it far more troublesome for the rest of society to accept them.

[Redstone]

3. They have the same model of truck? Omigod, that proves it!

They MUST be illegals...they have the same model of truck!!

Call La Migra, right away!

Redstone

[Horse with no Name]

39. There are lots of areas of Texas

that consist of Spanish speaking people only.
How do you know they were illegal?

[tubbacheez]

4. The sense of "invasion" is usually the perceiver's own fault.

Studies have shown a human psychological tendancy to ignore unfamiliar things (like new immigrants moving into a region) initially, because the information doesn't jive with the mind's notion of "how things are".

Then there comes a "tipping point" when the mind can no longer ignore the growing numbers of unfamiliar things.

Suddenly, the mind's worldview is shattered, and the ego is faced with being "wrong". The mind feels it has been thrust into an altered reality, and confidence in one's ability to survive quickly fades.

Searching for a rational way to make sense of the new data, the mind can arrive at false conclusions. "These immigrants just showed up in droves out of nowhere. It must be an invasion." becomes a tempting thing to think.

And so those who think this way base their actions on the phony belief. They start looking for "evidence" of an invasion, and with selective hearing and anecdotal tales, they usually can find it.

[Placebo]

6. Sorry, but we are being overrun.

The numbers don't lie. I hope you wouldn't be against tightened border security.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

8. Why don't you go ahead and post the numbers?

And please, don't bother with FAIR.

[Placebo]

10. here:

Based on Census Bureau and other government data, the Pew Hispanic Center, a private research group in Washington, estimated the number of undocumented immigrants at 10.3 million as of last March, an increase of 23 percent from the 8.4 million estimate in 2000. More than 50 percent of that growth was attributable to Mexican nationals living illegally in the United States, the report said.

Most of the overall growth has been in states that previously had small foreign-born populations, including Arizona and North Carolina, as well as the Washington metropolitan area.

The combined population of illegal immigrants in Maryland, Virginia and the District increased almost 70 percent from an estimated 300,000 in 2000 to about 500,000 in 2004, said demographer Jeffrey S. Passel of the Pew Hispanic Center.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55202-2005Mar21.html?nav=slate

[SemiCharmedQuark]

14. Notice it says "combined"

Also, as I pointed out, most don't get here by crossing the borders illegally. 5.9 million total? You've got to be kidding me. If that is an "invasion" I'm Santa Claus.

[Placebo]

17. okay Santa Claus.

you seem to be living in a fantasy land, just like Santa Claus.

i'd like to see a link to your "data" if you please.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

21. Sure, here you go:

http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.aspx?bc=17,141

http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.aspx?bc=17,142

http://www.cato.org/dailys/4-22-97.html

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=93

[Placebo]

28. Okay...

you post 2 links to a site that's obviously biased and doesn't disclose where it's getting its figures from, another link to the republican-friendly CATO institute that talks mainly about issues dealing with legal immigration and loopholes, and a third which is about racists.

:shrug:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

30. The Southern Law Poverty Center is biased?

And the first link has all of their sources listed. Every single one. But since you didn't see them, here they are again.
1 Richard Vedder, Lowell Gallaway, and Stephen Moore, Immigration and Unemployment: New Evidence,Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, Arlington, VA (Mar. 1994) at p. 13.
2 Maria E. Enchautegui, “The Effect of Immigration on the Wages and Employment of Black Males,” Urban Institute, Washington, D.C. (May 1993) at p. 17.
3 The New Americans, National Research Council, 1997, p. S-5.
4 Jeffrey S. Passel, Immigrants and Taxes: A Reappraisal of Huddle’s ‘The Cost of Immigration’, The Urban Institute, Washington, D.C. (Jan. 1994) at p. 51.
5 http://www.columbia.edu/~flr9/
6 Council of Economic Advisers. Economic Report of the President 2003, Table B-37.
7 Daniel E. Hecker, “Occupational Employment Projections to 2010,” Monthly Labor Review (Nov. 2001).
8 http://www.immigrationforum.org/about/articles/tax_study.htm.
9 http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=900094
10 Testimony of Ronald D Lee, Member, National Academy of Sciences Panel on the Demographic and Economic Impacts of Immigration, Before the Senate Immigration Subcommittee, “Economic and Fiscal Impact of Immigration,” (Sept. 9, 1997).
11 Ibid.
12 Ibid.
13 The New Americans, supra note 3.
14 Julian L. Simon, “Immigration: The Demographic and Economic Facts,” Cato Institute and National Immigration Forum (Dec. 11, 1995).
15 Ibid.
16 Griswold, Daniel T., “Immigrants Have Enriched American Culture and Enhanced Our Influence in the World,” Insight on the News (Feb. 18, 2002).
17 The New Americans, supra note 3.
18 Ibid.
19 Simon Romero and Janet Elder, “Hispanics in the U.S. Report Optimism,” New York Times (Aug. 6, 2003).
20 Ibid.
21 http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-29.html.
22 Ibid.
23 American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) Policy Report “Realities of Immigration Emerge in 2000 Census” (Mar. 2002).
24 Elizabeth Grieco, “English Abilities of the U.S. Foreign-Born Population,” Migration Policy Institute (Jan. 1, 2003).
25 The New Americans, supra note 3. The report stated that, according to the 1990 Census, “of those who had been here 30 years or more, only 3 percent reported that they could not speak English well.”
26 http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-29.html.
27 Stuart Anderson, “Muddled Masses,” Reason (Feb. 2000).
28 Testimony of Alan Greenspan before the Special Committee on Aging, U.S. Senate (Feb. 27, 2003).
29 Science and Engineering Indicators 2002, National Science Foundation.
30 AILF Policy Report, “U.S. Soldiers from Around the World: Immigrants Fight for an Adopted Homeland” (updated Mar. 2003).
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid.

[Placebo]

32. I didn't say they were.

Man, I know you've got some serious passion concerning your personal emotion beliefs in regards to this issue, but let them go, face the facts, our southern border is being flooded by illegal aliens.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

33. It's not. No more than it was flooded by the Chinese, the Irish or the

Poles. As KiC pointed out, every time there is a recession, people look for a scapegoat. Every. SIngle. Time.

And you bet your ass I really feel about this topic. My family has been harassed by assholes who insist we're trying to take over the fucking country.

[jdj]

141. or the Greeks.

seems like every immigrant group in this country has faced violence resentment and discrimination.

I'm with you, SCQ. My county has a substantial hispanic population, somewhere around 25% and growing. I live in "little Mexico" in this small town in NC and there are dozens of hispanic businesses within a couple miles of my house, none of the signs are in english so I have no idea what they are. One really cool thing is that around the area I live there are losts of little run-down vacant houses that no one has cared for and one by one the immigrant families are buying them and fixing them up and planting grass in the yard, etc., every time I come home the back way and drive through these streets in these neighborhoods they look a little better each time. I find that really encouraging because this is one of those run-down, close to downtown cracked out areas and the hispanic immigrants are bringing nothing but good to this area. The businesses they own that I was talking about are all formerly abandoned warehouses and shopfronts left over from the pre-factory closing and pre-walmart era of this little town.

personally, I'm elated about this and I don't care whether these folks are legal immigrants or not; this is Jesse Helms country, the Helms Enterprise Building is about 5 miles away, and I live a couple miles from Helms park, so this is a nauseating white republican stronghold that is desperately in need of some diversity and we are getting it.

[Maestro]

56. Bullshit!

It is because we have personally experienced the wonderful people these dirty pos illegals are. We understand and have compassion for them. They come here because of American businesses who hire them. If you are mad, get mad at them. You are mad at the wrong people.

[proud_dem]

190. Man....

On this issue many people here have drank the bush "there is no immigration problem" kool aid, unless they are living in the border States and experience it for themselves first hand, they will continue to be blinded by bush and corporate america.

