Even after all of this debate in class, I'm very unclear on my decision about illegal immigration into the United States, because it is a touchy subject with several key points, be it pro or con, that make perfect sense in the context of the debate. Personally, I think that a more moderate program based on political compromise may be more beneficial than a plan that drifts towards extremes.
What I would have in mind if I had any say politically in the issue is beyond me. It just seems to me that the issue has been polarized in a political arena to such an extent that it is broadcasted as a black and white issue, rather than one that could be solved with some common ground in the middle. For example, I believe that laws such as the ones in Hazleton that penalizes those that offer basic necessities and jobs to illegal immigrants are too harsh, for they strip them of their ability to live at all. However, other laws, such as the one that governs our policy on native-born children which gives illegal immigrants incentive to sneak across the border should be abolished.
Other areas come into play as well. The US economy is reliant on migrant workers to provide some of our labor forces and immigrates, both legal and illegal, contribute to our labor pool. However, with a continued flow of illegal immigrates coming into the United States, there is the side note that native born citizens are losing their jobs to illegal immigrates who will work for lower wages. While it is not an easy issue to deal with economically, other solutions such as globalization may prove to be the long-term solution, allowing for some of the wealth of our country to flow into the coffers of other countries where living conditions will improve as well.
I really think that most of this just went around in circles, with me chasing my own tail. I think I'm just going to stop trying and do something else...
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Why is this so hard?
Illegal Immigration and Such...
700 of the 1,951 miles of US - Mexcan border will be walled. What kind of wall? I have no clue. Could be a thirty foot embattlement, or it could be a picket fence. Hell, I'd say, save the money and go ahead with the picket fence idea. Either way, it'll be about as effective. You're covering a little more than a third of the border. That's like a medieval castle having a moat to go around 3/4 of the city. This wall will not be the immigrant-stopping juggernaught that I'm sure it's made out to be. Um, hi? The people will just WALK AROUND IT. If they're willing to walk illegally across our border to get into the country, they'll take the extra time to go around our obstacles. And, if this 700 mile area is the heaviest illegal immigration spot, why don't we just send a few bombers over the border there, and nuke the towns on the other side? That'll send a message to Mexico, right? Come on people... if you're going to do something, do it right... build the damn wall all the way across or continue to do nothing. The way I see it, illegal immigration needs to be brought to an end as much as we can help it (note that I do not offer a solution for this) and legal immigration needs, from what I understand, to be made a little less difficult. If the people can come here legally (and would benefit from doing so, from what I know) then why wouldn't they? On the other side of the coin, we could pass legislation to make illegal immigration punishable by death, and set up patrols to shoot anyone who tries. Crazy, huh? It's just as outrageous as doing nothing. From my perspective, building a wall that covers only 36% of the border is as good as doing nothing. Which, I think everyone understands as unacceptable.
ps - Andy, I'll smack you with my pimpcane!
ps - Andy, I'll smack you with my pimpcane!
USA all the Way
Hmm. So let's see. My thoughts on Immigration. When it comes to serious issues such as this one I find myself having a very neutral opinion. I tend to agree partially with both sides of the argument. I find it really hard to make up my mind when it comes to this issue.
For instance I completely agree that in no way should we delegate English as the one and only language of the country. It to me is unfair and unjust. We should welcome other languages and cultures with a warm and understanding heart. English is a very difficult language that takes years upon years to master. I myself still am discovering things about the language I was born and raised to know. America wouldn't be American without a wide variety of people that we have. We all blend together to made the USof A. Although some immigrants might travel to America for the wrong reasons whether it be for illegal or criminal uses, along with these bad come many more good. Immigrants are completely stereotyped and we fail to relieve them of this burden. In no way do I think we are better than these people. I would say we are more fortunate to live in a place with so many great opportunities.
On the other hand I agree that immigration is a growing problem. I agree we must find some way to stop illegal immigrants from coming to the US. Along with this I believe it would be so much better if the process of citizenship was easier. It seems that the tests they must complete are long and hard. I want immigrants to become a part of this country. I want them to take advantage of the privileges that we have and they have not yet experienced. In no way am I saying that immigrants shouldn't be apart of America. I want them to become legal and enjoy their stay here and not have to live in isolation because they are scared of the consequences of getting caught.
America is continuing to grow and change daily. We as Americans must choose if we want it to change for the better or for the worse. This is our homeland and we have to embrace new citizens into the arms of our nation.
For instance I completely agree that in no way should we delegate English as the one and only language of the country. It to me is unfair and unjust. We should welcome other languages and cultures with a warm and understanding heart. English is a very difficult language that takes years upon years to master. I myself still am discovering things about the language I was born and raised to know. America wouldn't be American without a wide variety of people that we have. We all blend together to made the USof A. Although some immigrants might travel to America for the wrong reasons whether it be for illegal or criminal uses, along with these bad come many more good. Immigrants are completely stereotyped and we fail to relieve them of this burden. In no way do I think we are better than these people. I would say we are more fortunate to live in a place with so many great opportunities.
On the other hand I agree that immigration is a growing problem. I agree we must find some way to stop illegal immigrants from coming to the US. Along with this I believe it would be so much better if the process of citizenship was easier. It seems that the tests they must complete are long and hard. I want immigrants to become a part of this country. I want them to take advantage of the privileges that we have and they have not yet experienced. In no way am I saying that immigrants shouldn't be apart of America. I want them to become legal and enjoy their stay here and not have to live in isolation because they are scared of the consequences of getting caught.
America is continuing to grow and change daily. We as Americans must choose if we want it to change for the better or for the worse. This is our homeland and we have to embrace new citizens into the arms of our nation.
immigrants...
So .. I don't know how I feel towards this whole immigration thing. I agree with things on both sides. I feel like it is definately a problem, but I also feel that the war in Iraq is a bigger problem. I don't think they should have taken the huge lump of money from the funds in Iraq to build a wall because in reality if people want to come to the US they are going to find a way whether there is this big wall in the way or not. Also, the government says how big of a problem illegal immigrants are and that there is soo many of them in the US, but maybe if they made it just a little more easy to be here legally then this wouldn't be such a huge problem. I also don't think its fair to question or card everyone that may be an illegal immigrant because what about the ones that are legal? They are going to be put through this inconvenience on a daily basis just because others are violating the law. Its not their fault, they did things the right way therefore I don't feel like they should be put through this just because our government didn't do their job in the first place. In the end I guess I don't really side a certain way but thats what I think!!
Perhaps a little too impartial...
I have always been an impartial person. I see the pros and cons to both sides of any issue... I can put myself in another person's shoes and understand why the feel a certain way about an issue. Perhaps I am a little too impartial. I often wonder if this gets me into trouble, because I have a hard time finding how I feel about many a topic. But I am beginning to digress...
Immigration- it's tricky. I feel that, despite certain negative images we possess in others' minds, America is a pretty kick ass place. We are free to do whatever we want, whenever we want. We are successful, diverse, and living it up with that American Dream. I know that if I were struggling in another country, I would want to come here. In fact, I would probably do whatever I had to do to get here. So, in that aspect, I can relate to these immigrants. In fact, I want them to have every opportunity that America can give them. And as I sit here, spacing out, blaring my Humble Pie cd, I realize how trivial my problems are compared to these immigrants. Many face persecution and tremendous hardship, while I'm sitting here wondering what to wear to the club tomorrow night. So from that perspective, I feel that we should be helping these people out instead of trying to keep them away, as if they were disgusting vermin.
But then there is the flipside- I cannot help but be influenced by others such as my family, and how they view the subject. In all honesty, I come from a very racist family. If the topic of immigration comes up in conversation, the first thing said will be something awful. I am not saying that i feel this way... but I am saying that another side of me thinks, "This is our country, we work hard to keep it this way, and now they are going to come in, steal our jobs, etc." I feel horrible for thinking that way sometimes. So from this perspective I feel that if they are going to come in, fine, but the government should really crack down on who comes in and why, yadda yadda.
Like I said... for me, it's a tricky subject. And based on other blogs I have read about this issue, I would say it is tricky for many others as well. Issues like this make me realize that a lot of our world's problems could be fixed with a little more Peace, Love, and Understanding.
Immigration- it's tricky. I feel that, despite certain negative images we possess in others' minds, America is a pretty kick ass place. We are free to do whatever we want, whenever we want. We are successful, diverse, and living it up with that American Dream. I know that if I were struggling in another country, I would want to come here. In fact, I would probably do whatever I had to do to get here. So, in that aspect, I can relate to these immigrants. In fact, I want them to have every opportunity that America can give them. And as I sit here, spacing out, blaring my Humble Pie cd, I realize how trivial my problems are compared to these immigrants. Many face persecution and tremendous hardship, while I'm sitting here wondering what to wear to the club tomorrow night. So from that perspective, I feel that we should be helping these people out instead of trying to keep them away, as if they were disgusting vermin.
But then there is the flipside- I cannot help but be influenced by others such as my family, and how they view the subject. In all honesty, I come from a very racist family. If the topic of immigration comes up in conversation, the first thing said will be something awful. I am not saying that i feel this way... but I am saying that another side of me thinks, "This is our country, we work hard to keep it this way, and now they are going to come in, steal our jobs, etc." I feel horrible for thinking that way sometimes. So from this perspective I feel that if they are going to come in, fine, but the government should really crack down on who comes in and why, yadda yadda.
Like I said... for me, it's a tricky subject. And based on other blogs I have read about this issue, I would say it is tricky for many others as well. Issues like this make me realize that a lot of our world's problems could be fixed with a little more Peace, Love, and Understanding.
Head? Meet desk. Again, djf;usDG;DJK.
Okay, so the more I think about immigration issues, the more I want to kick something, because, well, it's making my head hurt and I can't verbalize exactly what I think, and it's just frustrating me in general, 'kay?
And of course there's the fact that I should care about it, if only for the fact that it's a decent-sized issue that will be dealt with politically, whether it should be or not, and I'm trying to be politically active and informed and all that good stuff. I... just don't, really, when it gets down to the nuts and bolts. On the large scale, I'd say that yeah, lessen the hoops immigrants have to go through to become citizens so they can to it legally, find a way to legalize those who are already here and really want to be citizens, help those who just want to earn money for their families to do that and do more humanitarian stuff globally so they don't have to come here to make money, but.
Maybe I'm just too jaded to care, because real life is rather lacking. As the cliche goes, life isn't fair, and hey, what I'd like to do would end up trying to make it more fair. Everything that sounds good in theory will probably fail in practice, because of first people, and second chaos. Y'know, butterfly effect and all that? Nothing is a vacuum, "right", "wrong", and laws are just social constructs maybe made more permenent that they should be, and wow I'm a bitch.
Ohgodsthisisnotcool,can'twriteapaperlikethis. *flails*
And of course there's the fact that I should care about it, if only for the fact that it's a decent-sized issue that will be dealt with politically, whether it should be or not, and I'm trying to be politically active and informed and all that good stuff. I... just don't, really, when it gets down to the nuts and bolts. On the large scale, I'd say that yeah, lessen the hoops immigrants have to go through to become citizens so they can to it legally, find a way to legalize those who are already here and really want to be citizens, help those who just want to earn money for their families to do that and do more humanitarian stuff globally so they don't have to come here to make money, but.
Maybe I'm just too jaded to care, because real life is rather lacking. As the cliche goes, life isn't fair, and hey, what I'd like to do would end up trying to make it more fair. Everything that sounds good in theory will probably fail in practice, because of first people, and second chaos. Y'know, butterfly effect and all that? Nothing is a vacuum, "right", "wrong", and laws are just social constructs maybe made more permenent that they should be, and wow I'm a bitch.
Ohgodsthisisnotcool,can'twriteapaperlikethis. *flails*
------Imm's------
I sit in the back--I see it all, I hear it all--I take it all in, think about it, analyze it. I had an opinion on the topic a few weeks ago, and after all this talk, I realize......
I still have the same opinion.
Something needs to be done about illegal immigrants--Sure, some of them are coming in--intelligent, pure, longing for a better life for them and their family--but some of them are coming with bad intentions--bringing crime and gangs and terror....
SIDEBAR: I feel like I've said all this before, and I'm feeling slightly ho-hum today, so if this post is less than inspiring, I apologize.-------
Anyway, I don't care how long and difficult the legalization process is--if you're really that excited about coming to America, to start a better life, you'll plug along, you'll go through with it--and I'll respect you for that. But the true illegals--coming to smuggle drugs or take our jobs, invade our innocent towns and cities (i.e., Hazleton,) need to leave. Get 'em out. Build the fence. Make the US English-Only. Ship 'em back. My "frame" might sound harsh, but it's my opinion. I'm conservative, old-fashioned, and prefer a simple, direct resolution to the whole thing.
Which is probably not realistic, possible, feasible, or even imaginable for some, but hey!
You never....
ever....
know.
I still have the same opinion.
Something needs to be done about illegal immigrants--Sure, some of them are coming in--intelligent, pure, longing for a better life for them and their family--but some of them are coming with bad intentions--bringing crime and gangs and terror....
