<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: We Are All Mexicans</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 21:35:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Rush</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-3#comment-67460</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Rush</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 01:34:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67460</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://cmd.princeton.edu/papers/NAFTA%20and%20Mexican%20Immigration.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Is anyone wondering what benefits NAFTA produced regarding all the job creation expected inside Mexico, and the resulting impact on immigration and jobs in the US?&lt;/a&gt;

-----------------------------

I&#039;m learning a lot from this discussion about the illegal immigration issue, particularly as it impacts the border states. I live in the heart of the Northeast megalopolis, and while we are aware of increasing numbers of immigrants that we generally perceive as Mexican, immigration is not such a big issue in this region. I base that observation on what I do or don&#039;t see in our big-city newspaper that I read every day. For example, when I think about who is responsible for the bulk of the crime in our region, I certainly don&#039;t think about the Mexicans. If anyone else in this region sees it differently, let us know.

I believe our federal government has an obligation to its citizens to control the movement of people across the borders. While Arizona&#039;s new law is fraught with problems, I can understand the frustration of citizens that produced it. So, even if the law is found to be unconstitutional, it will have served the purpose of spotlighting the issue for the rest of us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cmd.princeton.edu/papers/NAFTA%20and%20Mexican%20Immigration.pdf" rel="nofollow">Is anyone wondering what benefits NAFTA produced regarding all the job creation expected inside Mexico, and the resulting impact on immigration and jobs in the US?</a></p>
<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m learning a lot from this discussion about the illegal immigration issue, particularly as it impacts the border states. I live in the heart of the Northeast megalopolis, and while we are aware of increasing numbers of immigrants that we generally perceive as Mexican, immigration is not such a big issue in this region. I base that observation on what I do or don&#8217;t see in our big-city newspaper that I read every day. For example, when I think about who is responsible for the bulk of the crime in our region, I certainly don&#8217;t think about the Mexicans. If anyone else in this region sees it differently, let us know.</p>
<p>I believe our federal government has an obligation to its citizens to control the movement of people across the borders. While Arizona&#8217;s new law is fraught with problems, I can understand the frustration of citizens that produced it. So, even if the law is found to be unconstitutional, it will have served the purpose of spotlighting the issue for the rest of us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: R</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-3#comment-67456</link>
		<dc:creator>R</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 23:13:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67456</guid>
		<description>There are better ways of attacking the rate of undocumented immigration other than profiling for Spanish speakers.

1.) Harsher penalties for companies who recruit or hire undocumented immigrants. Make it so undocumented workers are too expensive to hire under the table to be profitable. If there&#039;s no better job in the US, why go through all the danger of coming here?

2.) Encourage more companies to develop Mexico. It&#039;s more efficient economically for Mexicans to work in Mexico to feed their families than to come to the US to work. I&#039;d wager most would rather not be separated from their wives and children for long periods of time. 

Having an environment that encourages undocumented immigration is harmful. Undocumented workers do not have the rights we take for granted every day. If I were paid under minimum wage, I can report it. If I were made to work in an unsafe environment, I can report it. If my boss rapes me, I can report it. Undocumented workers do not have the same access or knowledge of the legal system that I have. The worst employer abuses happen in situations where the workers are undocumented. 