[H2O Man]

65. SPLC is a great source.

And they have been high-lighting many of the racist and violent events that have been occuring in the southwestern USA. I do not think that those on the democratic left who have concerns about illegal immigration question that this is a very real problem. But it is not the only issue, and everyone who is concerned about illegal immigration is not advocating KKK-like tactics. It is worth remembering that there are more than two options for dealing with this issue.

[Maestro]

43. Then you post some good links Placebo buddy

I have worked with immigrants for 11 years. Are an expert in this from your dorm room? Do you believe the MSM? SemiCharmedQuark quoted a variety of sources some from the left and some from the right. FAIR is freakin' reichwing nutjob place. We are not fuckin' overrun. Pretty soon DU will be advocating for banning all entry of Mexicans just like we did in the late 1800's to the Chinese. Shit, we never learn how stupid our past actions are.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

48. FAIR gets money from the Pioneer Fund, which sponsors eugenics studies

:eyes:

[Placebo]

Why do some people...

always turn this issue into a racial thing? I couldn't care less what colour they are, I don't want them coming here illegally! and I posted my sources.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

57. No, you were looking SPECIFICALLY to point to MExicans as the threat

Not any other nationality. THat's why you didn't even see you were posting numbers from your own source that weren't correct.

[Maestro]

58. You posted a newspaper article

that cited the US Census. We broke the numbers. Answer the damn question. How do the numbers mean we are overrun?

[Virginian]

183. The third isn't just about racists,

It is only discussing LEGAL immigrants it does not mention illegal aliens.

[H2O Man]

26. In terms of making a well-reasoned case

with a link to a source, Placebo clearly wins. Emotional rhetoric has it's place, of course, but it falls short on this thread.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

29. His own source has numbers that are less than 1% of the population.

But if you phrase it "OMG!!!! 5 MILLION!!!!" then of course, it has a different effect.

Futher, I posted sources as well, which just confirm what his source already said.

[Placebo]

34. How is 10.3 million people, 1% of the population?

:shrug:

[SemiCharmedQuark]

37. Did you read your own artiicle? That is ALL illegals, not just Mexicans

Maybe if you'd read further than just the first paragraph.

[Placebo]

40. Well guess where they're primarily coming from?

I'll give ya a hint, it ain't Canada or the UK.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

44. The number if illegals from MEXICO is HALF that.

You would have seen that had you not been in such a hurry to prove an erroneous claim.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

70. The largest immigrant groups in the Northeast come from:

China
Brazil
Haiti
Dominican Republic

and given that the Northeast is the melting pot of this country, Mexicans are probably a smaller percentage of the actual immigrant population than the OP claims.

[H2O Man]

81. There are also

problems with illegal immigrants from Ireland. They are not people who pose a danger to the USA. The problem is the immigration policy. There are answers to some of these problems that benefit the working class in the USA.

At the same time, I think it is fair to say that the present administration has made the USA the most hated country in the history of the world. It is fair to say that there are people who may wish to enter our boarders and do us harm. I do not think we can say they are all going to be one sex, age, race, or religion. But I think it makes sense to know who is entering the country.

[Maestro]

79. What the hell does that mean?

Do have a problem with the majority being Spanish speaking? It still doesn't change the fact that the percentage of illegal immigrants compared to the total population is 1%.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

137. In the Northeast in the 1970s, most of the illegals were from Ireland

(This was before Ireland's economic boom.)

You never heard anyone complain about "being overrun by Irish."

What Mexico needs is an economic boom of its own, so that Mexicans have no motivation to come north.

[Virginian]

187. That was also during the peak days of the IRA

Some of them may have been very dangerous. It wasn't that they were more accepted, it was that they weren't as easily detected. They could speak and read the language. They could more easily hide in the general population.
They may have made up the majority, but the total numbers were so much smaller the average American didn't come into contact with very many of them.
If the Irish illegals has all had a common visable trait and were more obvious, there probably would have been complaints.

[H2O Man]

38. Sure.

I agree it is less than 1% of the population. However, I do not see that as being of any particular significance.

I certainly do appreciate your concerns about the racist difficulties that certainly do occure. In the past few months, for example, I've spoken about one of my nephews, who has brown skin. He gets pulled over regularly, including in the town where he lives. He was held for over three hours one evening, when he and another brown-skinned young man were going a couple blocks away from their apartment for a pizza. (The pizza may have had extra cheese, causing wide-spread panic!)

Now, a person could say these were only 2 young men, and that as such, they are even less than the 5 million or the 1%. Again, I'm not that concerned with statistics, in these cases.

I think that our immigration policies need to be re-examined, and changed. But I am still in favor of enforcing our immigration policies, across the board, and not simply in the sense of targeting brown-skinned young men.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

47. Then why are both borders not watched?

Why are no Americans standing at the Canadian border with rifles? Because there would be such a riot against it.

[H2O Man]

59. I agree.

I am not saying that I agree with the recent developments on the Mexican border. I am saying that I think it is possible to have concerns about illegal immigration without being a racist. I think that you make very valid points about the fact that there are many other people who are here illegally than Mexican people. I also think that there needs to be more progressive immigration and employment policies for Mexican people hoping to enter the USA. I think that it is fair to say that some of the most oppressive and ugly forms of racism against Mexican immigrants is found in the illegal employment practices of the rich, generally republican businessmen who employ them. These are very important issues, that should be a priority among the working class and union acivists in this country. These are issues that should be uniting us.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

62. Then I don't think we disagree.

I don't support illegal immigration. But it irks me ot no end that people are blowing it out of proportion as if they are coming in droves. Why do they do that? Only half the illegals that come here are from Mexico. Why no concern about the other half?

[H2O Man]

74. I agree

that we don't disagree. We must keep in mind that we are not limited to only two options, or should I say two opinions, in dealing with this issue. We need to make sure that those who are racist do not define the options. When we define it, then it becomes easier to recognize that there are two forms of very ugly and destructive racism aimed at Mexican immigrants. That racism is not at all concerned if an immigrant is legal or illegal.

At the same time, we must recognize that many people of good will are concerned about illegal immigration for several reasons. These reason should never be more focused on Mexicans than any other group. Again, the vast majority of the "problems" with Mexican immigration can be dealt with in a manner that benefits everyone who is in the working class.

[dpibel]

101. Good lord, man!

That's an increase of 1.9 million over four years!! Don't you realize that's 500,00 a year!!! Why, that represents... lessee... <frantically punches calculator buttons>, ummm.... well....

.17% of the population of the country.

You read it right!! THAT'S NOT QUITE TWO-TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT of the total population of the country.

You don't call that an invasion? It's hordes!! Swarms!!!!

Sweartagawd around here you can't harly swing a cat without hittin' one of 'em. Well, that is, I think I spotted one of 'em week ago Tuesday.

[LittleClarkie]

158. There's a rational discussion to be had here

somewhere, if we could wade through the extreme responses and sarcasm and such.

Reminds me of SS. Problem, probably. Crisis, maybe not. Mexicans a probem. Nah. Other folks coming across the Mexican border who have goals in mind other than gainful employment a problem. Could be.

The OP started of with there is NO problem. When others have suggested that perhaps there might at least be somewhat of a problem, we are treated to extreme responses designed to make such posters seem ridiculous, "Oh my god, it's a hoard!"

No. It's not. But there is a middle ground between none and a ton, and if our borders aren't secure then Bush isn't doing his job. But that doesn't mean either that Minutemen and vigilantes are the answer either. They are just a further indication that this administration has it's head up it's ass, and some of the Conservatives know it. Gotta love these little schisms.

[dpibel]

165. With all due respect

You say, "When others have suggested that perhaps there might at least be somewhat of a problem, we are treated to extreme responses designed to make such posters seem ridiculous, "Oh my god, it's a hoard!"