SIDEBAR: I feel like I've said all this before, and I'm feeling slightly ho-hum today, so if this post is less than inspiring, I apologize.-------
Anyway, I don't care how long and difficult the legalization process is--if you're really that excited about coming to America, to start a better life, you'll plug along, you'll go through with it--and I'll respect you for that. But the true illegals--coming to smuggle drugs or take our jobs, invade our innocent towns and cities (i.e., Hazleton,) need to leave. Get 'em out. Build the fence. Make the US English-Only. Ship 'em back. My "frame" might sound harsh, but it's my opinion. I'm conservative, old-fashioned, and prefer a simple, direct resolution to the whole thing.
Which is probably not realistic, possible, feasible, or even imaginable for some, but hey!
You never....
ever....
know.
I wish...
I know a lot of people have strong opinions on the topic of immigration, but personally I find it hard to side with one side or the other. I feel like I’m in the middle. I’m the type of person that always wants to help everyone. I feel that this makes me side with those who say we should get rid of immigration laws and make it easy for people to enter our country. Since I also know two people who are trying to obtain US citizenship I feel greatly for all those immigrants who are stuck in this long and complicated process. These reasons make me believe that instead of the US making it harder for immigrants to come here we need to make it easier. We need to help people in other countries who don’t have the amazing opportunities that we have here in the US. If people are fleeing for religious or economic reasons I believe we should welcome them.
But then the realistic side of me kicks in and says, “NO!” I see the potential problems that this openness to immigration could cause. If immigrants come to the US and many of them end up staying here and never returning home that could lead to some serious over population problems. The US can’t take on all the problems of the world…I realize that. I just wish we could.
But then the realistic side of me kicks in and says, “NO!” I see the potential problems that this openness to immigration could cause. If immigrants come to the US and many of them end up staying here and never returning home that could lead to some serious over population problems. The US can’t take on all the problems of the world…I realize that. I just wish we could.
foreign affairs
On this issue I’m still torn. Something must be done about illegal immigration, if only due to the large number of illegal immigrants in the country. The process of getting a green card should be made easier so that less people feel inclined to get here in a illegal fashion. However, this doesn’t solve the whole problem of how our country deals with foreign affairs, which is part of the problem itself. Although we are focusing on illegal immigration from Mexico, there are illegal immigrants from other areas too. In order to change the consistency of illegal immigration, we must try to communicate better with other countries and possibly help countries that have a problem with all their citizens fleeing to increase their standard of living. However, I don’t suggest doing through a war, which tends to pit countries against each other. This won’t stop illegal immigration from happening, but it may decrease the number of illegal immigrants per year. As for what to do about the illegal immigrants already here, I’m still unsure about what would be best. We can’t just break up families and tell them to get out, but letting everyone stay may make give the wrong idea to more people that want to immigrate to the United States. For now, I think that the known plan that will work the best is trying to find and document all of the illegal immigrants correctly including the amount of time they have been here, the illegal immigrants that just came to the United States within the last few months would be sent back and the others would be allowed to stay. Using this method, people that have been living here for long periods of time won’t be thrown out. I think that we need to get rid of the born on American soil and you’re an American idea, because many illegal immigrants risk their lives because they want tier children to have a better life.
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
If I Ran For Office
I know am a more informed citizen on the issue of illegal immigration; however, all that I have learned has not done much to change my opinion on the situation. I have more information at my disposal now with which to defend the opinions I do have though. I am not a supporter of complete compassion towards people who come here illegally, but nor am I in favor of the complete absence of compassion. I don’t think that people who have not come here through the proper channels should be able to enjoy the same benefits as those who have. I don’t agree with major league baseball players who set records using steroids, and I am a strong supporter of tightening regulations and stiffer penalties for those who break these laws, but I also don’t feel that it would suit any purpose to try to go back through and take those players who cheated out of the record books. In my opinion, what’s done is done; it’s more important to work to change things in the present and not dwell on the past.
I don’t think that this wall will do to much to keep out illegal immigration; however, it is a strong sign that the United States is getting serious about fixing this problem. That alone is a step in the right direction. I also am not in favor of anything that will negatively affect those immigrants who did come here properly. If these immigrants will suffer as much from these new regulations as illegal ones will, then that is not a good solution to the problem.
Illegal immigrants shouldn’t be sought out once they’re here. I agree strongly with the new laws that were implemented in Houston; that if someone is found in violation of another law, police have every right to find out if they are here legally or not, but as long as they follow the other laws of this country, I feel that it would be a violation of personal rights to arrest someone just on suspicion of being an illegal.
I don’t think that this wall will do to much to keep out illegal immigration; however, it is a strong sign that the United States is getting serious about fixing this problem. That alone is a step in the right direction. I also am not in favor of anything that will negatively affect those immigrants who did come here properly. If these immigrants will suffer as much from these new regulations as illegal ones will, then that is not a good solution to the problem.
Illegal immigrants shouldn’t be sought out once they’re here. I agree strongly with the new laws that were implemented in Houston; that if someone is found in violation of another law, police have every right to find out if they are here legally or not, but as long as they follow the other laws of this country, I feel that it would be a violation of personal rights to arrest someone just on suspicion of being an illegal.
Legally Summing it Up
To try and put together my final thoughts on the topic is going to be difficult, but I feel from all the discussion I have put together a concrete opinion. I do feel safe stating that I believe the immigration process needs some sort of ammending. I also feel safe stating that the current system is very flawed, especially when it is estimated that as many as 12 million people live in this country undocumented, unlawfully, and dangerously. It is unlawful because the law states to live in this country you must be a citizen or a documented guest operating under conditions the Government states. It is dangerous because who knows who these people are? Yes the average illegal immigrant (a term I use only as what it states, someone who immigrated here illegally) likely means no harm to anyone, but out of those 12 million people the number of drug traffikers, terrorists, murderers, and everyday criminals who the government doesn't have any record of is enough for alarm. I think it is only fair to everyone if all people are regarded to under the same system who live inside the country border, and the only possible way for that is to overcome the immigration issue. Steps to be taken to resolve it are not as easy to come up with. It is likely impossible to gain documentation on everyone in the country, but the number 12 million definitly needs reduced. Everyone here illegally has in fact broken the law and needs to be dealt with accordingly. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be offered citizenship, but they must be punished. And if my view seems to be one demensional, I have personal experience involving an extremely close relative who to my knowledge worked around the system to gain citizenship, and I know that dealing with this problem would prevent that from happening in the future. It does sadden me that honest people like that may be denied access to the land I love, but if nothing is done there won't be a land to love much longer. This issue is a rising hurdle in the future operation of this country, but with enough thought, creativity, and compromise, an acceptable solution is likely. In conclusion, something must be done, the current system is terrible, people cannot live here unknown to the Government.
Law and Order: MBP (Mexican Border Patrol)
*dun dun* (Law and Order sound) October 17, 2006 10pm North Campus
haha Sorry, I had to. (On a side note, I have NEVER watched Law and Order once.) Okay, here's my stance on the whole illegal immigration debate for this paper. If you cross the US border from any country in methods that are illegal by the United States' standards, then that is illegal and is a crime. I do not believe that an illegal immigrant should be immediately deported if they are found out to be living here but they should be given time or fair warning first before getting deported. Jobs ARE being taken by American citizens by illegal immigrants. You cannot tell me otherwise because they have to be taking them from somebody, aren't they? The best way that I can think of changing this is for those who want to come to the US to better their lives to find the legal ways of coming here and not trying to sneak in.
There should be ways for immigrants to gain citizenship in a more time-efficient manner. I know that marrying a US citizen automatically makes you a citizen but at the same time, that can be illegal if it was done for the sole purpose of gaining citizenship. 7 years is somewhat of a long time to become a citizen. 5 years is just as long to receive benefits from the government. I would cut the time at least in half but that is just me. I am not the one creating the New Berlin Wall in Texas. There better be graffiti on it like Germany's wall in a month, that's all I gotta say.
haha Sorry, I had to. (On a side note, I have NEVER watched Law and Order once.) Okay, here's my stance on the whole illegal immigration debate for this paper. If you cross the US border from any country in methods that are illegal by the United States' standards, then that is illegal and is a crime. I do not believe that an illegal immigrant should be immediately deported if they are found out to be living here but they should be given time or fair warning first before getting deported. Jobs ARE being taken by American citizens by illegal immigrants. You cannot tell me otherwise because they have to be taking them from somebody, aren't they? The best way that I can think of changing this is for those who want to come to the US to better their lives to find the legal ways of coming here and not trying to sneak in.
There should be ways for immigrants to gain citizenship in a more time-efficient manner. I know that marrying a US citizen automatically makes you a citizen but at the same time, that can be illegal if it was done for the sole purpose of gaining citizenship. 7 years is somewhat of a long time to become a citizen. 5 years is just as long to receive benefits from the government. I would cut the time at least in half but that is just me. I am not the one creating the New Berlin Wall in Texas. There better be graffiti on it like Germany's wall in a month, that's all I gotta say.
NOT Procrastinating! [And finally reaching an opinion.]
Even after all of the research and discussion we've done on this topic, I am still a little confused about my own feelings on the subject. I feel like it is not my place to judge. However, there are some things that I do know. I think that people should be able to come to this country to make a better life for themselves. I think the working conditions for immigrants are terrible; yes, many Americans don't want the jobs that immigrants take on, but it is mostly due to those conditions. I think that our system right now is at fault for making it so long and so difficult for immigrants to become citizens. But when it comes to who exactly is admitted and other such circumstances, my opinions become fuzzy. Morally, it seems wrong to turn away someone who is simply seeking a better oppurtunity (at least, it does to me), but the well-being of everyone else has to also be taken in to account. How can you create a filter for who can enter and who is rejected? I don't know. People say that immigrants take up tax dollars and such, but the points have come up in class that immigrants do not see the benefits of taxes for the first five years they are here. I think all in all, everything evens out. Sure, not all immigrants are good people, but not every American is all that great, either. Sometimes, people will blame anyone and everyone else but themselves.
So, I guess I've realized where I stand.
So, I guess I've realized where I stand.
Immigration Shmimigration
I was in desperate need of a catchy poetic title and the only thing that came to my sad, tired college mind is Immigration Shmigigration, I give Dr. Mahoney permission to beat me for lack of originality.
Anyway as far as the whole immigration issue is concerned I am more on the progressive side. I am against illegal immigration because after all it is illegal. However I feel that becoming a legal immigrant should become a much easier process. We should of course continue to filter out the criminals but as of now unless you marry an American citizen or are a student, it is very difficult to obtain a precious green card and this needs to be changed. People should be allowed to come over here and given a certain amount of time before they are forced to get a job. I do not see a problem with this since they will be paying taxes and will be earning equal wages therefore they will not be "stealing" jobs. Many people who want to come to the United States do not want to come to commit acts of random violence or steal our jobs, they want to come here to earn money to help support their families. As far as people saying that illegal immigrants take jobs that no one else wants, this is not true. They take jobs with poor conditions and wages so that legal citizens will not take them. So I disagree with people saying that illegal immigrants taking these jobs is ok. I sympathize with these people and I feel that they are entitled to the same rights. Also rather than soley punishing the illegal immigrants, we should put a lot more emphasis on punishing the employers of illegal immigrants. I think that no matter what we do illegal immigration will be a problem however by opening up our borders we can help to ensure that people with positive intentions come into our country rather than criminals and terrorists.
Anyway as far as the whole immigration issue is concerned I am more on the progressive side. I am against illegal immigration because after all it is illegal. However I feel that becoming a legal immigrant should become a much easier process. We should of course continue to filter out the criminals but as of now unless you marry an American citizen or are a student, it is very difficult to obtain a precious green card and this needs to be changed. People should be allowed to come over here and given a certain amount of time before they are forced to get a job. I do not see a problem with this since they will be paying taxes and will be earning equal wages therefore they will not be "stealing" jobs. Many people who want to come to the United States do not want to come to commit acts of random violence or steal our jobs, they want to come here to earn money to help support their families. As far as people saying that illegal immigrants take jobs that no one else wants, this is not true. They take jobs with poor conditions and wages so that legal citizens will not take them. So I disagree with people saying that illegal immigrants taking these jobs is ok. I sympathize with these people and I feel that they are entitled to the same rights. Also rather than soley punishing the illegal immigrants, we should put a lot more emphasis on punishing the employers of illegal immigrants. I think that no matter what we do illegal immigration will be a problem however by opening up our borders we can help to ensure that people with positive intentions come into our country rather than criminals and terrorists.
