Responding to a reader comment - 4.23.2007.1

This post is in reference to a comment made to the post Immigration and student aid for college

First I would like to thank Anonymous and Mike for responding. I know that these issues are a trigger point for many people, and that some may respond without spellchecking their comments. It’s not a big concern, but I mention it because I do not alter any aspect of the comments made. I just suggest pausing before sending the response, no matter how passionate you are on the issues (and I’m sure that is the cause of any typos and missing words your comments may contain).

To Anonymous I wish to say that my position does not change whether any illegal alien is proven to be a great person or not. If Mother Theresa was an illegal alien, I would not provide her healthcare or student aid as stated in my post. I don’t care how worthy an illegal alien may be, they don’t belong here and thus deserve nothing. That is my feeling, as stated above.

To Mike, I think you failed to read through the post intensely, or perhaps I was not clear. While I did make an assumption that a major motivation for the intense efforts against Hispanic illegal aliens is the ease in identifying them it is not merely due to the color of their skin. That is a part, but it is also the fact that many are not bi-lingual or even marginally competent in English. That lack of ability to communicate in the national language (and yes English is the national language) AND their darker color makes them an easier target than say a British White female. That not racist, it is a fact. If I am correct and the motivation of many lawmakers and others is solely fixed against Hispanic illegal aliens due to a fear based on their different look and manner of speech (like their influence is somehow ‘tainting’ America – one argument I have heard and dislike) then that is racist. I thought I had made this point directly, if I did not here it is now.

I must dispute another of your thoughts; it is skin color and language as opposed to standard of living and quantity. The policy on immigration to the United States has always been skewed to Europe versus any other country since the time of the first policy being made. It continues to emphasize immigration for Europeans today. I have not been to Italy, but I understand it to not be the same standard of living as here. Nor is most any other part of Europe except England.

When this policy says that a Polish, or Croatian, or Russian immigrant has an easier chance to immigrate, and has more chances as there are 3x as many people allowed than say Africans or South Americans, then I must conclude it is about skin color. Poland or Russia, as examples, is not similar in lifestyle, quality of life, or language yet they are given greater slots for entering this nation. That is a bias that’s sole, as I understand it, reason is color of skin. That is racist, if my understanding is correct.

But the focus of the post was more to the point of the disparity that should not exist. The argument of creating walls at our border with Mexico is claimed to be needed for security reasons. That seems silly when it’s considered that Canada is where all terrorists that have attacked, and several that planned to attack, this nation entered from. Lifestyle is not a factor here, nor is quantity of people. The argument is made for homeland security and thus Canada and not Mexico is the greater threat.

Continued in part 2...