It takes very little design when the raw material is, e.g., post #6, in which we are informed that the US is being "overrun," and #32, in which we are told the southern border is being "flooded by illegal aliens."

And while we are in the business of stately and measured correctives, would you mind explaining to me how it constitutes a giant stup upward to say, "The OP started of(f) with there is NO problem."

I mean, since you are criticizing me for hyperbole, I'm sure you'd not indulge in such a sin yourself.

Although I've studied the OP pretty hard, and I'm damned if I can find where it says that.

[LittleClarkie]

166. The OP says there is no flood

hence I deduced that he/she was also saying there was no problem.

Does that not follow?

Nevertheless, I do find it somewhat odd that the OP has also set him/herself up as knowing more about the situation from the vantage of Indiana, when folks from closer to the border have chimed in with what would seem to be more first-hand knowledge.

I just wish more of a dialogue could be had.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

175. My family lives and has lived in Harlingen TX for decades

:eyes: Does THAT pass the test for you?


And I did say that illegals are a problem but people are blowing how many there are out of proportion.

Also, did you even bother to read the other posts? I've posted this point before.

[Cleita]

115. I worked with illegals a lot back when it wasn't illegal to

hire them. Although, some crossed the border once the hard way, like sometimes with coyotes, most learned it was easier to buy an airline ticket to come back when they went back to visit Mexico. Many illegals, among them many Europeans just overstay their visas like you said.

[Virginian]

182. It is combining the 3 jurisdictions of the DC metropolitian area.

It is enumerating Illegals only, not combining illegals with true immigrants.

[Maestro]

45. 5.9 million are Mexican

2003 estimate of the US population: 290,809,777

OMG! We are overrun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eyes:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html

[theboss]

108. That's still a goddamn lot of people

You wouldn't look at Chicago and go, "Well, it's big, but it's only .04 percent of the total land mass of the USA. I'll ignore it."

[Maestro]

131. A goddam lot of people!?

No but not all of that 5.9 million is concentrated in one area. Sheesh!

[Tomee450]

119. It's rather odd

that the illegal immigration that comes over the Canadian border is rarely mentioned. I read an article several years ago which indicated that many illegal aliens enter this country from Canada. The Canadian border is much longer than the Mexican border and very porous. The illegals entering from Canada, however, are mostly white.

[Maestro]

133. Interesting.

We need to investigate that.

[Zorra]

153. 11,000,000? Heck, that's only a little more than the combined population

of 10 or so states: Montana, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Idaho, Rhode Island, Vermont, Louisiana, Delaware, and Alaska.

We have enough non-American citizens living illegally in the US to "fill" 10 states.
:wow:
Good thing that there are so many extra jobs out there that Americans can find a good, high paying job anytime they want, or this might create a major labor surplus.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

181. The person per square mile in those states is 1-2.

Hardly filled. Mexicans only make up half that number. You'd have to take up the rest with other countires.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

12. Actually, I'll post them for you.

We get 1000000 immigrants, legal and illegal, in the U.S. per year. Of those, 850,000 enter legally. Of the 150,000 left, only 40% get here by crossing the border illegally. That is 60,000, tops. 60,000 people in a country of 260 million. And yet the way people act, you'd think they passed 40,000 every day on their way to work.

[Placebo]

16. Why did you post your own data...

with no source, after I posted a portion of and link to mine?

click here---> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3437316#3437411

[Kathy in Cambridge]

You notice illegal immigration becomes a talking point when the economy is

in the shitter. Then it's open season on Mexicans or any of the 'brown-skinned immigrants' that come here seeking work.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

22. Exactly. It always ALWAYS comes up after a recession.

It's historically documented.

[WillowTree]

9. I respect your right to believe what you want.

If you want to ignore all the facts, no one can change your mind and I won't waste my time trying.

Enjoy your fantasy.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

13. Post the numbers.

[Placebo]

18. Agreed.

This poster obviously is hellbent on believing what they want to believe, even in the fact of hard facts.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

24. Your own article said gave numbers making them about 1% of the population

How is that an invasion?

[Maestro]

50. Whatever Placebo

You stated we are overrun. We provided figures. 5.9 million are Mexican illegals. 290,809,777 is the estimated population of the US. Explain to me how this is being overrun.

[Placebo]

63. 81% of illegal immigrants...

come from Mexico (57%) or Latin America (24%), totaling about 8.4 million.

How are those people from other Latin American countries are getting here? The USA/Mexican border.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

64. Where'd you get that from? Not from the article you cited earlier

which disagreed. And you haven't cited a new one.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

67. So which article gives false information? This uncited one? Or the other

[Maestro]

84. So your problem is with Spanish speaking people?

This still doesn't answer why you think we are overrun. The total amount is still barely 1% of the total population. You make no sense at all. All you have established is that most are Spanish speaking. Logicallly this makes sense since there are 17 or 18 countries to the south of us that speak Spanish. I still fail to see or understand your contention that we are overrun. Explain yourself.

[theboss]

112. They are not distributed equally across the country

If 5.9 million illegals were spread equally, your argument would make sense. But they are concetrated in a few places. A few hundred thousand undocumented people in a city is a big deal.

[Maestro]

142. Then I want to see a break down of cities

being crushed. Obviously most illegal aliens are in the southwest but there are certainly some in the Northwest and Northeast as well.

[countryjake]

167. Maybe these people just really like the ones smuggled in for sex trade!

And before you read the article, I'd like to point out that I happen to live in a far Northern county, with direct access to a wide open border. A couple of years ago, some of our Border Patrol agents were reassigned down to the Southern Borders of the country, seeing that area as more of a threat to homeland security. They have never been replaced. Several months ago, the last remaining police department of our tiny upriver towns was shut down due to lack of funds, replaced with a promise of one Deputy Sheriff to be made available if trouble should arise. In a county that's 95 miles long, that leaves eighty some miles or so & who knows how many square miles of opportunity for any old determined bugger, with a trail map, access to this great nation of ours. But that's not important, nah, we have other priorities.

Last year, our prez signed a bill (National Intelligence Reform Act) that was supposed to provide for 10,000 Border Patrol agents to be added over a few years. Now, thanks to a convenient loophole in that bill, ("subject to available appropriations") we find the budget can only afford funding for 210 new border agents.

My county had been promised that some of those "10,000" agents would be filling in the void of unpatrolled, rarely traveled, numerous mountain roads that criss-cross this area. Considering that one man bearing the makings of destruction was already captured entering the country right up here in this neck of the woods, it's always been rather comforting to see those little white & green patrol cars go by, but now we hardly ever see them. Not long ago, I learned that we won't be getting any more, either; those few agents still stationed out at the freeway have been deemed plenty enough for this little county of 2000 sq. miles or so. It sure does make me wonder just what is important to "protect" these days.


Easy Entry By Way of Canada
By Bruce Finley Denver Post Staff Writer

http://www.denverpost.com/framework/0,1413,36~11676~2787199,00.html

~snips~

"Government intelligence obtained by The Denver Post indicates 400 to 500 immigrants a month just from South Korea sneak in from western Canada. The intelligence report says half the Koreans are women bound for indentured servitude at Korean-run massage parlors around the United States."

"Last fall, a Korean smuggler tried to lead a group of Korean women into the United States through wilderness inside Glacier National Park. Canadian authorities caught them after they got lost and, bitten by mosquitoes, begged for help."

"Others from China and Korea have headed east to prairies of Alberta, where unwatched backroads allow easy illegal crossing. Border booths on main roads often are unstaffed at night."

And this just today:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=ID%20Human%20Smuggling

[Kathy in Cambridge]

15. Posters have used the Center for Immigration Studies, FAIR,

and a slew of RW sites to back up their assertions.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/org/cis.php

The Center for Immigration Studies describes itself as “the nation’s only think tank devoted exclusively to research and policy analysis of the economic, social, demographic, fiscal, and other impacts of immigration on the United States.” Founded in 1985 as a think tank to support the more activist work of the anti-immigrant Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), CIS is dedicated “to expand the base of public knowledge and understanding of the need for an immigration policy that gives first concern to the broad national interest. The Center is animated by a pro-immigrant, low-immigration vision which seeks fewer immigrants but a warmer welcome for those admitted.”