US, Mexico, and those who know everything
There are many things about this immigration debate we have been having in class that really unerve me and others that really confuse me. What i enjoy the most however, by far is the amount of US born 18-19 year olds that feel they have the right to decide who has the right to a "good" life. What pains me is that all of us in class have not had to work for our rights or much of anything else yet in our lives. Yet somehow we have this right to put down those people who aren't born so lucky? i imagine this point of view is one that strictly exists on the subconcious basis of, "if it's not me i dont care". some people believe that naturally born citizenship means they know everything. nice.
of course i understand the point that if there is crime happening here because of the illegal entering of the country, but perhaps instead of attacking the individual for the problem we should attack the country allowing and lets just say it, PROVOKING these people to come. First of all we have thousands of employers offering jobs to immigrants over americans for pretty obvious reasons...they can pay them WAY less. When the conditions in another country are so bad, wouldnt we just naturally assume that people would try to get out of them? instead of blaming those people luring in immigrants, the only option people see fit is to deport many of the hardworking people who just want a better life for themselves and their families. We also need to reavalute our system of citizenship. if every person born here is automatically a citizen without a second glance, then why is it so hard for people outside of the country to become citizens? it's f***ing ridiculous if you ask me. Sure not every immigrant is a "good" person but not every american is a good either. again that goes unnoticed.
of course i understand the point that if there is crime happening here because of the illegal entering of the country, but perhaps instead of attacking the individual for the problem we should attack the country allowing and lets just say it, PROVOKING these people to come. First of all we have thousands of employers offering jobs to immigrants over americans for pretty obvious reasons...they can pay them WAY less. When the conditions in another country are so bad, wouldnt we just naturally assume that people would try to get out of them? instead of blaming those people luring in immigrants, the only option people see fit is to deport many of the hardworking people who just want a better life for themselves and their families. We also need to reavalute our system of citizenship. if every person born here is automatically a citizen without a second glance, then why is it so hard for people outside of the country to become citizens? it's f***ing ridiculous if you ask me. Sure not every immigrant is a "good" person but not every american is a good either. again that goes unnoticed.
US, Mexico, and those who know everything
There are many things about this immigration debate we have been having in class that really unerve me and others that really confuse me. What i enjoy the most however, by far is the amount of US born 18-19 year olds that feel they have the right to decide who has the right to a "good" life. What pains me is that all of us in class have not had to work for our rights or much of anything else yet in our lives. Yet somehow we have this right to put down those people who aren't born so lucky? i imagine this point of view is one that strictly exists on the subconcious basis of, "if it's not me i dont care". some people believe that naturally born citizenship means they know everything. nice.
of course i understand the point that if there is crime happening here because of the illegal entering of the country, but perhaps instead of attacking the individual for the problem we should attack the country allowing and lets just say it, PROVOKING these people to come. First of all we have thousands of employers offering jobs to immigrants over americans for pretty obvious reasons...they can pay them WAY less. When the conditions in another country are so bad, wouldnt we just naturally assume that people would try to get out of them? instead of blaming those people luring in immigrants, the only option people see fit is to deport many of the hardworking people who just want a better life for themselves and their families. We also need to reavalute our system of citizenship. if every person born here is automatically a citizen without a second glance, then why is it so hard for people outside of the country to become citizens? it's f***ing ridiculous if you ask me. Sure not every immigrant is a "good" person but not every american is a good either. again that goes unnoticed.
of course i understand the point that if there is crime happening here because of the illegal entering of the country, but perhaps instead of attacking the individual for the problem we should attack the country allowing and lets just say it, PROVOKING these people to come. First of all we have thousands of employers offering jobs to immigrants over americans for pretty obvious reasons...they can pay them WAY less. When the conditions in another country are so bad, wouldnt we just naturally assume that people would try to get out of them? instead of blaming those people luring in immigrants, the only option people see fit is to deport many of the hardworking people who just want a better life for themselves and their families. We also need to reavalute our system of citizenship. if every person born here is automatically a citizen without a second glance, then why is it so hard for people outside of the country to become citizens? it's f***ing ridiculous if you ask me. Sure not every immigrant is a "good" person but not every american is a good either. again that goes unnoticed.
My Belief...
When it comes to immigration, I believe that our country should stop focusing so much on who is legal or illegal and focus on making everyone legal. There should be no illegal immigrants in this country. That sounds harsh but that's my feeling on the issue. They don't have permission to be in this country so they shouldn't be. I understand that they want a better life but they need to go about it the right way.
Immigrants shouldn't be outlawed from this country by any means. We should be a welcome home to anybody especially if their homeland isn't safe anymore. Now, I'll admit I don't know much about the naturalization process but from I gather it is not an easy process. I think that's where our efforts should be focused. We should work on getting immigrants legalized in this country in an efficient way. I don't know what that way would be but I am all for finding that way.
So, again, when it comes to immigrants they should be welcomed into our country if they do it the right way. Illegals need a better procedure to become legal and they need our country to aid them in that quest.
Immigrants shouldn't be outlawed from this country by any means. We should be a welcome home to anybody especially if their homeland isn't safe anymore. Now, I'll admit I don't know much about the naturalization process but from I gather it is not an easy process. I think that's where our efforts should be focused. We should work on getting immigrants legalized in this country in an efficient way. I don't know what that way would be but I am all for finding that way.
So, again, when it comes to immigrants they should be welcomed into our country if they do it the right way. Illegals need a better procedure to become legal and they need our country to aid them in that quest.
Monday, October 16, 2006
It is after all illegal
It is after all illegal for an undocumented immigrant to enter the country, isn't it? Isn't the government doing everything necessary since September 11th to make sure there aren't people in this country that they don't know about? That is a comforting thought, but apparently it is untrue. It is estimated that 12 million people live here illegally. That means they work here illegally, that means they drive here illegally, that means they aquired living space illegally. Fact is, if you are here illegally, you are technically illegally breathing our air. I know it is unfair to say just because they weren't fortunate enough to be born here they can't live here, but for now the law is the law, and that must be upheld. According to "Two kinds of immigration," immigration isn't hurting the economy, illegal immigration is hurting the economy. Legal immigrants have actually positively affected it. As said by Ray Martin of the Oklahoma Daily, "contrary to popular belief, the law matters." I agree, however, there is nothing wrong with ammending it. Let's see Democracy work, let's see America be the land of the free once again. No matter what someone is in this country for, the government should know about them.
Hey look, there's articles on this nearby!
I was looking around the internets and tried to find some articles on illegal immigration that were close to or in Pennsylvania. Suprisingly, I found such an article. In The Morning Call newspaper, located in Allentown, on September 29, 2006, there was an editorial titled "Illegal Immigration bill gets polished, but it's not getting any better" about the city council and a specific member (wow there were a lot of commas in the beginning of that sentence). Anyway, City Councilman Louis Hershman wanted Allentown to have strict guidelines on illegal immgration that would be nearly identical to that of Hazleton's laws created by Barletta. This editorial shows the views of policemen who would need to add forces to crack down on this problem and of other city officials' perspectives who believe that the immigration problem is too big for Allentown alone to handle.
Another article, this time from the Boston Globe (yay Boston), entitled "Two kinds of immigration (10/16/06)" reveal that people and politicians (there's a difference) should view both the benefits and the costs of both legal and illegal immigration. This article attempts to show that jobs are being lost by the American population to illegal immigrants but do a poor job at it. Their statistics have little validity and their information is vague at best. These authors should have never written this article and only hurt their own cause with their lack of information and semi-"pro-illegal immigration" points. And I thought better of a Boston newspaper.
Allentown Morning Call
Boston Globe
Another article, this time from the Boston Globe (yay Boston), entitled "Two kinds of immigration (10/16/06)" reveal that people and politicians (there's a difference) should view both the benefits and the costs of both legal and illegal immigration. This article attempts to show that jobs are being lost by the American population to illegal immigrants but do a poor job at it. Their statistics have little validity and their information is vague at best. These authors should have never written this article and only hurt their own cause with their lack of information and semi-"pro-illegal immigration" points. And I thought better of a Boston newspaper.
Allentown Morning Call
Boston Globe
IMMIGRATION
Although this may sound very stupid and naive to some, I never really knew about the huge controversies over Immigration until I began researching for this class. Its as if I lived in some cave, hidden from the outside world. It may be due to my unenthusiastic attitude toward staying current with global news. From reading about this issue I think it has sparked my interest in learning more.
I began searching and I came upon a website called http://www.immigrationdebate.com/ it was a very interesting website. The article I read was completely for immigration. This article completely slammed all the negative impacts of immigration. The author proved that these negative set backs were instead positive. For example, "The most convincing argument against immigration is usually their effect on wages, but current economic policy is already focused on fighting this wage pressure to reduce the threat of inflation and subsequent depression. As such, the chief argument against becomes an argument for increased immigration. Most importantly, let us not forget that these immigrants are people who simply want a better life, just like our parents and grandparents, who all came to the United States in similar situations. Helping them in their quest for a better life makes us rich in ways which transcend money. " What he is saying in this debate is completely true. In my opinion this point is a indeed a very accurate point. We are so worried about money that we forget that most, but not all these immigrants are coming to America for a better life. They have been taught that this is the greatest place and why must we insist on tearing there dreams apart? I do agree that not all of these immigrants are here for "the right" reasons, but we have natural born Americans who haven't made "the right" decisions either. We must not punish all the immigrants due to a few that aren't morally correct.
In this website there are a bunch of articles both positive and negative towards immigration. It was nice to sit down and read what these people have to see and read their opinions. I am so indecisive when it comes to this issue. On one hand I do agree with immigration and then when it comes something on the negative side, I somewhat agree. Its so confusing. I feel like i am stuck in a really bad storm when trying to decide whether i like immigration or whether I hate it. I am on the nuetral end.
I began searching and I came upon a website called http://www.immigrationdebate.com/ it was a very interesting website. The article I read was completely for immigration. This article completely slammed all the negative impacts of immigration. The author proved that these negative set backs were instead positive. For example, "The most convincing argument against immigration is usually their effect on wages, but current economic policy is already focused on fighting this wage pressure to reduce the threat of inflation and subsequent depression. As such, the chief argument against becomes an argument for increased immigration. Most importantly, let us not forget that these immigrants are people who simply want a better life, just like our parents and grandparents, who all came to the United States in similar situations. Helping them in their quest for a better life makes us rich in ways which transcend money. " What he is saying in this debate is completely true. In my opinion this point is a indeed a very accurate point. We are so worried about money that we forget that most, but not all these immigrants are coming to America for a better life. They have been taught that this is the greatest place and why must we insist on tearing there dreams apart? I do agree that not all of these immigrants are here for "the right" reasons, but we have natural born Americans who haven't made "the right" decisions either. We must not punish all the immigrants due to a few that aren't morally correct.
In this website there are a bunch of articles both positive and negative towards immigration. It was nice to sit down and read what these people have to see and read their opinions. I am so indecisive when it comes to this issue. On one hand I do agree with immigration and then when it comes something on the negative side, I somewhat agree. Its so confusing. I feel like i am stuck in a really bad storm when trying to decide whether i like immigration or whether I hate it. I am on the nuetral end.
Procrastinators Unite!
I'm actually glad that we had this assignment because it gave me the chance/oppurtunity/excuse to learn more about this whole ordeal. What's more, I was able to find arguments from both sides. One of my articles involved David Cameron, who believes that "the recent flood of immigration into Britain is a good thing". He was quoted as saying that the gaps in our own labor market are being filled with these migrant workers and that this is not necessarily bad. "When willing, able, and energetic people come to this country to work, they don't crowd out other people from the labor market." He even goes to say that "skiller foreign workers expand our economy and make us more competitive".
Other articles I found were not as positive. In a student-run independent newsweekly called The UWM Post, it was brought up that it is not legal immigrants that many people have a problem with, but the illegal ones. Illegal immigrants pose all kind of problems for our society, including taking up space in jails and driving without insurance; when an accident occurs, our own government tax dollars pay the expenses. Another interesting point brought up in this newsletter was that if illegal immigrants did not take up unwanted or undesirable jobs, the overall pay rate could increase. This is possible because a "surplus of labor" has come over and the corresponding wages have decreased.
In Immigration Realities, by Peter Skerry, one of the major points is that most people in American have a twisted view of immigration. An example of this is that most immigrants do not come here with the intention of staying, but to make enough money to start their own business when they return home. Despite their intentions, however, many do end up rebuilding their lives here.
I have found a lot of articles so far and I can honestly say that I want to continue researching the different views on this topic.
Other articles I found were not as positive. In a student-run independent newsweekly called The UWM Post, it was brought up that it is not legal immigrants that many people have a problem with, but the illegal ones. Illegal immigrants pose all kind of problems for our society, including taking up space in jails and driving without insurance; when an accident occurs, our own government tax dollars pay the expenses. Another interesting point brought up in this newsletter was that if illegal immigrants did not take up unwanted or undesirable jobs, the overall pay rate could increase. This is possible because a "surplus of labor" has come over and the corresponding wages have decreased.
In Immigration Realities, by Peter Skerry, one of the major points is that most people in American have a twisted view of immigration. An example of this is that most immigrants do not come here with the intention of staying, but to make enough money to start their own business when they return home. Despite their intentions, however, many do end up rebuilding their lives here.
I have found a lot of articles so far and I can honestly say that I want to continue researching the different views on this topic.