Arizona has 9% immigrants? From what I was able to Google, 11-12% of the nation is foreign born. At the dawn of the 20th century 15% of the US was foreign born (I heard 20% from some other source, but I can&#039;t find it). I fail to see how this is some new danger to the US way of life. It&#039;s not like the Irish left their saints and whiskey in Ireland, or Norwegians studied English and spoke it exclusively after they arrived.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are better ways of attacking the rate of undocumented immigration other than profiling for Spanish speakers.</p>
<p>1.) Harsher penalties for companies who recruit or hire undocumented immigrants. Make it so undocumented workers are too expensive to hire under the table to be profitable. If there&#8217;s no better job in the US, why go through all the danger of coming here?</p>
<p>2.) Encourage more companies to develop Mexico. It&#8217;s more efficient economically for Mexicans to work in Mexico to feed their families than to come to the US to work. I&#8217;d wager most would rather not be separated from their wives and children for long periods of time. </p>
<p>Having an environment that encourages undocumented immigration is harmful. Undocumented workers do not have the rights we take for granted every day. If I were paid under minimum wage, I can report it. If I were made to work in an unsafe environment, I can report it. If my boss rapes me, I can report it. Undocumented workers do not have the same access or knowledge of the legal system that I have. The worst employer abuses happen in situations where the workers are undocumented. </p>
<p>Arizona has 9% immigrants? From what I was able to Google, 11-12% of the nation is foreign born. At the dawn of the 20th century 15% of the US was foreign born (I heard 20% from some other source, but I can&#8217;t find it). I fail to see how this is some new danger to the US way of life. It&#8217;s not like the Irish left their saints and whiskey in Ireland, or Norwegians studied English and spoke it exclusively after they arrived.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Burroway</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67453</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Burroway</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67453</guid>
		<description>By the way, the term &quot;teabagger&quot; in reference to the political movement was coined by the &lt;a href=&quot;http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=Mjk1YmRjNzIxNmUwMTI0ZWYxZWU4OWU2MzFiOWJmNDE=&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;teabaggers themselves&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, the term &#8220;teabagger&#8221; in reference to the political movement was coined by the <a href="http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=Mjk1YmRjNzIxNmUwMTI0ZWYxZWU4OWU2MzFiOWJmNDE=" rel="nofollow">teabaggers themselves</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Burr</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67451</link>
		<dc:creator>Burr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:32:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67451</guid>
		<description>Tim is correct in his assessment of the debate. Too much attention is being drawn to the extremes.

It&#039;s obvious that this won&#039;t be solved without enforcement, but enforcement will not make sense until policy is pragmatic and deals with reality. Deporting all illegals is not practical, and neither is letting them all in. Maintaining the status quo as far as what people we allow in legally is also ridiculous to continue to support. Far fewer people would cheat the system if it was more fair and actually satisfied the demand on both sides of the border. Part of the reason so many illegals come here and STAY (causing trouble in the process) is because they don&#039;t want to suffer the border crossing again. If they had more freedom of movement there would be fewer issues.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tim is correct in his assessment of the debate. Too much attention is being drawn to the extremes.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s obvious that this won&#8217;t be solved without enforcement, but enforcement will not make sense until policy is pragmatic and deals with reality. Deporting all illegals is not practical, and neither is letting them all in. Maintaining the status quo as far as what people we allow in legally is also ridiculous to continue to support. Far fewer people would cheat the system if it was more fair and actually satisfied the demand on both sides of the border. Part of the reason so many illegals come here and STAY (causing trouble in the process) is because they don&#8217;t want to suffer the border crossing again. If they had more freedom of movement there would be fewer issues.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Burr</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67450</link>
		<dc:creator>Burr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67450</guid>
		<description>Teabagger is not a gay slur. Straight guys can teabag just as much as gay ones, and you can teabag a female. It&#039;s just immature and not a helpful term to use.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/22/how-immigration-crackdowns-bac&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;How Immigration Crackdowns Backfire&lt;/a&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;The state has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants. But contrary to myth, they have not brought an epidemic of murder and mayhem with them. Surprise of surprises, the state has gotten safer.

&lt;b&gt;Over the last decade, the violent crime rate has dropped by 19 percent, while property crime is down by 20 percent. Crime has also declined in the rest of the country, but not as fast as in Arizona.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