CIS describes itself as “independent” and “nonpartisan,” but its studies, reports, and media releases consistently support its restrictionist agenda and works closely on Capitol Hill with Republican Party immigration restrictionists. However, CIS has achieved credibility with the media and in think tank circles because of its lack of the kind of strident anti-immigrant rhetoric associated with many restrictionist groups, its willingness to invite pro-immigrant voices to its forums, and the scholarly format of its reports.

(snip)

“Let’s be clear,” wrote Frank Sharry of the National Immigration Forum, “CIS was birthed by FAIR, the militant anti-immigration group. The CIS executive director moved from FAIR to CIS to head up the organization. Although now independent, the two organizations share the same basic agenda: an American version of what in Europe is called ‘zero immigration.’” According to Sharry, CIS masquerades as an objective, “squeaky clean” think tank, but CIS is “simply churning out high-sounding, low-credibility grist for the high-pitch, low-road anti-immigration forces in the United States.” This assessment of CIS is widely shared among pro-immigrant groups, but CIS studies are not only frequently cited by the “low-road” nativist forces but also by major news media.

(snip)

Early funding for CIS was channeled through U.S. Inc, a nonprofit established and still directed by John Tanton, who was one of the cofounders of the Federation of American Immigration Reform (FAIR). (3) Among the right-wing foundations that fund CIS are Sarah Scaife Foundation, John M. Olin Foundation, Jaqueline Hume Foundation, Carthage Foundation, and Scaife Family Foundation.

[lonestarnot]

19. You are WAAAAYYY wrong poster! Border looks like a colony of ants.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

25. Proof?

please provide links instead of snarky one-liners.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

27. A colony of ants! Ha ha! They're uninvited pests...parasites.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

36. I guess I'm being overly sensitive about this issue

it really pisses me off no end to see such racism on DU...

[SemiCharmedQuark]

42. In 100 years, people will look back at this and compare it to NINA

Or the nasty characterizations we gave to the Chinese and Japanese and Polish and Italians.


You're not being overly sensitive.

[countryjake]

173. Worries me cause of what'll happen when they find out deportation...

is totally ineffective. With such hateful attitudes, & questionable prison camps already being allowed elsewhere (Gitmo) with not much fuss, will everybody just kick back & think it's a good thing if our government decides to round up all these "lawbreakers" & hold them in internment camps somewhere?

Some of these posts imply that "deportation" is the magic wand that will "send 'em all home"...obviously they've never known anyone who actually was deported!

[Placebo]

51. What racism?

Where? :shrug:

[Kathy in Cambridge]

54. You haven't seen the other threads

on the subject. there was so REALLY ugly stuff on them...

[Maestro]

60. Late to the party Placebo

Do a search.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

73. I bet he saw the other threads

:eyes:

some folks just like a good shitstorm.

[Maestro]

82. Personally I'm sick of it

The ignorance here in GD on this issue is at an all time high.

[lonestarnot]

128. What racism?

:shrug: Don't care who is sick of what, I'm sick of people entering illegally. Either do it legally or don't come in period. Don't care who flames, blames, or games. Legal or nutt'n is the way it should be. Not condoning vigilaniism, racism or pessimism, not calling names, not racist. Some people just have to have things their way or suddenly opposition becomes racist. My kid is half Puerto Rican, but he's all the way legal.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

139. Well, of course he's legal

He's half Puerto Rican. Puerto Ricans have total freedom to migrate to the mainland U.S. because Puerto Rico is a U.S. possession. And even if he weren't, having one American-born parent would automatically make him legal.

[lonestarnot]

144. Are you trying to tell me something? LOL

[proud2BlibKansan]

52. Me too

It is just disgusting.

Thanks for the info on FAIR. They are fighting a decision here in KS to give in state tuition to kids of illegals who are residents and graduate from KS high schools. The concept of a well educated citizenry apparently escapes these bigoted assholes.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

61. Why is FAIR involved in state isses?

that is really incredible-I'm sure those same illegals pay KS state taxes. :eyes:

Here's some more info on FAIR:


http://www.chriscannon.com/index.cfm?B=e&Page=Immigrati...

<snip>
The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), which was founded by John Tanton, is the parent group of the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) headed by Mark Kirkorian. Tanton wrote a memo on July 11, 1986 stating, “To expand our fund-raising machine, we created the Center for Immigration Studies last year. We need to get CIS fully funded and entrenched as a major Washington think-tank, one that can venture into issues which FAIR is not yet ready to raise.” Tanton is the infamous anti-population activist who said in a memo written in 1988 that continued immigration from Latin America would lead to the peaceful takeover of the nation by “a group that is simply more fertile.”

<snip>
FAIR and Negative Population Growth

Negative Population Growth, an organization once headquartered in the anti-immigration group FAIR’s Washington, DC office, was founded by Donald Mann who stated:

“We should give incentives to low-income people who agree to sterilization. We should make available free abortion to low-income people on demand. And companies should cut back or deny maternity leave to women who have more than two children.” (The Record, Teaneck Group Would Limit Babies, Immigrants, August 15, 1996, pg A01)

Executive director of FAIR, Dan Stein, said of Mann’s group, “NPG is one of a few serious, courageous, meaningful population-control groups that’s seriously dealt with immigration.” (The Record, Teaneck Group Would Limit Babies, Immigrants, August 15, 1996, pg A01)

Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) received money from the Pioneer Fund.

http://www.pioneerfund.org /

"A nonprofit foundation who's purpose is to conduct or aid in conducting study and research into the problems of race, heredity and eugenics"...

in other words, the people that are funding FAIR are proponents of eugenics. Yikes!

[proud2BlibKansan]

69. We have been asking the same question since this came out a year or so ago

FAIR filed a lawsuit shortly after the legislature in KS passed this law. (Spring of 2004 if I remember correctly) Most of the 'citizens' who signed on to the lawsuit are not even KS residents! One of them is a native Kansan who lives elsewhere and wants to send her own children to KS state universities at the in-state resident rate.

Before I got my satellite radio and AAR, I listened to a disgusting interview on the radio one day with these FAIR folks who had filed this lawsuit. They were also featured on a CNN show about immigration in the midwest a few months ago. Just a bunch of whiny ass bigots.

Our illustrious state AG (the idiot prying into medical records) is also involved with FAIR up to his eyeballs. He has refused to defend the state in this lawsuit.

If you are interested, I will look for a link on the status of the lawsuit.

[lonestarnot]

130. numbers are posted above in previous post and these are only estimated

numbers. I've seen the houses with up to 50 people in one house in deplorable conditions. Only people that would support this are exploiter coyotes making' a buck to bring in and house these people.

[Maestro]

66. That is funny

Call your friend DeLay to exterminate them. And while your at it could you tell how your rhetoric adds to the conversation? Oh yeah, it doesn't because you can't. :eyes: Gotta protect them borders from the freakin' Mexicans. Them's terrorists they is.

Here is some of the Miniscule Men

[proud2BlibKansan]

80. Miniscule Men LOL

That's great Maestro. :rofl:

Educamators sure have a gift with words.

[LittleClarkie]

159. Let's see

You're from (checking) Arizona.

The OP is from (checking) Indiana.

I think I shall go with your assessment, since you can likely see the ants from you back window.

And I have heard reports on the radio that border patrols have been told not to stop folks coming across the border. I believe the word used was "porous."