A New Kind of Theme Park
When I read our assignment I turned first to Wikipedia for its take on illegal immigration. At the top of the page I saw things which looked like warnings saying, "This article may not be compliant with the content policies of Wikipedia. To be compliant, it must be written from a neutral point of view and must not include unverifiable, unsuitable material, or original research," and "This page is currently protected from editing until disputes have been resolved. Please discuss changes on the talk page or request unprotection. (Protection is not an endorsement of the current page version,)" which I thought helped to solidify the fact that this is currently a very large issue. I also found a section called "Terminology in the United States" which discussed different terms used in the United States and which were politically correct and incorrect according to different people. Then I went to NPR and searched for programs on illegal immigration. I chose one and began to listen. I was startled to realize it was a story about a park in Mexico where tourists pay to pretend to be illegal immigrants. At first I thought this was a very strange sort of “vacation” to take, but then something changed my mind. One man who runs this park said, “This is a tribute to our brothers who have migrated and gone after the American Dream. This walk is an act to raise awareness; it is a challenge so you know how the migrants suffer and so you value what you have here.” I thought he had a good point – someone needs to keep the people from crossing the border, and why not do it by simulating the border crossing?
illegal immigration - treason?
http://www.vdare.com/pb/060528_unamerican.htm
http://www.today.ucla.edu/2006/060509voice_immigrants.html
http://tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/news_item.2006-07-06.3854364776
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so, after reading a few of these crazy articles on illegal immigration, I realised how many stances there really are on this issue. The first article, vdare.com, talked about how some see the illegal immigration problem as un-American. even TREASON. Treason? It's a little extreme. This piece was entirely persuasive and satirical, but it made me think about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the language it was written in. It was left fairly open, to many interpretations, which has already led to a debate for the issues of: gay/lesbian marriage, abortion, racism, etc. All of the modern issues we have today are not completely addressed by the Constitution, so our government, in it's "infinite wisdom" tells what they really mean.
Mmkay. Second article: a one page, not even one page, kind of a quickie on a metaphor that I saw a lot, but the articles were locked away so I couldn't read them. In the media, immigrants are most often metaphorically imaged as animals. Think about this phrase: "The truthis, employers hungering for really cheap labor hunt out the foreign workers." (UCLA Today, Faulty Discourse on 'illegal immigrants'). It may be unintentional, but these kinds of images and this type of language really plays a part in the bias of a dispute.
THIRD ARTICLE!! This article brought up the point of how we don't really have an illegal immigration problem. No, not at all. Our problem is... ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS. Who'da thunk it? That's right. And this article isn't just all opinion. It states fact and uses laws to back up it's point - specifically, that Republicans in 1980 and now hide the fact that they actually promote illegal employment. In 1986 Reagan's amnesty program, it basically told employers and non citizens that there would be "few penalties and many reqards to increasing the US labor pool with undcoumented immigrants." (Immigration: The Issue Republicans Are Using).
so, those are basic summaries of my 3 articles. :) ummmm.. I guess we'll be talking about it in about half an hour!!
http://www.today.ucla.edu/2006/060509voice_immigrants.html
http://tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/news_item.2006-07-06.3854364776
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so, after reading a few of these crazy articles on illegal immigration, I realised how many stances there really are on this issue. The first article, vdare.com, talked about how some see the illegal immigration problem as un-American. even TREASON. Treason? It's a little extreme. This piece was entirely persuasive and satirical, but it made me think about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the language it was written in. It was left fairly open, to many interpretations, which has already led to a debate for the issues of: gay/lesbian marriage, abortion, racism, etc. All of the modern issues we have today are not completely addressed by the Constitution, so our government, in it's "infinite wisdom" tells what they really mean.
Mmkay. Second article: a one page, not even one page, kind of a quickie on a metaphor that I saw a lot, but the articles were locked away so I couldn't read them. In the media, immigrants are most often metaphorically imaged as animals. Think about this phrase: "The truthis, employers hungering for really cheap labor hunt out the foreign workers." (UCLA Today, Faulty Discourse on 'illegal immigrants'). It may be unintentional, but these kinds of images and this type of language really plays a part in the bias of a dispute.
THIRD ARTICLE!! This article brought up the point of how we don't really have an illegal immigration problem. No, not at all. Our problem is... ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS. Who'da thunk it? That's right. And this article isn't just all opinion. It states fact and uses laws to back up it's point - specifically, that Republicans in 1980 and now hide the fact that they actually promote illegal employment. In 1986 Reagan's amnesty program, it basically told employers and non citizens that there would be "few penalties and many reqards to increasing the US labor pool with undcoumented immigrants." (Immigration: The Issue Republicans Are Using).
so, those are basic summaries of my 3 articles. :) ummmm.. I guess we'll be talking about it in about half an hour!!
<non-offensive adjective meaning illegal> immigration
Two Kinds of Immigration published by the Boston Globe, is a politically correct article emphasizing the distinction between the pros and cons of "unauthorized" or "undocumented" immigration. The authors refused to repeat that one specific word, however, if they could help it. Instead they jumped through hoops, and probably wasted hours in a thesaurus comming up with alternative, unassuming words to replace it. Why? I have no clue. It's unnecessary in the extreme. Call it undocumented, unauthorized, unofficial, or ever so slightly unbeknown to the governemnt, and it's all the same. These people are here, and they are not here legally. When you do something that is not legal, we have recently invented a new word especially for that, and it's called "illegal". You can come up with euphemizations for me punching someone in the face on my way to class, but, at the end of the day from a legal perspective, it's assualt. Period. No way around it. Just like these immigrants. They're here, and they're not supposed to be. That's illegal. The article points out that between 2000 and 2005, persons over the age of 16 lost 4.8 million jobs. The number of immigrants who claimed to have found jobs in that time interval, was 4.13 million. About 2/3 of those immigrants are calculated to be here illegally. So, what's that about them not taking jobs? Immigrant workers ate 86% of those lost jobs. In an interesting paragraph, the article explains that migrant workers make remodeling, lawn care, housecleaning, and child care easier for wealtheir families. I can't believe such vivid and succinct stereotypical ideologies could possibly have been published in the Globe. My respect for that paper has now gone down two full notches with the reading of this one article. And, at the end, they even go on to say that in "future debates" we "need to clearly distinguish between the economic benefits and costs of legal and illegal immigration." What? I'm sorry... what happened to "principle over property"? Is that what our country is comming to? "Well, who gives a <place crude & derogatory term here> about what's right, or about what SHOULD happen, let's just go with what will benefit the economy here and now. Holy freakin God... I can't believe people can be so shortsighted. Okay, I need to calm down... I'm done for now.
...between this class and Geography, college is killing my ink supply. (aka. Printed articles.)
As I'm searching for immigration articles, it's easy to tell that the loudest voices tend to be the ones opposed. In fact, I do have a few of those, since they're easy to find.
There are some others, though, that are interesting. One is from Mexidata.info, entitled "Mexico and the US to Share a 'Wall of Shame'", which is much more sympathetic to the immigrants--as many come from Mexico, and that's worth looking at. A valid opinion from Hispanics doesn't appear quite as much. Maybe it makes us look weak? I'm not sure.
Also, I have an article from... Vail, Colorado that is interviewing candidates on that topic, which brings in the politics of how one answers the question of what to do and get elected. You know that's an issue. Everything is brought up in politics here. Immigration and what to do with it isn't politics in itself, but that is a factor....I know what I mean, really!
Finally, after all of these that separate the population on this issue, I found one that takes the middle ground, talking about how immigration is important and what we could do to make it more legal without hurting the economy. It's... refreshing to see something that isn't polarizing. Maybe that's how life really is, but it doesn't really show in the news. That wouldn't be shocking, after all, and would sell less papers. ...profit is a factor in media, though I doubt they'd admit it.
I'll probably need to find more stuff, but this covers a good, basic range.
There are some others, though, that are interesting. One is from Mexidata.info, entitled "Mexico and the US to Share a 'Wall of Shame'", which is much more sympathetic to the immigrants--as many come from Mexico, and that's worth looking at. A valid opinion from Hispanics doesn't appear quite as much. Maybe it makes us look weak? I'm not sure.
Also, I have an article from... Vail, Colorado that is interviewing candidates on that topic, which brings in the politics of how one answers the question of what to do and get elected. You know that's an issue. Everything is brought up in politics here. Immigration and what to do with it isn't politics in itself, but that is a factor.
Finally, after all of these that separate the population on this issue, I found one that takes the middle ground, talking about how immigration is important and what we could do to make it more legal without hurting the economy. It's... refreshing to see something that isn't polarizing. Maybe that's how life really is, but it doesn't really show in the news. That wouldn't be shocking, after all, and would sell less papers. ...profit is a factor in media, though I doubt they'd admit it.
I'll probably need to find more stuff, but this covers a good, basic range.
"Let the choas begin"
(I found a few articles to work with and I read them and noted the important parts and I still have a mixed view for this topic, so I’m probably going to contradict myself quite a few times throughout this blog, so just go with it and yell at me later.)
The first article I found, “An immigration parable” written by Pat Boone had some valid points, but had inaccurate information (at least some of it seemed that way). The article called a parable “virtually the same thing” as a fable; however, (having just learned this last chapter in my library science class called resources for children and as honors comp takes place in the same room as this class I decided to note the inaccuracy) a fable has “animal characters that talk and act like humans to indicate a moral lesson or satirize human conduct.” A parable on the other hand, (according to Merriam-Webster online) is a “fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or religious principle.” These two are not similar and the story that the writer tells seems to be more of an extended metaphor and includes lots of hyperbole. This makes is hard to consider much of the information in the article as fact, such as the amount of “illegal immigrants” seems higher than other sources approximate it at (12 – 14 million people). The way that the “parable” criticizes the “guest worker” program shows some valid points, such as the way the program is structured and the chaos that may ensue if such a program is put into place. However, the argument was looked at form one side only (a very Republican side too), nothing was presented as a possible alternative; the articles sole purpose was the say to just get the illegal immigrants out. However, this is the view of many Americans, especially considering that the “parable” was quoted form someone else before it was printed.
After reading the second article I noticed that we are only looking at immigration from Mexico in this issue and disregarding the bigger picture with immigration from other countries too. The is currently a case going on that deals with a “Chinese asylum claim” to decide whether we should provide asylum for Chinese families that have more than one child and aren’t in the farming industry. The article talks about Jian Hui Shao who has been living in the United States about four years. This case is currently in the Appeals Court and relates greatly to the part Mexican part of the immigration issue. Should families that are seeking “asylum” or basically all of them be allowed to stay in the United States? This article also proves that it isn’t just Mexican immigrants that are crossing borders illegally; people of other nationality have also done this. This case is actually going to the Supreme Court; this is what the Board of Immigration Appeals decided.
The third article that I read was about comments that Gov Schwarzenegger made about immigration. These articles bring up one we discussed in class about asslimation. Should immigration take on American culture, keep there own entirely, or maybe mix the two together. Schwarzenegger said, “They try to stay Mexican but try to be in America.” I’m not sure how I feel about this statement; I can see some truth in it, but I’m still wondering if this is technically an issue or just a group of people holding on to their culture. The governor made other generalizations about learning or not learning a language which caused controversy with many citizens and the California Democratic Party had a field day. I'm unsure about this article as a whole, so i'll continue to think about it until class.
p.s. It's Ellie's birthday today!!!
The first article I found, “An immigration parable” written by Pat Boone had some valid points, but had inaccurate information (at least some of it seemed that way). The article called a parable “virtually the same thing” as a fable; however, (having just learned this last chapter in my library science class called resources for children and as honors comp takes place in the same room as this class I decided to note the inaccuracy) a fable has “animal characters that talk and act like humans to indicate a moral lesson or satirize human conduct.” A parable on the other hand, (according to Merriam-Webster online) is a “fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or religious principle.” These two are not similar and the story that the writer tells seems to be more of an extended metaphor and includes lots of hyperbole. This makes is hard to consider much of the information in the article as fact, such as the amount of “illegal immigrants” seems higher than other sources approximate it at (12 – 14 million people). The way that the “parable” criticizes the “guest worker” program shows some valid points, such as the way the program is structured and the chaos that may ensue if such a program is put into place. However, the argument was looked at form one side only (a very Republican side too), nothing was presented as a possible alternative; the articles sole purpose was the say to just get the illegal immigrants out. However, this is the view of many Americans, especially considering that the “parable” was quoted form someone else before it was printed.
After reading the second article I noticed that we are only looking at immigration from Mexico in this issue and disregarding the bigger picture with immigration from other countries too. The is currently a case going on that deals with a “Chinese asylum claim” to decide whether we should provide asylum for Chinese families that have more than one child and aren’t in the farming industry. The article talks about Jian Hui Shao who has been living in the United States about four years. This case is currently in the Appeals Court and relates greatly to the part Mexican part of the immigration issue. Should families that are seeking “asylum” or basically all of them be allowed to stay in the United States? This article also proves that it isn’t just Mexican immigrants that are crossing borders illegally; people of other nationality have also done this. This case is actually going to the Supreme Court; this is what the Board of Immigration Appeals decided.