BTW Regan, here&#039;s some evidence of immigration enforcement affecting even us innocent legal citizens.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/01/24/25392/immigration-officials-detaining.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Immigration officials detaining, deporting American citizens&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Teabagger is not a gay slur. Straight guys can teabag just as much as gay ones, and you can teabag a female. It&#8217;s just immature and not a helpful term to use.</p>
<p><a href="http://reason.com/archives/2010/04/22/how-immigration-crackdowns-bac" rel="nofollow">How Immigration Crackdowns Backfire</a></p>
<blockquote><p>The state has an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants. But contrary to myth, they have not brought an epidemic of murder and mayhem with them. Surprise of surprises, the state has gotten safer.</p>
<p><b>Over the last decade, the violent crime rate has dropped by 19 percent, while property crime is down by 20 percent. Crime has also declined in the rest of the country, but not as fast as in Arizona.</b></p></blockquote>
<p>BTW Regan, here&#8217;s some evidence of immigration enforcement affecting even us innocent legal citizens.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/01/24/25392/immigration-officials-detaining.html" rel="nofollow">Immigration officials detaining, deporting American citizens</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianQTD</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67449</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianQTD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:07:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67449</guid>
		<description>&quot;But I don’t think it was never &#039;yours&#039;” should be &quot;...I don&#039;t think it was ever &#039;yours&#039;&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;But I don’t think it was never &#8216;yours&#8217;” should be &#8220;&#8230;I don&#8217;t think it was ever &#8216;yours&#8217;&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67448</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67448</guid>
		<description>jcrr,

the Task Force report was not based on exit polling but was instead based on after-the-fact polling and was written primarily to argue against the exit polling on black voters.  

But even assuming that it is accurate, it does not support the assertion that immigrants are significantly more anti-gay than non-immigrants.  Even if we tell ourselves the preposterous idea that all Hispanic Californians are &quot;immigrants&quot; (ignoring that some Hispanic families have been here for hundreds of years) we are talking about a 6% higher rate of voting on Prop 8 than the state-wide average.

There are reasons to be concerned about immigration policies but I don&#039;t think &quot;Latinos are anti-gay&quot; is one of them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jcrr,</p>
<p>the Task Force report was not based on exit polling but was instead based on after-the-fact polling and was written primarily to argue against the exit polling on black voters.  </p>
<p>But even assuming that it is accurate, it does not support the assertion that immigrants are significantly more anti-gay than non-immigrants.  Even if we tell ourselves the preposterous idea that all Hispanic Californians are &#8220;immigrants&#8221; (ignoring that some Hispanic families have been here for hundreds of years) we are talking about a 6% higher rate of voting on Prop 8 than the state-wide average.</p>
<p>There are reasons to be concerned about immigration policies but I don&#8217;t think &#8220;Latinos are anti-gay&#8221; is one of them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianQTD</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67447</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianQTD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:04:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67447</guid>
		<description>The animus behind this bill is racism and resentment towards &quot;those people&quot; (indigenous looking Latinos).  I know, I know, it can&#039;t possibly be so because the law&#039;s supporters say it isn&#039;t--just like antigay folks say they don&#039;t &quot;hate&quot; gay people, they just want to &quot;protect marriage&quot; when the very definition they have of &quot;marriage&quot; is exclusionary and bigoted.  Who does and does not get to be &quot;legal&quot; should be based, first and foremost, on principles of human rights and justice, which are prioritized over expediency.   

This argument about resources is interesting.  Basically you all seem resentful because the undocumented are taking &quot;stuff&quot; you perceive to be yours like jobs.  But I don&#039;t think it was never &quot;yours&quot;.  It was all an illusion.  You have no control over labor or capital, and you let it get that way because you let big business have the upper hand.  In fact, you rewarded their cost-cutting, race-to-the-bottom measures by electing politicians who would cut their taxes even more and pursue even more &quot;business friendly&quot; models.  

Who is responsible for this drive for cheap labor in the first place?  The undocumented?  You cannot be serious.  This race to the bottom wasn&#039;t caused by the undocumented, but the influx of undocumented workers is a consequence of it.  Along with the historical factors I mentioned earlier.   

What business wants, business usually gets--observe health care reform.  Even if there is immigration reform, the very things Regan is concerned with will not go away because cheap labor is profitable.  That&#039;s the way the world works and until you are willing to deal with that, you are just heaping scorn on people with the least amount of power and you will further marginalize undocumented workers (and, by extension, all dark-skinned Latinos--which nobody seems to care about).   