[SemiCharmedQuark]

176. My family lives in....TX!

Besides being in constant contact with them, I visit them often for extended periods of time (as the land down there is quite cheap and my grandfather has an extra plot of land with a small set up).
You want to discount what I say because *I* live in Indiana? I go to school here. Before that I lived in Chicago and Texas. Most of my family still lives in Texas.

You could have read through the posts, but instead you chose to defend people making the same horrible generalizations as RWingers. As I told H20 man, there IS a problem with Illegal Immigration, but it is grossly exaggerated. And then I repeated this again in another post. In fact, I think the title of that post is "Nobody is saying illegal immigration is a good thing" or something like that.

And you bet that I am passionate about this topic. I don't like seeing people treated like fucking dogs. Just because people commit a crime doesn't mean they relinquish all rights inherent to humanity. Otherwise you could say that what those soldiers did at Abu Ghraib was acceptable.


To use the term "ants" is so horribly offensive, it's not even worth responding to.

[fishnfla]

20. I recommend a book for you

Written by a liberal, BTW

The Devil's Highway by Luis Urrea.

Then hit the ferneries in Pierson

[Walt Starr]

31. INS estimates 7 million illegal aliens in the U.S. in 2000

"The INS estimates that the total unauthorized immigrant population residing in the United States in January 2000 was 7.0 million. The total population estimates presented here are somewhat higher than INS’ previous estimates. In its last set of estimates, INS estimated that the population was 5.0 million in October 1996; the new estimates produced a total of about 5.8 million for the same date. Estimated population growth was variable in the 1990s; on average, however, the population grew by about 350,000 per year from 1990 to 1999, about 75,000 higher than INS’ previous annual estimate of 275,000 for the 1990s."

At the rate of 350,000 per year, assuming that rate has not changed, that puts the illegal immigrant population in the United States at 8.75 million right now. That's about 3% of the people living in this country.

"In addition to the total population, estimates were compiled for each State of residence and for 75 countries of origin (Tables 1 and 2). As expected, California is estimated to have the most unauthorized residents in January 2000, about 2.2 million, or 32 percent of the national total. The States with the largest numerical increases in unauthorized population in the 1990s were California, Texas, Illinois, Arizona, Georgia, and North Carolina.

Mexico is the largest source country for unauthorized immigration to the United States. The estimated unauthorized resident population from Mexico increased from about 2.0 million in 1990 to 4.8 million in January 2000. Mexico’s share of the total unauthorized resident population increased from 58 percent in 1990 to 69 percent in 2000. In addition to Mexico, six countries had more than 100,000 unauthorized residents in the United States in January 2000 --El Salvador, Guatemala, Colombia, Honduras, China, and Ecuador."

Based upon these rates, that would be about 662 illegal aliens making it across the border and into general society each and every day across the Mexican border. Is that a flood to you? Guess it depends upon the definition of "flood", huh?

Source for my statistics:

http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/Ill_Report_1211.pdf

Home page for the above:

http://uscis.gov/graphics/index.htm

[Cleita]

49. I keep reading this over and over again and yes I see your

published stats, but where does the INS get the figures from? Illegal underclasses are historically impossible to document because they are elusive and can't be counted so they can only be estimated, which your PDF source says is only estimated. The INS in particular is one of the smarmier agencies under the government with practically no oversight from anyone so they can say anything.

There is something really funny with the bookkeeping here. However, for the sake of objectivity, let's say that they don't ask them to come in to be counted, or send them polls and questionnaires. The lack of paperwork or documents (hence undocumented) would close that avenue of compiling stats. So what do they do?

A theory on my part. They count the guys they repatriate and then extrapolate from that. What is the problem here? Most of the guys who get sent back come back the next day almost sometimes over and over. So they are counting the same guy over and over.

[Walt Starr]

68. You propose an explanation, but offer nothing to back it up

Sorry, I provided hard statistical data from a highly credible source. Please counter with the same.

[Cleita]

104. Page two of the report from the highly credible source you provided

gives an explanation of how the INS makes these estimates. My off the top of my head method (not an explanation but a theory) is one of them with a few extra factors worked in. They also factor in the population of each area. Ummm, not a very good method IMHO. It means they are picking a demography, which they don't know is legal or illegal to try to figure out who may be illegal. They just don't have any hard statistical data. And they admit this saying that they are only estimates.

Also, there is a little disclaimer about the method they used up to 1990 and they admitted that maybe it wasn't all that accurate after all. It was "less dependable" and "less reliable the farther out they were projected" in their own language. Since, they don't say if this new method is tried and proven in previous tests or for other ways of counting elusive demographics, these figures are just estimates and really not take to the bank numbers.

Now if they maybe used this as a test to let's say track geese migrating to Canada and compared their results to the old-fashioned way of counting them on the migration path, kind of like counting crowds at rallies and if the results tallied then I'd say the method is okay. The only really accurate way of counting illegals would be to count them on their migration path like the geese. I don't think the resource strapped agency can do this or they would have said that this is what they do in their document.

I find government agencies vary in their reliability and credibility. The INS is not high only anyone's list although for the purpose of this post I decided to concede to you that they could be reliable and credible. However, I don't find the stats compelling at all.

[Milspec]

94. Well, Yes...

If you consider that the benchmark should be from 0 to 9 a day. Yes

[Walt Starr]

102. What would you consider a flood?

I consider 600/day a flood. How about you? Is it 1000? 10,000? 100,000?


How many people illegally crossing the border daily constitutes a "flood"?

[Cleita]

35. Exactly.

These bigots think that if don't look like them or speak like them, then you had to have come in here illegally from Mexico, no where else but Mexico. I have known Pacific Islanders who are here legally working because they come from American territories in the Pacific and they often look Latino.

New York and other cities are full of Puerto Ricans, a US possession, and yes not only are they legal but American citizens. There are many Native Americans who have moved to the city to work and many speak Spanish particularly the ones from the South West. Are they illegal too?

[proud2BlibKansan]

55. Good point

A lot of the Hispanics and Latinos in my community are NOT from Mexico.

[Walt Starr]

75. Most people of Hispanic origin are NOT illegal aliens

The INS, however, does estimate that El Salvador, Guatemala, Colombia, Honduras, China, and Ecuador all had over 100,000 illegal aliens living in the United States as of 2000.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

78. 100,000 in a country of 290 million is hardly an invasion.

Are there illegals? YEs, most definitely. However, there is no "flood" and there is no "invasion".

[Walt Starr]

83. Mexico, on the other hand, is quite different from the others.

See post #31. 662 Mexican nationals make it across the border and into general society of the United States daily.

Is that a flood? Depends upon your definition of "flood".

[Maestro]

86. Compared to the national population

No, not a flood and those illegals are hired by American companies so if you want to vent, frame the debate against the companies that hire them or go join the Miniscule Men in Arizona.

[Walt Starr]

90. Well, based upon the conservative estimates of the INS, 3% of those

residing in the United States are illegal aliens.

The statistics are quite clear, approximately 250,000 illegal aliens each year from Mexico alone.

You may not consider that a flood of illegal aliens across the Mexican border, however, I do.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

92. And the Census Bureau disagrees. Also, where does it say that that

was a "conservative" estimate?

[Walt Starr]

98. I call it conservative because PEW Research says 10.5 million

whereas INS says 7 million. Both statistics are for 2000.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

105. No, it says 10.5 million TOTAL, not Mexicans. It's 5.9 Mil. Mexicans

[Walt Starr]

178. Right, Pew says 10.5 million total, INS says 7 million total

The 7 million is a conservative estimate when compared to 10.5 million.

:eyes:

[Walt Starr]

96. 3% of the population are illegal aliens

That's a flood, IMO.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

88. Your premise is flawed. Most illegals are on overstayed visas, not

from "over the border"

[Walt Starr]

89. Read the link in post #31. You're wrong. n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

91. Ok, where does it say how many come over the border daily?

[Walt Starr]

95. Do the math

350,000 illegal aliens/year.