The third article that I read was about comments that Gov Schwarzenegger made about immigration. These articles bring up one we discussed in class about asslimation. Should immigration take on American culture, keep there own entirely, or maybe mix the two together. Schwarzenegger said, “They try to stay Mexican but try to be in America.” I’m not sure how I feel about this statement; I can see some truth in it, but I’m still wondering if this is technically an issue or just a group of people holding on to their culture. The governor made other generalizations about learning or not learning a language which caused controversy with many citizens and the California Democratic Party had a field day. I'm unsure about this article as a whole, so i'll continue to think about it until class.
p.s. It's Ellie's birthday today!!!
I couldn't think of a title...
The topic of immigration rages on in the United States. Declared by many, next to the war in Iraq, to be the hot button issue of elections, at the local and national level, for several years. In the political arena the issue is painted as black and white with no gray area in between, you either support or oppose illegal immigration. The reality though, is that the answer o the illegal immigration debate lies in the middle, and several sources I found support the same view.
The first article “A surge in immigration is spawning a backlash” http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/15767256.html was published in the Philadelphia Inquirer and deals with the immigration debate in Charlotte, North Carolina. In North Carolina, the foreign born population has increased by over 400 percent, with the foreign born population in Charlotte increasing by almost 700 percent. Mecklenburg County Sheriff Jim Pendergraph, the local sheriff, has proposed a solution to the illegal immigration in the area, which is to invoke a federal law created in 1996 under the Immigration and Nationality Act by section 286(g), which allows for the deportation of illegal immigrants found guilty of crimes in the United States. I found this solution to be an interesting twist on the issues raised in the articles on Hazleton, where the issue of illegal immigration and crime led to a totalitarian approach to dealing with illegal immigrants. Instead, Charlotte only processes and deports those actually found guilty of crime, taking irresponsible and dangerous criminals off the streets and processing them or deportation.
Another article “Two kinds of immigration,” http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/16/two_kinds_of_immigration/
published in the Boston Globe, explored the economic implications of immigration on the workforce of the United States. One of the most interesting aspects is that immigrants accounted for 86 percent of employment in the minor employment force in the last 5 years while minors who reported being employed fell by almost 4.2 million in the same time frame. As has been explored before, in an effort to keep costs down, many employers are turning to the immigrant workforce to maximize their profits and statistics prove that it isn’t just jobs that no one wants that are being filled. The growth of illegal immigrants in the labor force is a double-sided sword. On one hand, the cheaper labor keeps commercial costs down and according to Harry L. Jones of Charlotte is a net gain in terms of diversity as well as economic opportunities. On the other hand however, illegal immigrations create a deficit because they do not pay as much taxes as others.
Police, the President, and the Law
While in the process of researching the topic of the immigration debate, a window popped up on my screen. It offered you the chance to win a green card to the United States just by filling out a few simple pieces of information, as long as the task was completed with the 5 minute time-frame. I found this to be ironic, especially with all the controversy about who should be allowed into our country.
I looked mainly at three different articles. One, entitled "Houston Police Department Revises Immigration Policy after Officer’s Death," (http://www.blogger.com/(http://www.officer.com/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=32866) discusses how the death of a police officer, at the hands of an immigrant who had already been deported once due to having previously entered illegally. This event rekindled the flames of a heated debate on tightening immigration checks and consequences for "illegals" on a local level.
There have been several revisions to their procedural methods since this event. Fingerprinting and background checks will be used as a way of determining citizenship, as well as "detention of illegal immigrants who returned to the country after deportation for criminal convictions and detention of people who have previous deportation orders." Like the seatbelt regulations however, being an "illegal" is a secondary offense, and police do not in most cases have the authority to detain someone simply on suspicions of these grounds.
Secondly, an article called simply "Faulty Discourse on ‘illegal immigrants’,"(http://www.today.ucla.edu/2006/060509voice_immigrants.html) is similar to those which we have already looked at. It merely shows the many ways in which immigrants are depicted by completely negative and degrading images such as "overgrown weeds and invading soldiers." It also touches on the use of "illegal immigrant" vs "undocumented immigrant," and how those who stand up for these people are often less respected, such as President Bush when he said, "Immigrants are hard-working, decent human beings."
The third is an unbiased, purely informative piece, called "The Immigration Debate: How This Issue Could Affect Your Household." (http://www.blogger.com/(http://research.lawyers.com/The-Immigration-Debate.html?SPC-CNN). It deal largely with immigration law and how it is applied, especially in regard to home-employed immigrants.
Overall, these three pieces present three different, though not completely opposing views on immigration: pro-immigrant right, toughened regulations, and the law. Together, these can be used to gather a more complete picture of how immigration is affecting our nation.
I looked mainly at three different articles. One, entitled "Houston Police Department Revises Immigration Policy after Officer’s Death," (http://www.blogger.com/(http://www.officer.com/article.jsp?siteSection=1&id=32866) discusses how the death of a police officer, at the hands of an immigrant who had already been deported once due to having previously entered illegally. This event rekindled the flames of a heated debate on tightening immigration checks and consequences for "illegals" on a local level.
There have been several revisions to their procedural methods since this event. Fingerprinting and background checks will be used as a way of determining citizenship, as well as "detention of illegal immigrants who returned to the country after deportation for criminal convictions and detention of people who have previous deportation orders." Like the seatbelt regulations however, being an "illegal" is a secondary offense, and police do not in most cases have the authority to detain someone simply on suspicions of these grounds.
Secondly, an article called simply "Faulty Discourse on ‘illegal immigrants’,"(http://www.today.ucla.edu/2006/060509voice_immigrants.html) is similar to those which we have already looked at. It merely shows the many ways in which immigrants are depicted by completely negative and degrading images such as "overgrown weeds and invading soldiers." It also touches on the use of "illegal immigrant" vs "undocumented immigrant," and how those who stand up for these people are often less respected, such as President Bush when he said, "Immigrants are hard-working, decent human beings."
The third is an unbiased, purely informative piece, called "The Immigration Debate: How This Issue Could Affect Your Household." (http://www.blogger.com/(http://research.lawyers.com/The-Immigration-Debate.html?SPC-CNN). It deal largely with immigration law and how it is applied, especially in regard to home-employed immigrants.
Overall, these three pieces present three different, though not completely opposing views on immigration: pro-immigrant right, toughened regulations, and the law. Together, these can be used to gather a more complete picture of how immigration is affecting our nation.
"The gay-lesbian marriage of this election"
The mexican immigration debate is becoming a huge issue politically. It is going to be the "gay-lesbian marriage of this election", according to Angeles Ortega-Moore, director of the Latin American Coalition in Charlotte, N.C.. People are already touting this as "going to be the hottest issue, maybe next to Iraq, in the presidential election in two years." There are two problems with illegal immigration: the huge amount of illegal immigrants already in the U.S., and securing the Mexican-American border to prevent more from entering in the future. At the moment our federal government has only taken steps to secure the border, which some think will not stop illegal immigration at all. The problem is becoming more political than anything else in the eyes of some. Meanwhile others recognize the complexity of the situation and the sensitivity that must be used when making decisions concering illegal immigrants, since the U.S. is affected so directly by the immigrant population already in the U.S.
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/15767256.htm
http://www.10news.com/news/10024681/detail.html
http://www.themonitor.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=15909&Section=Opinion
http://www.mexidata.info/id1070.html
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/15767256.htm
http://www.10news.com/news/10024681/detail.html
http://www.themonitor.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=15909&Section=Opinion
http://www.mexidata.info/id1070.html
Illegals--Who's Right, Who's Wrong?
Illegal immigration--an issue swirling with myths, facts--truths and lies. Protests and mudslinging, amongst the illegals themselves, as well as the public, politicians, and classrooms. Who is right in this debate? From the "vigilantes" in a group known as the Minuteman Project to the open, warm (yet still conservative) state of Utah, it seems no one can escape the topic.
Millions have come in legally--so why the influx of illegals? With them they bring crime, gangs--They "steal" jobs from Americans. They don't bother learning the language, they "drape themselves in Mexican flags..." and disrupt "the very country they claim to love." The issue is huge in the race for the Senate, with Republican Rick Santorum airing a commercial featuring his father and grandfather's emigration contrasted with those who have "more sinister intentions." But what of those who believe illegals have pure intentions? There are some who insist the immigrants can help the economy, making our country "richer in every sense of the word." We've welcomed them in the past, why not now? The state of Utah is the perfect example--the once 98% white state is changing, evolving, becoming more and more diverse. The acceptance and compassion that the Mormon faith was founded on is now the excuse to accept illegal immigrants. They insisist you can be "conservative yet compassionate..."
Yeah, right. So why is this significant? It's an issue that isn't going to go away until the American public sees some kind of resolution--maybe we're just waiting for something, anything to give us the illusion of "problem solved." English-only, billion dollar fences, politician's promises--I'll take it.
How about you?
Millions have come in legally--so why the influx of illegals? With them they bring crime, gangs--They "steal" jobs from Americans. They don't bother learning the language, they "drape themselves in Mexican flags..." and disrupt "the very country they claim to love." The issue is huge in the race for the Senate, with Republican Rick Santorum airing a commercial featuring his father and grandfather's emigration contrasted with those who have "more sinister intentions." But what of those who believe illegals have pure intentions? There are some who insist the immigrants can help the economy, making our country "richer in every sense of the word." We've welcomed them in the past, why not now? The state of Utah is the perfect example--the once 98% white state is changing, evolving, becoming more and more diverse. The acceptance and compassion that the Mormon faith was founded on is now the excuse to accept illegal immigrants. They insisist you can be "conservative yet compassionate..."
Yeah, right. So why is this significant? It's an issue that isn't going to go away until the American public sees some kind of resolution--maybe we're just waiting for something, anything to give us the illusion of "problem solved." English-only, billion dollar fences, politician's promises--I'll take it.
How about you?
i hate immigration...i also hate santa clause and puppy dogs
hello everyone. first of all i must say that regardless of the cold it is a beautiful day...a day we may have trouble enjoying because of our frozen pupils...but nonetheless a beautiful day.
I have read three articles for our assignment that i would link at the bottom of this page if i wasnt a complete dumbass with computers. im not entirely sure how to go about doing this so i will just take a whack at it.
Over the course of my various readings regarding the immigration debate, i found myself questioning many things that i believe and do not believe. When it comes to a largely publicized debate such as illegal immigration, i believe people truly need to examine each side of the argument instead of accepting only what they believe in as truth. Through the scheme of things, in the direct division of people through country and state borders, we manage to get lost in this rhelm of identity. We identify ourselves as the country we live in, or the state we are from. We divide ourselves into Mexicans, Americans, and Canadians, leaving out the most important group of all; that we are all humans. Regardless of where we are from we are all of the same race. We are all related in some way, we all feel, we all have the same intentions as our lives first begin; they simply change based on our environment and our circumstances. The division of life that takes place everyday is appauling and depressing. We are ALL americans, except we are from the united states part and they are from the mexican part, however more importantly we are all humans. This is why each of owes it to one another, to hear their story.
I have read three articles for our assignment that i would link at the bottom of this page if i wasnt a complete dumbass with computers. im not entirely sure how to go about doing this so i will just take a whack at it.
Over the course of my various readings regarding the immigration debate, i found myself questioning many things that i believe and do not believe. When it comes to a largely publicized debate such as illegal immigration, i believe people truly need to examine each side of the argument instead of accepting only what they believe in as truth. Through the scheme of things, in the direct division of people through country and state borders, we manage to get lost in this rhelm of identity. We identify ourselves as the country we live in, or the state we are from. We divide ourselves into Mexicans, Americans, and Canadians, leaving out the most important group of all; that we are all humans. Regardless of where we are from we are all of the same race. We are all related in some way, we all feel, we all have the same intentions as our lives first begin; they simply change based on our environment and our circumstances. The division of life that takes place everyday is appauling and depressing. We are ALL americans, except we are from the united states part and they are from the mexican part, however more importantly we are all humans. This is why each of owes it to one another, to hear their story.
Immigration Debate
When it comes to immigration, this country seems to be greatly divided. Everyone has different opinions on the issue and everyone thinks their solution is the best one. If there is one uniting factor in this debate, it's that mostly everyone agrees that something needs to be done. Immigration can't be ignored.
This debate is a main focus for upcoming elections with candidates trying to perfect their resolutions in order to win votes. The main aspect of the debate that people seem to be focusing on is what immigration does to the American people living here legally. Does it take away their jobs? Does it make the country less secure? Do immigrants take away services that should go to taxpaying Americans?
The immigration issue seems more like a competition between politicians. Instead of thinking about how immigrants are really affected, it's like they want their plan to be the one chosen in order to win.
This debate is a main focus for upcoming elections with candidates trying to perfect their resolutions in order to win votes. The main aspect of the debate that people seem to be focusing on is what immigration does to the American people living here legally. Does it take away their jobs? Does it make the country less secure? Do immigrants take away services that should go to taxpaying Americans?
The immigration issue seems more like a competition between politicians. Instead of thinking about how immigrants are really affected, it's like they want their plan to be the one chosen in order to win.