And Regan--you talk about the mistrust undocumented workers cause.  Can you, having worked with the LAPD, tell us anything about the damage racial conflicts between minority groups and police due to racial profiling and heavy handed tactics?  Do you even acknowledge that illegitimate, illegal (there&#039;s that word!) racial profiling takes place in America?  If so, how can you not be concerned about racial profiling here?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The animus behind this bill is racism and resentment towards &#8220;those people&#8221; (indigenous looking Latinos).  I know, I know, it can&#8217;t possibly be so because the law&#8217;s supporters say it isn&#8217;t&#8211;just like antigay folks say they don&#8217;t &#8220;hate&#8221; gay people, they just want to &#8220;protect marriage&#8221; when the very definition they have of &#8220;marriage&#8221; is exclusionary and bigoted.  Who does and does not get to be &#8220;legal&#8221; should be based, first and foremost, on principles of human rights and justice, which are prioritized over expediency.   </p>
<p>This argument about resources is interesting.  Basically you all seem resentful because the undocumented are taking &#8220;stuff&#8221; you perceive to be yours like jobs.  But I don&#8217;t think it was never &#8220;yours&#8221;.  It was all an illusion.  You have no control over labor or capital, and you let it get that way because you let big business have the upper hand.  In fact, you rewarded their cost-cutting, race-to-the-bottom measures by electing politicians who would cut their taxes even more and pursue even more &#8220;business friendly&#8221; models.  </p>
<p>Who is responsible for this drive for cheap labor in the first place?  The undocumented?  You cannot be serious.  This race to the bottom wasn&#8217;t caused by the undocumented, but the influx of undocumented workers is a consequence of it.  Along with the historical factors I mentioned earlier.   </p>
<p>What business wants, business usually gets&#8211;observe health care reform.  Even if there is immigration reform, the very things Regan is concerned with will not go away because cheap labor is profitable.  That&#8217;s the way the world works and until you are willing to deal with that, you are just heaping scorn on people with the least amount of power and you will further marginalize undocumented workers (and, by extension, all dark-skinned Latinos&#8211;which nobody seems to care about).   </p>
<p>And Regan&#8211;you talk about the mistrust undocumented workers cause.  Can you, having worked with the LAPD, tell us anything about the damage racial conflicts between minority groups and police due to racial profiling and heavy handed tactics?  Do you even acknowledge that illegitimate, illegal (there&#8217;s that word!) racial profiling takes place in America?  If so, how can you not be concerned about racial profiling here?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swampfox</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67444</link>
		<dc:creator>Swampfox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:58:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67444</guid>
		<description>TonyJazz, if you don&#039;t believe what I have to say about the Tea Party Movement, perhaps you will believe what the New York Times has to say about them, here is a link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/us/politics/13tea.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>TonyJazz, if you don&#8217;t believe what I have to say about the Tea Party Movement, perhaps you will believe what the New York Times has to say about them, here is a link: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/us/politics/13tea.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/us/politics/13tea.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Swampfox</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/04/27/22068/comment-page-2#comment-67442</link>
		<dc:creator>Swampfox</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 21:47:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=22068#comment-67442</guid>
		<description>&quot;I guess Swampfox doesn’t realize that the whole teabagger thing is a Republican-funded front, and there is NOTHING to indicate any support for gay rights. In fact, gay marriage is one of their targets.

It is loosely-formed on purpose, and clearly promoted by the Fox network.

C’mon, guy, get REAL!!!!

Back to the immigration mess now…&quot; - TonyJazz

And, you my friend are living in la la land.  Why don&#039;t we just call them a bunch of faggots?  Somehow it doesn&#039;t surprise me that the left has labeled them teabaggers, a gay slur.  I guess that you are happy with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I guess Swampfox doesn’t realize that the whole teabagger thing is a Republican-funded front, and there is NOTHING to indicate any support for gay rights. In fact, gay marriage is one of their targets.</p>
<p>It is loosely-formed on purpose, and clearly promoted by the Fox network.</p>
<p>C’mon, guy, get REAL!!!!</p>
<p>Back to the immigration mess now…&#8221; &#8211; TonyJazz</p>
<p>And, you my friend are living in la la land.  Why don&#8217;t we just call them a bunch of faggots?  Somehow it doesn&#8217;t surprise me that the left has labeled them teabaggers, a gay slur.  I guess that you are happy with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