69% of illegal aliens are Mexican nationals.

69% of 350,000 is 241,500 Mexican Nationals who are illegal aliens each year. (Note: This number does not take into account the rate of increase in percentage of illegal aliens who are Mexican Nationals. Were we to do the Calculus, the number would actually be demonstrably higher. I did not do the Calculus as I am keeping this as simple as possible.)

241,500 Mexican Nationals who are illegal aliens per year = ~662 per day (661.64 to be exact. We could call it 660 to make it even. Heck, we could even just call it 600/day, that's still a flood IMO).

[SemiCharmedQuark]

97. Ok...but that still doesn't take into account that most are overstays.

Which is really the point of my last post.

[Walt Starr]

99. HAve you got a link to "most are overstays"? n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

103. Sure. Take the quiz.

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/newamericans/quiz.html

All sources are listed.

[Walt Starr]

177. Took the quiz. 40% of illegal aliens enter from the Southern border

That makes my estimate of 241,500 quite low when you take the total number of those who entered unauthorized status in 1999 (958,000) rather than a net total unauthorized average over ten years (350,000).

This means that in 1999, 383,200 illegal aliens entered across the Southern border which averages out to 1049/day.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

180. No...350,000 illegals per year and take 40 percent of that.

That's according to the 2000 census.
You also left this out:

"There are, however, some other categories of aliens who may be entitled to remain in the United States for limited periods of time and are not actually deportable, but who are not included in the legal population estimate. These groups include so-called "family fairness" immigrants, asylum applicants, persons with temporary protected status (TPS), and the new K and V visa. These groups could account for at least 1 million and possibly 2 million persons or even more who are estimated as part of the "illegal" population who are not actually deportable, and who are on the road to becoming legal immigrants."



And saying "that's more than we've ever had before!" is like saying "George W. Bush received more votes than any other president". As a percentage, we've had more immigrants (legal or otherwise) in the past.

[Walt Starr]

185. NO NO NO NO NO, that's NET, after those who were overstaying

either become authorized or go home averaged over ten years. Read the full document linked in post #31. It's laid out clearly how those numbers were arrived at.

The total is 958,000 prior to taking that into account!

[SemiCharmedQuark]

186. No, link 31 links to a site that says there is NO way to tell them apart.

It doesn't even distinguish between legal and illegal.

[Walt Starr]

191. Read the entire document. n/t

[ArkDem]

188. Hey, quit bringing facts into the argument!

:wow:

[Walt Starr]

100. Also, turn to page 12 of that document linked in post #31

Chart 2 demonstrates the the numbers from post #31 are after entrances end exits to and from unauthorizedstatus are compiled. Look at numbers entering unauthorized status each year and numbers exiting unautorixed status. For 1999, 968,000 people entered unauthorized status. 456,000 people exited. Most of that exit would be people who overstayed and left, upgraded their status to authorized, etc. The statistics given in post 31 are post calculation of entrance end exit from unauthorized status.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

93. Your article says the new method makes it impossible to distinguish

between EWI and overstays.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

77. In Boston, Dominicans and Salvadorans comprise the majority of Latino

immigrants.

Not too many Mexicans up this way...

[proud2BlibKansan]

85. One of my good friends at work

is a Puerto Rican from Brooklyn. Another is a Puerto Rican from Puerto Rico. The two of them laugh all the time at how little they have in common. The one from Brooklyn has never even been to Puerto Rico. She was born and raised in NYC. The girl from Puerto Rico was asked for her green card when she moved to the midwest. She said she told her employer 'well the last time I was in Puerto Rico, it was still part of the USA. I think that means I don't need a green card, unless Missouri is no longer part of the US.'

[thinkingwoman]

71. evidence?

Got any evidence to back up your opinion?

Anything at all?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

72. Uh...yeah. All over this thread.

[thinkingwoman]

109. Nice try

but a mob shouting the same thing isn't evidence. It's just a mob shouting the same thing.

Do you have any links, phone numbers or ISBN numbers to hard evidence that the "flood of illegals" is made up?

It's a really simple question.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

116. Ok, since reading through the posts is so difficult, here are some links

Funnily enough, one provided by someone arguing there were floods.

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/newamericans/quiz.html

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0404-27.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55202-2005Mar21.html?nav=slate


Now, you're going to actually have to read the whole thing and do some light math...

[thinkingwoman]

145. thanks for the links

they made for interesting reading. I visited each of them and read through all of the material provided on each. Here are some of my thoughts on your evidence:

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/newamericans/quiz.ht...
This is a quiz about immigrants. From the tone of the questions and answers, it appears to be about legal immigrants, which makes the information largely irrelevant when used in a discussion about illegal immigrants.

Nevertheless...here are a few quotes I found interesting:

"Of the 175 million migrants in the world, the U.S. admitted 1,063,732 documented immigrants in 2002. Undocumented immigration adds approximately 350,000 people per year by INS estimates."

Whether or not 350,000 people constitute a flood is obviously up to interpretation.

"Of the approximately 1.4 million immigrants who entered the U.S. in 2002, only about 25 percent came illegally. Although these figures do not account for some homeless immigrants and undocumented migrant workers who return to their native countries when their seasonal work is over, the proportion of illegal immigrants to legal immigrants is still quite small."

This clearly states that 25% of the 1.4 million immigrants who entered this country in 2002 came here illegally. Doing some "light math", 25% of 1.4 mill comes to roughly 250,000 (if my computer calculator is accurate). This number is different than the 350,000 given just a couple of answers earlier, and yet the end result is the same...whether that number constitutes a flood is up to interpretation.

I like the last sentence of the answer above, because it says so much about opinion vs. fact. It admits that the 25% of 1.4 million does NOT include "homeless immigrants and undocumented migrant workers" who cross back over the borders, and yet claims that the proportion of illegal to legal "is still quite small." If the actual number is unknown, but the known number is 25%, it cannot possibly be "quite small." It's, at the very least, 1/4 of all immigrants.

"... in 2000, immigrants made up a little more than 11 percent of the population."

Darn it, I missed this question. I answered 6% instead. Bummer. I also underestimated the percentage of their income that they send back to their home country. But despite those answers revealing a bias on my part TOWARD illegal immigrants instead of AGAINST them, I did pretty well on the quiz.


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0404-27.htm
This is the link to the anti-minutemen article on Common Dreams. Now, I love this site, but it is not a news source.

Nevertheless, I found these quotes interesting:

"According to the US Census administered in 2000, there are approximately 8,705,419 non-legal foreign-born persons living in the US. Of that number, 4,787,980 were from countries other than Mexico. In fact, almost 40% of all US immigrants were not even Hispanic"

Ok, they say 8,705,419 non-legals in 2000, with 4,787,980 from "countries other than Mexico. Doing a little "light math," that means that the Common Dreams article says that there were 3,917,439 illegal immigrants from Mexico living in the U.S. in 2000. Hmmm, that's a bigger number than the one cited by PBS, but, of course, there was a disclaimer--"Note: this number includes 'people who are here legally but are not yet included in the official estimates of legal migrants and refugees. It also includes people in 'quasi-legal' status who are awaiting action on their legal migration requests.' That makes the number rather meaningless, then.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55202-20...
Oh goodie, the Washington Post. They never get anything wrong or spread propaganda of any sort. Sigh. Still, here are some interesting quotes from your source that contradict your opinion...no "light math" required.

"Mexicans Make Up Largest Group; D.C. Area Numbers Up 70 Percent Since 2000"

That was the sub-head, which is often inflammatory or sensationalistic, so I kept reading...

"Despite tighter border enforcement and a post-Sept. 11, 2001, economic slump, the number of illegal immigrants in the United States has continued to grow steadily..."

Okay, and then this...