Sunday, October 15, 2006
From Governors to Children
I’m not sure if this is due tomorrow and I’m not sure exactly what it is we’re supposed to do. So here is my take on what I think it might be…
Immigrant parents plead to stay in the US for the sake of their children. Towns focus on crime first and immigration second. Virginia communities look towards local police to enforce immigration laws. People share their differing opinions on immigration. Each of these sentences sums up one of the articles I viewed. The thread that links all of them is the extremely heated topic of immigration.
Americans will not stand for invasion by illegal immigrants.
“Smoke them out”
None of us want to stay. We all just want to be able to come, improve our lives a little bit and go back to where we came from.
Immigration enforcement is not a local job.
First priority is to crack down on crime, not immigration.
A helpless stream of American born children who stand helpless before the possibility that their immigrant parents may be deported
More than 3.1 million US born children of unauthorized parents in the US.
If both my parents are deported, then who would tuck me in at night? A stranger?
These are all statements and quotes that came from the articles I read. They help to show some of the differing positions on immigration. Everyone has their own position on immigration whether it is a governor or the child of an illegal immigrant. Each opinion deserves to be heard.
Immigrant parents plead to stay in the US for the sake of their children. Towns focus on crime first and immigration second. Virginia communities look towards local police to enforce immigration laws. People share their differing opinions on immigration. Each of these sentences sums up one of the articles I viewed. The thread that links all of them is the extremely heated topic of immigration.
Americans will not stand for invasion by illegal immigrants.
“Smoke them out”
None of us want to stay. We all just want to be able to come, improve our lives a little bit and go back to where we came from.
Immigration enforcement is not a local job.
First priority is to crack down on crime, not immigration.
A helpless stream of American born children who stand helpless before the possibility that their immigrant parents may be deported
More than 3.1 million US born children of unauthorized parents in the US.
If both my parents are deported, then who would tuck me in at night? A stranger?
These are all statements and quotes that came from the articles I read. They help to show some of the differing positions on immigration. Everyone has their own position on immigration whether it is a governor or the child of an illegal immigrant. Each opinion deserves to be heard.
Here are the links to the articles I referenced:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/hp/content/local_news/epaper/2006/10/14/m1a_lizdeport14.html
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4258908.html
http://www.reflector.com/local/content/news/stories/2006/10/12/Immigration_forum.html
http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1149190916722&path=!news&s=1045855934842
Immigration Abstract
No matter what side of the immigration issue people are on, most have a tendency to stress the importants of symbols and history to back their arguments with. As the Boston Globe put it "the immigration debate rely on such rhetoric and on symbols from our history as the quintessential nation of immigrants." Progressives point out that the immigration made up for the building blocks of the United States and that we are all immigrants. They often call America "the melting pot." People who are for strictly enforcing anti-illegal immigration laws such as Santorum, say that immigrants in the past worked hard to asymilate into American society whereas modern illegal immigrants do not bother to even learn English.
Both sides of the arugement agree that the symbolism and meanings of words play a huge role in the debate. They stress how it is important to be weary of calling people "illegals" and "legals" rather than legal immigrants and illegal immigrants. With elections coming up, these issues revolving immigration are very important and studying what each side is saying is also nessecary. No matter who is speaking or what side they support, they all have bring up the same points, points that they know will get people going. Politicians want to get people riled up and passionate so that they will vote in their favor. Based on the stir that these debates and new laws have caused, it shows that they know what they are doing.
Both sides of the arugement agree that the symbolism and meanings of words play a huge role in the debate. They stress how it is important to be weary of calling people "illegals" and "legals" rather than legal immigrants and illegal immigrants. With elections coming up, these issues revolving immigration are very important and studying what each side is saying is also nessecary. No matter who is speaking or what side they support, they all have bring up the same points, points that they know will get people going. Politicians want to get people riled up and passionate so that they will vote in their favor. Based on the stir that these debates and new laws have caused, it shows that they know what they are doing.
Public Discourse on Immigration Issues
Well I have been cruising the internet going from site to site and article to article to come up with some kind of base for me to write an abstract about. The Immigration Debate is a widely discussed topic throughout the
Nationwide polls conducted by major news media and research organizations between Feb. 8-
So pretty much we’re dealing with a whole bunch of different point of views, from religion to the president, everyone has something to say. Hopefully things won’t get too violent.
Public Discourse on Immigration
Well I have been cruising the internet going from site to site and article to article to come up with some kind of base for me to write an abstract about. The Immigration Debate is a widely discussed topic throughout the
Nationwide polls conducted by major news media and research organizations between Feb. 8-
So pretty much we’re dealing with a whole bunch of different point of views, from religion to the president, everyone has something to say. Hopefully things won’t get too violent.
Coco's Current Activities
Hello all!
It is currently 7:51 in the P-M on Sunday, and I am in the Johnson Hall comp lab, printing out articles concerning "public discourse on the immigration debate," like it says in the syllabus. I'm finding some great junk, but I've noticed nobody has posted anything yet--is this a "hold off on that for now" type of thing? I mean, are we going to discuss this in class and then have to do it for Wed, or am I just early? (heehee.)
Ho-hum, just checking.
Nighty-night! See you all tomorrow....
It is currently 7:51 in the P-M on Sunday, and I am in the Johnson Hall comp lab, printing out articles concerning "public discourse on the immigration debate," like it says in the syllabus. I'm finding some great junk, but I've noticed nobody has posted anything yet--is this a "hold off on that for now" type of thing? I mean, are we going to discuss this in class and then have to do it for Wed, or am I just early? (heehee.)
Ho-hum, just checking.
Nighty-night! See you all tomorrow....
Saturday, October 14, 2006
sorta about the readings, but really not at all
first off i just want to say i really enjoy the discussions we have in class, although i do often get enraged about things...oh well. i want to mostly comment on the second reading. a "how to" manual on how to get votes makes me sick. and in all actuality, that is exactly what was written. how to get votes. this in my mind is downright ridiculous and immoral. yes, tell ppl what they want to hear and make them temporarily happy. by doing this you guarantee disappointment for the future voters and weaken their faith in the united states voting system, by forcing them to believe that they are not voting for any cause, but simply for the benefit of the candidate that will not be doing anything about the causes they discuss. whatever. i dont like politics
Friday, October 13, 2006
My late blog about the readings
Man, I am really creative when it comes to blog titles, LOL. Anyhoo, here are my thoughts on the readings:
Framing
I really enjoyed this article. I never really took the time to think about my feelings on immigration, but I can say that I agree with a lot of the points brought up in this article. I liked how the author focused on the wording of things... at one point they mention how the term "Immigration problem" focuses on the negative effects of immigration, but it does not truly delve into the issue and how it truly must be fixed (by a higher standard of living for everyone). I also liked the point brought up about illegal immigration being a Civil Rights issue. They are right- even if they are illegal, if these people work in our country and pay our taxes, then technically they are Americans. And even though they are Americans, they have to live in the shadows. Seems like a Civil Rights issue to me! I agree with the statement that the words "Illegal Alien" denote criminality and negative images in the minds of many people. Overall, I really enjoyed the article. It put a lot of things into perspective for me. I think the one quote that truly stuck out to me is this (I may get a word or two wrong, but you get the point): "Terrorists come to destroy the American dream. Immigrants- legal or illegal-come to live the American dream."
Respect...Fairness
I hated this one. It wasn't even the fact that it was 25 pages... I just hated how it was written. Parts of it are written like a manual, and quite frankly, I think that's stupid! Honestly, I read this piece and did not take any of it in. Seriously, you can ask me what it was about and all I will say is "Immigration." I also did not like how most of the quotes did not have their author cited. I rather enjoyed some of those quotes and would have liked to have known who said them, but they didn't write it! Maybe I'm just being dumb and didn't see them. Anyhoo, one thing I did like is all of the pie charts/polls... it was cool to see how people stand on the issue. There was one quote that I really enjoyed. I'm not sure if I agree with it or not, but I just liked the feel of it: "A country that can't control its own borders can't control its own destiny."
Framing
I really enjoyed this article. I never really took the time to think about my feelings on immigration, but I can say that I agree with a lot of the points brought up in this article. I liked how the author focused on the wording of things... at one point they mention how the term "Immigration problem" focuses on the negative effects of immigration, but it does not truly delve into the issue and how it truly must be fixed (by a higher standard of living for everyone). I also liked the point brought up about illegal immigration being a Civil Rights issue. They are right- even if they are illegal, if these people work in our country and pay our taxes, then technically they are Americans. And even though they are Americans, they have to live in the shadows. Seems like a Civil Rights issue to me! I agree with the statement that the words "Illegal Alien" denote criminality and negative images in the minds of many people. Overall, I really enjoyed the article. It put a lot of things into perspective for me. I think the one quote that truly stuck out to me is this (I may get a word or two wrong, but you get the point): "Terrorists come to destroy the American dream. Immigrants- legal or illegal-come to live the American dream."
Respect...Fairness
I hated this one. It wasn't even the fact that it was 25 pages... I just hated how it was written. Parts of it are written like a manual, and quite frankly, I think that's stupid! Honestly, I read this piece and did not take any of it in. Seriously, you can ask me what it was about and all I will say is "Immigration." I also did not like how most of the quotes did not have their author cited. I rather enjoyed some of those quotes and would have liked to have known who said them, but they didn't write it! Maybe I'm just being dumb and didn't see them. Anyhoo, one thing I did like is all of the pie charts/polls... it was cool to see how people stand on the issue. There was one quote that I really enjoyed. I'm not sure if I agree with it or not, but I just liked the feel of it: "A country that can't control its own borders can't control its own destiny."
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
To tell you the truth, when i first printed out what we had to read I was so mad. In my head i was thinking 25 pages? Seriously, 25 pages?? No way was I gunna be able to read this and understand it. Surprisingly I was proven wrong.
Illegal Immigration Prevention was a great read. I love how it is broken into categories and it has lots of bolded words/passages. The charts in it really helped me to understand just how immigration effects the US. It was very interesting and at the same time very informative. Just as many said this article didn't sound like a campaign speech. It really showed the audience what the concern is and how it effects our every day life.
The other reading, The Framing of Immigration, didn't settle as well with me. The language he uses is really hard to understand personally. The words didn't flow in my mind. It seems like a word scramble to me. I found myself reading over it again and again before i somewhat understood the authors point. It seemed like a campaign speech. The whole framing situation just went over my head. I guess i just wasnt into it enough. My mind was probably too fried from reading the other reading.
Illegal Immigration Prevention was a great read. I love how it is broken into categories and it has lots of bolded words/passages. The charts in it really helped me to understand just how immigration effects the US. It was very interesting and at the same time very informative. Just as many said this article didn't sound like a campaign speech. It really showed the audience what the concern is and how it effects our every day life.
The other reading, The Framing of Immigration, didn't settle as well with me. The language he uses is really hard to understand personally. The words didn't flow in my mind. It seems like a word scramble to me. I found myself reading over it again and again before i somewhat understood the authors point. It seemed like a campaign speech. The whole framing situation just went over my head. I guess i just wasnt into it enough. My mind was probably too fried from reading the other reading.
illegal immigrants
I enjoyed the first and second readings on Hazelton. It kept my attention and I wanted to keep reading because it was about a place so close to home. Mayor Barletta shows a very strong idea and I agree with it. I feel that he understands both sides but in order to do what is best for that town he is doing the best he can. Some of the actions he took or is planning to take I feel went a little over the line such as having certain people carded and making English the official language becuase there are people there legally that may look a certain way and may not speak english and I don't feel like they should be put through this hassle just because others are doing things illegally. Also, with all the letters of support he has gotten that greatly outnumber the oppostition letters that shows that he is definately going in the right direction for what the people of Hazelton want.
today's articles
hello all-
so how did everyone enjoy these two articles? my first reaction was that i ran out of printer paper to print both articles [i read better in ink than pixels], so i was rather mad.. yea. anyway, i enjoyed both articles although i didn't agree with the stances promoted in the first one. i'm pretty much against illegal immigration and agree with most of what the second article said about prevention, and how by breaking laws by immigrating illegally communicates that america's laws are optional (kind of like speed limit signs on the highway - completely optional!). granted, laws are optional, but there is a severe punishment for most when they're broken. for example, if i didn't file my taxes, i'd get an earful from the government about 'stealing money', and have to pay it PLUS interest, etc. etc. etc.
i definitely noticed that it was less of an article and more of a guidebook for politics, which i thought was interesting. i dunno why i thought it was so interesting, but i enjoyed reading it as opposed to an article with the same ideas. i suppose it was a little more persuasive.
ok.. that's what i've got to say, i guess.
so how did everyone enjoy these two articles? my first reaction was that i ran out of printer paper to print both articles [i read better in ink than pixels], so i was rather mad.. yea. anyway, i enjoyed both articles although i didn't agree with the stances promoted in the first one. i'm pretty much against illegal immigration and agree with most of what the second article said about prevention, and how by breaking laws by immigrating illegally communicates that america's laws are optional (kind of like speed limit signs on the highway - completely optional!). granted, laws are optional, but there is a severe punishment for most when they're broken. for example, if i didn't file my taxes, i'd get an earful from the government about 'stealing money', and have to pay it PLUS interest, etc. etc. etc.
i definitely noticed that it was less of an article and more of a guidebook for politics, which i thought was interesting. i dunno why i thought it was so interesting, but i enjoyed reading it as opposed to an article with the same ideas. i suppose it was a little more persuasive.
ok.. that's what i've got to say, i guess.