"Based on Census Bureau and other government data, the Pew Hispanic Center, a private research group in Washington, estimated the number of undocumented immigrants at 10.3 million as of last March, an increase of 23 percent from the 8.4 million estimate in 2000. More than 50 percent of that growth was attributable to Mexican nationals living illegally in the United States, the report said."

An estimated 10.3 million "udocumented immigrants' now? With "more than 50 percent of that growth was attributable to Mexican nationals living illegally in the United States" as the follow up sentence? Did you really provide this link as evidence that there was NO FLOOD of immigrants? Seriously?

But there was more...

"Mexicans remain the largest group of illegal migrants, at 5.9 million or about 57 percent of the March 2004 estimate, the report said."

and this gem...

"Angela Kelley, deputy director of the National Immigration Forum, which favors a plan to legalize illegal immigrants, said the continued growth of that population simply shows that current immigration policy 'is broken.'"

Wowie. I read this last article twice, giving you the benefit of the doubt that it somehow bolstered your opinion, but alas I could not see how. Please feel free to point out where I was blind. It is getting late and I've had a little to drink.

This has been fun reading. And light math is always a pleasure, but you have offered no evidence to support your opinion. None.

The best you could do is argue that 250,000 (the smallest number offered by any of your sources) is not a flood. Many would disagree with you, but you are certainly entitled to that opinion.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

152. Like everyone else, you didn't read carefully.

10.9 million undocumented illegals means ALL illegals, including Europeans, Canadians, whatever. Did you only read the first paragraph?

Secondly, you'd have to be really really hard up to find anyone to think that 250,000 in a country of 290 million people is a lot.

Immigrants includes all immigrants legal and illegal, so you missed that point as well.

You contradict yourself within your own post. Simply amazing.

As for your "what constitutes a flood is up to interpretation" there are people who would proudly say one mexican is too many. So that excuse is cheap.

Thanks for playing though!

[thinkingwoman]

196. Obviously

I read all of the material...I quoted liberally from all of it.

I am not "hard up"...but thanks for asking.

You have not showed where I contradicted myself. Simply stating it does not make it so.

Your subject line gives you away..."Like everyone else, you didn't read carefully"

Hmmm, when a bunch of people disagree with you it's because THEY did something wrong...it couldn't be because you are wrong or because there is more than one way to interpret the same data.

Whatever, your posts don't reflect a desire to talk about this issue. I leave you to berating those who disagree. That's a good sport for some people but I find it boring.

Bye bye

[Maestro]

170. Again, we read the same thing

How can that number be a flood of people disrupting our economies, sucking our services, blah, blah, blah compared to the estimated 291,000,000 that live in the US?

And most of the links were provided earlier and many others in other threads to which you were already referred.

[thinkingwoman]

194. Thank you

Your response is the first intelligent one I have read today...though, sadly, you didn't have much competition.

You think those numbers are not a flood. That's fine. You are entitled to that opinion.

Others can legitimately interpret the same numbers differently.

I wonder, however, why the anti-flood people feel the need to insult people who disagree?

This board is becoming more and more narrow since the last election. I hope it isn't a mirror of the full Democratic party because this is not the time to shrink the tent.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

87. And if you need some more evidence, here are some DU threads on the topic:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3434922

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3428779

[thinkingwoman]

117. DU is a wonderful place

and sometimes it is a place where intelligent, reasoned discourse occurs.

And sometimes it is a mob scene.

Recent threads on illegal immigration, regardless of what size of a problem it ultimately is found to be, have been over the top. People have been called racists. It's disgusting.

Nevertheless, what I keep noticing thread after thread is that there is a whole lot of shouting down of opposing opinions, with little or no evidence.

And so, again I ask, what is the evidence to support the opinion that there aren't a bunch of people streaming over the southern border. I'm not there and I don't know. And frankly, neither do a lot of people posting here.

Without real evidence, most of these conversations are just pissing in the wind.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

121. Did you even read the threads?

because there are PLENTY of LINKS on these threads that plainly show that there isn't a stream of Mexicans coming over the border.

"People have been called racists. It's disgusting."

That's because they used links to racist and RW websites to back up their arguments, and they have no problem with white supremacists joining the Minutemen. That is racist. Period.

"Nevertheless, what I keep noticing thread after thread is that there is a whole lot of shouting down of opposing opinions, with little or no evidence."

Again, try a little reading and you'll find plenty of evidence to back up the OP's claim.

[thinkingwoman]

146. I did read

as much as I could, while skimming posts like yours. I looked specifically for links, not just opinions.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

122. It is a mob scene. People posting RW links and arging that

a bunch of Confederate flag waving, gun toting, nobodies looking for illegals (when similar attempts at the same thing have in fact proven deadly) are a good thing.

[thinkingwoman]

147. I've also seen

people not in that category belittled just for believing that there is a problem with illegals crossing our southern border.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

154. No, nobody said that illegals crossing is a good thing.

But I have a problem with people who think that because it is an illegal thing it is ok to treat them like shit. Fact is, they DO cross. And setting up a bunch of morons right along the border is not the answer. And those that do cross are no big number, certainly not the inflated numbers people scream when they are scared.

Read my posts to H20 Man. One who believes there is something wrong with the border situation, but that the way things are being handled is NOT the way to do it.

[thinkingwoman]

192. sorry

but I've really read enough of your posts for one day.

I HAVE seen posts like I described. I did not say they were yours.

This thread is about whether or not there is a "flood" of people across the border. That is all I was responding to.

You don't think 25% of more than a million people is a "flood" but others do. It is simply a matter of interpretation.

[Maestro]

125. No evidence?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Check the links!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[thinkingwoman]

149. Wow that's a lot of exclamation points

without any actual links.

See post #145 for my response to links I was finally provided.

[Cleita]

129. Of course those of us who have been the victims of racial

profiling wouldn't know anything about racism. We are being accusatory whiners. It's really upsetting when we forget to keep our place. Imagine offending people back who offend us constantly.:sarcasm: No one gives a crap about illegal aliens especially the people who scream the loudest about it. This is all about racism and nothing else.

[thinkingwoman]

150. A lot of opinion

again, with no evidence to back it up.

I have yet to see anyone who has been the victim of racial profiling be called an "accusatory whiner" in these threads, but I admit I may have missed that. If so, I would consider that just as wrong as calling someone racist for believing that there are a lot of illegals crossing the southern border.

As for this:

"No one gives a crap about illegal aliens especially the people who scream the loudest about it."

Wow, nice of you to declare how everyone feels, especially people you don't even know.

[Cleita]

151. EVIDENCE!!!

You want me to back up my life and personal experiences with evidence for you???

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

You, who sashayed in here, didn't bother to read two days of threads, said that no one had provided any proof or links and then announced that all of this telling of truth isn't nice because God forbid you wouldn't want blatant racism called just that?

You are just too funny and I'm afraid I can't take you seriously.

[thinkingwoman]

193. What is this crap?

Where did I ask for evidence of your personal experiences and life?

A. I don't sashay

B. I have read these threads

C. I don't take you seriously either and now you're on ignore.

Bye, bye.

[Cleita]

195. ....

:hi:

[UTUSN]

76. What a Great Headline n/t

[martymar64]

107. There is no flood

Hispanics have been in the SW since Coronado. Many Latino families have been in Tejas since the 1500's. Anglos didn't show up until the beginning of the 19th Century. Thats almost 3 centuries! If there is any flood, it was us Anglos invading ala Manifest Destiny.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

111. Bwahahaha! Excellent Post!

[Maestro]

126. As an Anglo

that was a great post! Thanks!

[Tomee450]

157. Exactly

It's amazing that so many people are ignorant of the history of the Southwest.

[countryjake]

168. It's cause all they were taught was to remember the Alamo!

[tsuki]

114. I have posted this before. This is my response. I am upset with

illegal immigration for the following reasons.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3435895&mesg_id=3436276

I cannot standby and watch the exploitation of others and not speak out. But what do I do? In my area, these people are being exploited. Do I speak out? No, they will be deported. I am in a quandary about what to do. Have you any solutions?

[Cleita]

118. Mind your own business?

Isn't that what you would want for yourself in the same circumstances?

[tsuki]

124. I don't know. Mind your own business? Sometimes, I wish it were

the 1970's. The Nuns always knew what to do. They were the social conscience of the Catholic Church. I stood with them and what was right. But now I feel there is no social conscience. Sometimes I see the wrongs and feel adrift. I should be doing something, but what? I feel leaderless.

[Cleita]

132. Okay, I was raised a Catholic and Sister said to treat others

as you want to be treated. If you put yourself in that other person's place and try to imagine his problems and what the repercussions of your actions would be to everyone, you might have your answer. The legal way isn't always the moral way.

[tsuki]

136. And so I remain silent, knowing what wrong is being done. This really

bothers me.

[Cleita]

143. Why is this your problem?

Meddling often makes things worse. I heard something the other day by Rumi, a Moslem religious figure. It said something to the effect that you should always do what is just. If you see injustice, you should try to change it. If you can't change it then you must not make it worse Sometimes all you can do is pray to God.

I think you need to go find a spiritual advisor.

[fleabert]

163. the immigrants I know would say to stay out of it. (legal and illegal)

there are two vastly different cultures at play here, and -according to those I speak with (and am related to)- if asked, please help (NO GRAPES!), but otherwise, butt out.

you didn't ask me, but I asked my family what they thought about this exact same thing, and that's what they said. I don't understand it, but I was not born in Mexico, or raised in the Mexican culture.

just an anecdotal story...doesn't represent anyone else's opinion or experience.

[donheld]

123. There needs to be a Mexican labor strike

Let all Mexican's, legal or not strike for one day. Denver and a lot of other cities would be devistated.

[FormerOstrich]

127. In my previous life...

before *, I vacationed in Mexico every year. Over the years, I became very good friends with many of the locals. One of the locals I have know for nearly 15 years. I'll share a little about Cesaer.

I was frequently invited to Cesaer's home. Cesaer is very very proud of his home. He spends much of his free time making improvements. His wife and he have a daughter and son.

Cesaer speaks fluent English. He will very proudly tell you his daughter is the considered the best student in her English class. He says that as my computer is the tool of my trade, English is the tool of his trade.

Cesaer's home is probably one of the nicest in his "class". By American standards it's hard to think about. Part of the house is tiled, but the rest is dirt floors. The home is very small. The patio area and "family room" is not covered (even though Cesear is working on building a roof).

In the summer (off season) Cesaer can only earn $10 per day. His wife is a teacher so she has no income during the summer. If he comes to the states it costs him $700 to get into the US. Room and board depend on several factors but if kept to a minimum he can easily make enough profit to send home more than $10 per day. He would do any (legal) job asked if it is working in a field, washing dishes, nothing would be "beneath him".

To my knowledge he has only come to the states twice to work. When he is here he is anxious to return to his family.

It is hard for me to think of a person with more honor than Cesaer. Put yourself in his shoes. Would you let the "border" stop you when it could mean your family eats or doesn't eat?

I don't think there are many American's that would be willing to do the jobs that Cesaer will eagerly accept. At least not at that wage and I do wonder if some at any wage. The other side of issue, would consumers pay the increase in prices were wages increased?

Personally, I'm willing to live with less so that people like Cesaer can live with more.

[tyedyeto]

135. Nice post......

during all these debates, the PEOPLE who are trying to feed and clothe their families are vitually ignored. It's all about them being illegal and not about them as human beings.

[Maestro]

140. Great post

I posted something similar here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3428779

[FormerOstrich]

148. Thank you..

for pointing me to your post....I don't know how I missed it.

I think your post is one of the best I've read on DU in recent memory. I thought about elaborating more in my post. However, you covered where I left off.

It is almost heartbreaking to me to hear Ceasar's daughter discuss the dangers of crossing through the desert or the economic realities that many American adults can't even imagine.

You are 100% correct in so many ways!

Thanks!!

[Maestro]

171. Thanks

Unfortunately, there are many (it seems) that do not realize this and seem to drink reichwing kool-aid when confronted with this issue. I just don't get it. I appreciate your thoughts. For being a former ostrich your head definitely isn't in the sand on this issue. ;)

[cire4]

161. Excellent post. I hope everybody in this debate reads it....

[fleabert]

164. you are my hero for posting this.

This is the true reality of this situation. Real people.

Not numbers.

and you nailed it, you said it much better than I could have (I've tried) I guess Cesaer really said it, didn't he?

Our immigration policies really favor people with money, not the poor; make it free and easy to get a work permit and see what happens.

[nguoihue]

134. I say let 'em come

Looks like new blood is needed in the USA

[Maestro]

138. Really interesting article

that uses some of the same numbers, 5-7 million illegal Mexican immigrants but this article supports SemiCharmedQuark, Kathy in Cambridge, Cleita and I along with others have been saying.

http://www.latinobeat.net/HVC/Columnist/posiojr/032805osio.htm

[Placebo]

156. Even one illegal alien is too many.

What happens when a terrorist gets into the US through the southern (or northern) border? Those figures will really help us then. Bottom line: we have porous borders, and they must be sealed. We have rampant illegal activity, and it must be stopped.

Why is obeying the law suddenly such an evil thought?

[LittleClarkie]

160. A bit of an insult to legal aliens as well

Why did they bother to go through the process if they could have just come across illegally.

Yes, indeed. It isn't Mexicans coming across the Mexican border I'd be especially worried about.

To me it's just another example of how Bush can talk a good game, but doesn't actually know what "Homeland Security" actually entails.

I'll add it to the list of things Kerry was right about. Unguarded ports, Tora Bora, bringing the troops home in 4 years (thanks for that one, Rummy), and also the borders. At least I think he mentioned that as well. I KNOW he mentioned the ports.

[Maestro]

169. It's not an evil thought

Nice rhetoric. Point your disdain at the right entity, the American companies that hire them!

[barb162]

198. yeah, pretty interesting

obeying the law seems to equal racist, vigilante. I have read in several places that terrorists are coming in through the south border. Why not? Hell, Everyone else who doesn't legally belong here does it

[fleabert]

162. I agree with you.

on edit: I had more to say, but then I read the whole thread and changed my mind...my post was out of place. Keep fighting the good fight!

:-)

[allhislife]

172. just wondering

how do i post my own thread?

[Bridget Burke]

174. You need a minimum number of posts to other threads first.

This is explained in the FAQ; the exact number required is not disclosed. It's a method of discouraging distracting & divisive threads.

Numerous brief & pointless messages will build up the post count but are quite noticeable. Especially to those with search capabilities.

[Snivi Yllom]

179. I guess the fences and border patrols are for jack rabbits?

:crazy:

[Kathy in Cambridge]

184. Did you read the thread?

there is plenty of empirical evidence to support the OP's claim. There's nothing crazy about her assertion-the only thing that's crazy on this thread is that it's like racist flypaper.

[EFerrari]

189. Parts of it are funny. According to one poster, I'm

a second generation legal alien.

Beam me up!

:)

[barb162]

197. It's a deluge

Here's from the INS on how many illegals were deported in 2002 from Canada versus Mexico

Canada 3,463
Mexico 994,724


Some posters on some threads commented/asked/implied racist reasons as to why the Canadian border isn't patrolled by the Minutemen Project. Well, the answer is in the numbers: 4,000 deportees from Canada versus 1,000,000 deportees from Mexico.

To me, 1,000,000 deported is not a flood, it's a deluge. How many more got through on the southern border, a million or two in 2002?

[EFerrari]

199. It's a deluge all right. Of propaganda. Hiding thread. n/t

[Moderator]

200. Locking by request of author

DU Moderator