This Is Where The Title Is.
Let me start by saying that I do not always feel comfortable sharing my opinion of things I am not completely up-to-date on. Yes, we all know (or at least we should) that immigration is an issue, but I am not familiar with all of the details or what exactly it is that I believe. That said, on to the articles! I enjoyed The Framing of Immigration because there were several lines that jumped out at and me and because I found it easy to understand. The article talked about Bush "framing" the laws in a way that the UN cannot step in and make it a humanitarian crisis. "These bodies do not have roles in the immigration frame, so they have no place in an 'immigration debate'". It also added later on that we "are all complicit in the current problematic situation" since most of us go to Wal-Mart and McDonald's. I thought this was a good article simply because it made me think. However, even though it had graphs and fun pictures to look at, I did not enjoy reading Respect For The Law and Economic Fairness. The pictures and such did a much better job of explaining than the actual article, which made me feel as if I were reading a rulebook. As for the entire issue, I want to look up more information and further develop my opinion. :)
They have rights too!
Illegal immigration, if I may call it that now, is a serious issue in the forum of American politics today. Personally, I think that the messages being sent by Capitol Hill are about as polarized as the messages in “The Framing of Immigration” and “Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness.” With some supporting very conservative agendas while other tend to be much more liberal. Personally, I believe that we should take a democratic approach to the issue of immigration.
My entire view tends to fall more in line with the entire agenda set forth by the article “The Framing of Immigration/” I thought that this article put forth very interesting perspectives on the way in which we frame “illegal” and other terms that we apply to illegal immigrants, which apply a very negative connotation to everyone that falls into this category. The entire article spoke in very liberal terms politically that seemed to place the blame elsewhere and not on the immigrants themselves and while I tend to agree with some f the issues placed forth by the other article, I think that this article rings true as well. Personally, I look at the people who cross our border as just that, people with certain rights that should not be violated. Everyone in our country in here in search of the American Dream, and even if they reach this country through unconventional of illegal means they should not be deprived of an opportunity to live here. It was just like Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, that we are all created equal with certain unalienable rights.
There are issues raised in the other article that seem to be valid when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration however. Security, in the sense of our vulnerability to attack from foreign countries or groups, is always a concern in a post 9/11 America and measures should be taken to preserve our security domestically. I also believe that through some form of domestic reform, we could gain citizenship for the people who have come here illegally. Deportation is not the answer, because no matter what anyone does, people will continue to cross our borders. So in that vein the only reasonable solution is to solve the problem at home and allow more people to enter the country legally instead of building a fence along the border, that’s my two cents.
Conservative on Complexities
Hello all---just got done reading the articles for today. Regarding "The Framing of Immigration," The only thing I identified with was near the end, when it described the "conservative view" on the immigration problem. The rest of the article was more of the same, more of what we've been hearing--Bush is messing it up, etc etc--and I especially hated the "Refugees are worthy of compassion" quote. It's probably why I LOVED the gigantic 25-page article--"Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention." I know, I know--I say how much I love simple, get-to-the-point type junk, but this was fabulous. The pie charts were a nice addition--but the sections were almost as if I had written them--they were just, BAM! Here it is---Illegal means you're breaking the law--"The best way to show compassion for illegal immigration is to END illegal immigration." Just go through the process, you know? Just legalize yourself---the article stresses a "balanced and reasonable" amount of legal immigrants, which I also agree with. "If it sounds like amnesty, it will fail." You hear that Georgie? You know I love you, but the "Temporary Worker" thing that the first article went into is NOT gonna work. My favorite thing of all was the "LANGUAGE TO REMEMBER" section at the end of the long article--that's my type of junk right there--simple, direct--I could frame it and hang it on my wall.
I suppose we'll talk more about this later---see you all then!
I suppose we'll talk more about this later---see you all then!
...ahahahaha, your Will is equal to mine, baby.
And, oh, wow, I have a lot to cover.
First of all, all of the three articles from the last class seemed forceful, but in different ways, which makes sense considering the sources. The news articles are forceful in a "this is what's going on and you can't--or shouldn't--deny it" way, which more or less is what newspapers as a whole try to do. I can't see that much beyond it, though.
"Lingo Jingo" is another story though. It lacks the context of the news and has to stand on it's own. An interesting way of doing that, I think, is the realatively more dense sections framing the problem and the less dense sections that actually offer his position. It put the focus on the argument, for me, in the "oi, I can actually make it through this without getting distracted!" way. That didn't hit me at first, but it works, and anything else is even subtler than that, which I can't catch.
And now the stuff for today.
"The Framing of Immigration" I find intereesting, in that it says calling what's happening an "immigration" problem that needs to be reformed makes it too simple. I... more or less agree with that fact, but in the way that I see practically everything as more complex than anyone says. Exactly what the problem's made up of? I'm not really sure. The author brings up quite a few more ways to look at it, but I doubt that's all the ways. My uninformed opinion would be on the progressive side, to make it easier for those who want to come here as long as the USA has the room and money--because it's their choice, and one my big things is "live and let live", but even after reading all this stuff I don't think I know enough to really decide. ...going to need to think about this more.
Second article firstly results in me going "oooooh, pie charts and other graphs, yay!", but after that. It starts to annoy me with the wording. Firstly, the ongoing mention of "Republicans" and "Democrats" as the two different side of the debate. That certainly puts a overt political spin on it--and though I think it was written to aid politicians, that still really turns me off. However, the constant mention of America as a cohesive whole is even worse. There are many Americas--just in terms of the USA, not even touching the fact that could apply to continents--and the article doesn't acknowledge that. I don't like polarizing, and that's what that article does--yes, I do it, but I freely admit so, which... is different, more or less, because it implies that I'm wording something for other reasons than accuracy and to take it with a grain of salt.
That leads to the talking about laws as a be-all-and-end-all type thing. I... don't agree. Firstly, I haven't read the laws in their entirity--would you expect me to, not knowing where to begin?--but the way they're brought up in public makes them sound way too broad. ...I'm more or less a moral relativist, can't you tell? But that is, of course, just a convienent label that works since I've been working on this for an hour, and I'm still not quite done. Laws... aren't perfect. I don't know if this article is meant to make them sound like they are, but to me it does. Nothing is eternal. ...well, except in some religion, maybe, which I'm not bringing up since that would open a huge can of worms I really don't want to deal with, but in terms of human things, there is no eternal, and the laws should change to reflect that. Laws... aren't as democratic as some people think--since direct democracy would be... well, interesting, but mostly a pain in the ass, considering the size of the nation--so taking them with a grain of salt while realizing that disagreement isn't protection for punishment if they're broken is a good idea, I would say.
...also? Seven of the ten times they had charts or tables, the figures didn't add up. Okay, I understand rounding issues and only wanting to mention the most important--i.e. highest--percents, but that should have been mentioned at some point. Maybe I missed it, but if not? Makes it look sloppy, guys.
ds;bgk I've been writing this for an hour and fifteen minutes, and I don't even have a strong stand on immigration itself.
First of all, all of the three articles from the last class seemed forceful, but in different ways, which makes sense considering the sources. The news articles are forceful in a "this is what's going on and you can't--or shouldn't--deny it" way, which more or less is what newspapers as a whole try to do. I can't see that much beyond it, though.
"Lingo Jingo" is another story though. It lacks the context of the news and has to stand on it's own. An interesting way of doing that, I think, is the realatively more dense sections framing the problem and the less dense sections that actually offer his position. It put the focus on the argument, for me, in the "oi, I can actually make it through this without getting distracted!" way. That didn't hit me at first, but it works, and anything else is even subtler than that, which I can't catch.
And now the stuff for today.
"The Framing of Immigration" I find intereesting, in that it says calling what's happening an "immigration" problem that needs to be reformed makes it too simple. I... more or less agree with that fact, but in the way that I see practically everything as more complex than anyone says. Exactly what the problem's made up of? I'm not really sure. The author brings up quite a few more ways to look at it, but I doubt that's all the ways. My uninformed opinion would be on the progressive side, to make it easier for those who want to come here as long as the USA has the room and money--because it's their choice, and one my big things is "live and let live", but even after reading all this stuff I don't think I know enough to really decide. ...going to need to think about this more.
Second article firstly results in me going "oooooh, pie charts and other graphs, yay!", but after that. It starts to annoy me with the wording. Firstly, the ongoing mention of "Republicans" and "Democrats" as the two different side of the debate. That certainly puts a overt political spin on it--and though I think it was written to aid politicians, that still really turns me off. However, the constant mention of America as a cohesive whole is even worse. There are many Americas--just in terms of the USA, not even touching the fact that could apply to continents--and the article doesn't acknowledge that. I don't like polarizing, and that's what that article does--yes, I do it, but I freely admit so, which... is different, more or less, because it implies that I'm wording something for other reasons than accuracy and to take it with a grain of salt.
That leads to the talking about laws as a be-all-and-end-all type thing. I... don't agree. Firstly, I haven't read the laws in their entirity--would you expect me to, not knowing where to begin?--but the way they're brought up in public makes them sound way too broad. ...I'm more or less a moral relativist, can't you tell? But that is, of course, just a convienent label that works since I've been working on this for an hour, and I'm still not quite done. Laws... aren't perfect. I don't know if this article is meant to make them sound like they are, but to me it does. Nothing is eternal. ...well, except in some religion, maybe, which I'm not bringing up since that would open a huge can of worms I really don't want to deal with, but in terms of human things, there is no eternal, and the laws should change to reflect that. Laws... aren't as democratic as some people think--since direct democracy would be... well, interesting, but mostly a pain in the ass, considering the size of the nation--so taking them with a grain of salt while realizing that disagreement isn't protection for punishment if they're broken is a good idea, I would say.
...also? Seven of the ten times they had charts or tables, the figures didn't add up. Okay, I understand rounding issues and only wanting to mention the most important--i.e. highest--percents, but that should have been mentioned at some point. Maybe I missed it, but if not? Makes it look sloppy, guys.
ds;bgk I've been writing this for an hour and fifteen minutes, and I don't even have a strong stand on immigration itself.
Still On the Fence
I agree with points from both readings, so I’m still on the fence on this “issue” or “mélange of social, economic, cultural, and security concerns.” Although I agreed with parts of both articles, “The Framing of Immigration” was easier and more enjoyable to read. Despite the “Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention” was relatively easily understood and definitely got the point across; the article was so long that by the end I couldn’t remember a lot of stuff from the beginning, even the title is long. The graphs and pictures gave the reader most of the important information in the article, but most of that was from polls which often has a bias, whether purposely or unintentionally there. “Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention” only gives the reader how best to phrase the Republican view of immigration, which makes me wonder why someone feels the need to make their own viewpoint on the issue sound better. “The Framing of Immigration” has quite a few good points about how we are looking at only the “immigration problem” instead of the big picture and what the “immigration problem really means. I didn’t agree with all of George Lakoff and Sam Fergeruson’s views, but he had some good points (and he seems to be anti-Bush, so I liked that part of the article). “The Framing of Immigration” was written in a more interesting way than “Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness: Illegal Immigration Prevention;” the former was written in a smoothly flowing essay form, while the latter was written in a more clunky outline form.
Easy Read
Although the second reading was much longer I enjoyed it much more than the first reading. The first reading had a definite political slant in which it brought up viewpoints of others and then smashed them down. The Author did not take the time to support claims he believed in or offer his own solutions. He only bashed the ideas of others. I really don't appreciate any writing like this, no matter what the political viewpoint. The second reading however was much better. The author wrote about solutions and gave suggestions to the readers of how to fix this problem and used poll results to support and reinforce his claims. This made the second reading better in my opinion because it did not have any real negativity to the other viewpoints. It only suggested the writers own solution using graphs to make it look more scientific. Plus the graphs, poll results, and larger text made it very easy to read.
Illegal politics
I have to say, although I did read the "Respect fot the Law and Economic Fairness" in its entirety, I don't think I actually retained anything from it. It was interesting to read the "words that work" sections; they tended to be much more informative than the explanations. In reality though, I have no real idea wat else the article was about.
I liked the "Framing of Immigration" article much better. I was actually able to pay attention to the points they were making and retain at least a portion of the information. I think what really stood out to me was how this article wasn't so against immigration and illegal immigrants. Its writters recognized there is a problem with illegal immigration that needs to be dealt with but that a compete lack of compassion is not the solution. Rather, it suggests immigration in moderation. One such passage states, "The answer to this problem isn't an 'open-border.' The United States cannot take on the world's problems on its own. Other affluent countries need to extend a humanitarian arm to peoples fleeing oppressive economic circumstances as well. How many immigrants the United States should be willing to accept will ultimately be up to Congress."
I also found the section on the use of the word 'illegal' interesting and also of the use of the word 'alien.' My favorite passage in the whole piece is this one. " 'Aliens,' in poular culture suggests nonhuman beings invading from outer space- completely foreign, not one of us, intent on taking over our land and our way of life by gradually insinuating themselves among us." Although somewhat melodramatic, I think this is probably a pretty accurate description of how the majority of our nation sees illegal immigrants. In reality, they are people too and should be treated as people. This does not mean to say that they should be allowed to do anything they please without consequence, but they do deserve to at least be discussed with respect. Another point this article made along these same lines was that it asked whether the United States was setting up or helping enforce governments that people might flee from and also how trade impacts illegal immigration. This is finally an article that questions what America is doing to encourage illegal immigration.
The final point that I want to touch on deals with the use of the word illegal to describe immigrants. I just thought this passage was amusing. "Imagine calling businessmen who once cheated on their taxes 'illegal businessmen.' Imagine calling people who have driven over the speed limit 'illegal drivers.' "
I liked the "Framing of Immigration" article much better. I was actually able to pay attention to the points they were making and retain at least a portion of the information. I think what really stood out to me was how this article wasn't so against immigration and illegal immigrants. Its writters recognized there is a problem with illegal immigration that needs to be dealt with but that a compete lack of compassion is not the solution. Rather, it suggests immigration in moderation. One such passage states, "The answer to this problem isn't an 'open-border.' The United States cannot take on the world's problems on its own. Other affluent countries need to extend a humanitarian arm to peoples fleeing oppressive economic circumstances as well. How many immigrants the United States should be willing to accept will ultimately be up to Congress."
I also found the section on the use of the word 'illegal' interesting and also of the use of the word 'alien.' My favorite passage in the whole piece is this one. " 'Aliens,' in poular culture suggests nonhuman beings invading from outer space- completely foreign, not one of us, intent on taking over our land and our way of life by gradually insinuating themselves among us." Although somewhat melodramatic, I think this is probably a pretty accurate description of how the majority of our nation sees illegal immigrants. In reality, they are people too and should be treated as people. This does not mean to say that they should be allowed to do anything they please without consequence, but they do deserve to at least be discussed with respect. Another point this article made along these same lines was that it asked whether the United States was setting up or helping enforce governments that people might flee from and also how trade impacts illegal immigration. This is finally an article that questions what America is doing to encourage illegal immigration.
The final point that I want to touch on deals with the use of the word illegal to describe immigrants. I just thought this passage was amusing. "Imagine calling businessmen who once cheated on their taxes 'illegal businessmen.' Imagine calling people who have driven over the speed limit 'illegal drivers.' "
Illegal politics
I have to say, although I did read the "Respect fot the Law and Economic Fairness" in its entirety, I don't think I actually retained anything from it. It was interesting to read the "words that work" sections; they tended to be much more informative than the explanations. In reality though, I have no real idea wat else the article was about.
I liked the "Framing of Immigration" article much better. I was actually able to pay attention to the points they were making and retain at least a portion of the information. I think what really stood out to me was how this article wasn't so against immigration and illegal immigrants. Its writters recognized there is a problem with illegal immigration that needs to be dealt with but that a compete lack of compassion is not the solution. Rather, it suggests immigration in moderation. One such passage states, "The answer to this problem isn't an 'open-border.' The United States cannot take on the world's problems on its own. Other affluent countries need to extend a humanitarian arm to peoples fleeing oppressive economic circumstances as well. How many immigrants the United States should be willing to accept will ultimately be up to Congress."
I also found the section on the use of the word 'illegal' interesting and also of the use of the word 'alien.' My favorite passage in the whole piece is this one. " 'Aliens,' in poular culture suggests nonhuman beings invading from outer space- completely foreign, not one of us, intent on taking over our land and our way of life by gradually insinuating themselves among us." Although somewhat melodramatic, I think this is probably a pretty accurate description of how the majority of our nation sees illegal immigrants. In reality, they are people too and should be treated as people. This does not mean to say that they should be allowed to do anything they please without consequence, but they do deserve to at least be discussed with respect. Another point this article made along these same lines was that it asked whether the United States was setting up or helping enforce governments that people might flee from and also how trade impacts illegal immigration. This is finally an article that questions what America is doing to encourage illegal immigration.
The final point that I want to touch on deals with the use of the word illegal to describe immigrants. I just thought this passage was amusing. "Imagine calling businessmen who once cheated on their taxes 'illegal businessmen.' Imagine calling people who have driven over the speed limit 'illegal drivers.' "
I liked the "Framing of Immigration" article much better. I was actually able to pay attention to the points they were making and retain at least a portion of the information. I think what really stood out to me was how this article wasn't so against immigration and illegal immigrants. Its writters recognized there is a problem with illegal immigration that needs to be dealt with but that a compete lack of compassion is not the solution. Rather, it suggests immigration in moderation. One such passage states, "The answer to this problem isn't an 'open-border.' The United States cannot take on the world's problems on its own. Other affluent countries need to extend a humanitarian arm to peoples fleeing oppressive economic circumstances as well. How many immigrants the United States should be willing to accept will ultimately be up to Congress."
I also found the section on the use of the word 'illegal' interesting and also of the use of the word 'alien.' My favorite passage in the whole piece is this one. " 'Aliens,' in poular culture suggests nonhuman beings invading from outer space- completely foreign, not one of us, intent on taking over our land and our way of life by gradually insinuating themselves among us." Although somewhat melodramatic, I think this is probably a pretty accurate description of how the majority of our nation sees illegal immigrants. In reality, they are people too and should be treated as people. This does not mean to say that they should be allowed to do anything they please without consequence, but they do deserve to at least be discussed with respect. Another point this article made along these same lines was that it asked whether the United States was setting up or helping enforce governments that people might flee from and also how trade impacts illegal immigration. This is finally an article that questions what America is doing to encourage illegal immigration.
The final point that I want to touch on deals with the use of the word illegal to describe immigrants. I just thought this passage was amusing. "Imagine calling businessmen who once cheated on their taxes 'illegal businessmen.' Imagine calling people who have driven over the speed limit 'illegal drivers.' "
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
A Pleasant Surpirse
When I started reading “The Framing of Immigration” for the first couple pages I was anything but eager to read the rest. All I could think was…oh no here we go again with a long article that is just going to go over my head. That was until I came across something that caught my attention. “Unknown numbers of people have died trekking through the extreme conditions of the Arizona and New Mexico desert…Fathers feel forced to leave their families in their best attempt to provide for their kids. Everyday, boatloads of people arrive on our shores after miserable journeys at sea in deplorable conditions.” As much as I think about it I’m not sure exactly what made this stand out to me. Maybe it was just the plain old fact that it touched my heart. Just the way that it was put, something touched me and pulled me in.
Through the rest of the article I continued to find particular sentences and paragraphs that stood out to me and grabbed me. It was a pleasant surprise. I was dreading reading this article, and before I knew it I was enjoying it. I didn’t particularly love the way in which the article was written, but I was still able to get a lot out of it and take pleasure in it.
Another sentence that grabbed me was towards the middle of the article. It came in a section that was discussing security; it even mentioned the war on terror. Then this was mentioned, “Terrorists come to destroy the American dream, immigrants – both documented and undocumented – come to live the American dream.” I thought that this was a wonderful way of putting this idea. I could not have said it any better myself. I feel that many people link immigrants with terrorism, when in reality they are two completely different issues. It just happens that they both share one little similarity, that we see both of them as coming from outside this country.
“These immigrants are not a physical threat, they are a vital part of our economy and help America function. They don’t want to shoot us or kill us or blow us up. They only want to weed our gardens, clean our houses, and cook our meals in search of the American Dream.”
Through the rest of the article I continued to find particular sentences and paragraphs that stood out to me and grabbed me. It was a pleasant surprise. I was dreading reading this article, and before I knew it I was enjoying it. I didn’t particularly love the way in which the article was written, but I was still able to get a lot out of it and take pleasure in it.
Another sentence that grabbed me was towards the middle of the article. It came in a section that was discussing security; it even mentioned the war on terror. Then this was mentioned, “Terrorists come to destroy the American dream, immigrants – both documented and undocumented – come to live the American dream.” I thought that this was a wonderful way of putting this idea. I could not have said it any better myself. I feel that many people link immigrants with terrorism, when in reality they are two completely different issues. It just happens that they both share one little similarity, that we see both of them as coming from outside this country.
“These immigrants are not a physical threat, they are a vital part of our economy and help America function. They don’t want to shoot us or kill us or blow us up. They only want to weed our gardens, clean our houses, and cook our meals in search of the American Dream.”
Jet Lag...
So I read these two articles last Friday while I was on the plane on the way to Arizona (which is the coolest state in the world), so I'm having a little bit of trouble remembering entirely what they were about. However, I do remember enjoying the first one very much - I liked the author's style and ideas. I loved how he went through each word or phrase and talked about how it "framed" immigration. I really don't remember much about the second one, but I recall disliking it, and also that many of the author's points conflicted with my own. If I have time I'll reread these before class tomorrow, otherwise I'm sure it will all come back to me after we start discussing it. See you then!
PS Everyone should go to AZ... seriously, it's awesome.
PS Everyone should go to AZ... seriously, it's awesome.
Make it Work: Immigration Reform and Fashion Reality Shows
Maybe it's because the Project Runway season finale is tomorrow and I've just got fashion fever but when I read the Luntz article I couldn't help but picture Tim Gunn in front of a poorly made dress. The way the authors repeated "words that work" and "words that don't work" made it seem like their points weren't valid. Like they were a poorly made dress but with only one day left they have no choice but to add a fancy hem to distract the judges. It gave me the impression that this is a how to manual on how to trick the public into agreeing with you. The authors pointed out that by saying certain phrases you can bring people in and get them to agree with you but other words turn them away. It shows that politicians can gain a lot of support by various groups of people by manipulating their words. Although I found the article very humorous with its oversized pie charts and odd language I did agree with a lot of what they were saying which surprised me. I think that we should work on preventing illegal immigration without hurting legal immigrants. The problem is that many of the laws passed to prevent illegal immigration is hurting legal ones too such as the English only laws.
I found "The Framing of Immigration" article very boring although once I reread it and actually understood it I realized that I do agree with it. The article was very technical and therefore not very appealing but I did agree with the author that you have to first define a problem before you can solve it. And these words that people throw around like illegal immigrants can take on many different meanings to different people and it is important to clarify ones intended meaning. Besides it being so technical, another major problem I had with this article though was that I did not understand why the author first talked about lobbying reform. I mean I get what they were saying but I thought it was unnecessary if the main point of the essay was illegal immigration reform.
Overall I found the writing styles of both articles unappealing. The Luntz one was hokey and comical and the Lakoff piece was extremely technical. However once I stripped the the outer language and got to the meat of the pieces I found that I could agree with points from both articles. Which I found very interesting, they were written by people of opposing view points but I found that they expressed their views in a certain way that I found both agreeable. If that makes any sense at all.
I found "The Framing of Immigration" article very boring although once I reread it and actually understood it I realized that I do agree with it. The article was very technical and therefore not very appealing but I did agree with the author that you have to first define a problem before you can solve it. And these words that people throw around like illegal immigrants can take on many different meanings to different people and it is important to clarify ones intended meaning. Besides it being so technical, another major problem I had with this article though was that I did not understand why the author first talked about lobbying reform. I mean I get what they were saying but I thought it was unnecessary if the main point of the essay was illegal immigration reform.
Overall I found the writing styles of both articles unappealing. The Luntz one was hokey and comical and the Lakoff piece was extremely technical. However once I stripped the the outer language and got to the meat of the pieces I found that I could agree with points from both articles. Which I found very interesting, they were written by people of opposing view points but I found that they expressed their views in a certain way that I found both agreeable. If that makes any sense at all.
Immigration
I enjoyed the "Framing of Immigration" article somewhat. My mind didn't wander too often so that is a definite plus. The only real annoyance I had was the spelling mistakes but as someone who never really proofreads I won't be too picky. I thought the article gave a very clear description of how framing an issue can leave out a lot of topics that go along with it. It seems with immigration there is problem upon problem and sometimes I wonder if it will ever be solved. I don't believe that there is any nice way to refer to an "illegal immigrant." There is always bound to be someone offended. The point of the article seemed to be to illustrate how immigration is not an isolate problem. It is a much broader concern and it does not seem to fit in any one frame.
I am truly surprised that I was able to read through the entire "Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness" article. It sounded like a Republican's how to get elected when it comes to immigration guide. The resolutions described sounded very harsh but some valid arguments were made. I think the whole debate over immigration is very complicated and can't be solved in 25 pages. It's already been going on for years. I have no problems personally with immigrants coming into the country as long as they do it the right way. Everyone deserves a chance at the "American dream". We can only hope that a workable solution will be reached someday.
I am truly surprised that I was able to read through the entire "Respect for the Law and Economic Fairness" article. It sounded like a Republican's how to get elected when it comes to immigration guide. The resolutions described sounded very harsh but some valid arguments were made. I think the whole debate over immigration is very complicated and can't be solved in 25 pages. It's already been going on for years. I have no problems personally with immigrants coming into the country as long as they do it the right way. Everyone deserves a chance at the "American dream". We can only hope that a workable solution will be reached someday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)