So I subscribe to Crooks and Liars, a leftist blog whose articles seem invariably in lock-step with whatever the Democratic Party would most benefit from. I find myself in agreement with probably five percent of what is written there. One of the things I think I agree on is immigration law.

I guess what I’m stuck on, though, is how people can be so casual in assuming the positions of their party of preference. It doesn’t seem a great deal of consideration is put into whether those positions deserve support beyond that the party requires it. For example, there are many people (libertarians foremost among them) who voted for George W. Bush who believe that Bush was an abysmally bad President of the United States. Many people casually dismissed as “Teabaggers” or free-market extremists don’t believe Bush to have been a good President… but at least they’re honest about it.

The same doesn’t seem to be the case for Barack Obama. You can rightly expect that people on the right will disagree with many of Obama’s policy decisions (particularly those that mirror or extend those of his predecessor), but I’m thinking now about those that supported his candidacy. He has been unable to accomplish any of the things he claimed he would do. I don’t doubt that Obama is a better President for leftists than McCain would have been; I concede that point. My frustration here is that people on the left are unwilling to concede even the obvious.  By the standards of most of* the people that voted for him, Obama’s Presidency has been, without reservation, a huge disappointment.

*There are obviously people (White Nationalist racists that voted for McCain, for example) that vote for candidates exclusively because of skin color. Whether such a simple standard is met is obvious.

    • Sai
    • June 15th, 2010

    Not that I’ve looked at the site, but what part of said leftist stand on immigration do you agree with?

    I have the inside track on what goes on in Arizona hospitals, and it’s pretty sad. Current policies are bizarre. I’m an American with no health insurance, and every day I hear about the kind of situation where some illegal alien is getting $100,000 of heart surgery from a Phoenix hospital. These people cross the border specifically to get free health care. And many who don’t have any health problems (and usually don’t understand ANY English — even “Hi,” or, “Where does it hurt?”) are taught how to complain about chest pain just to keep from getting sent home. Phoenix isn’t some Mexican border town — it’s almost 200 miles north of the border.

    It’d sure be the nice thing to do if we could provide health care and public services for everybody, but until that point it’s unfair to every American to give non-Americans the same rights as (or more than) Americans.

    A few days ago I was driving through central Phoenix and saw an accident right in front of me. One car ended up in the turn lane heavily damaged, and one spun all the way up onto the sidewalk. Both drivers were Hispanic, and both were fleeing the scene. My car insurance doubled when I moved to Phoenix. But this wasn’t an “I don’t have car insurance” situation. This was “I’m illegal and have no ID so I’m going to grab the kid out of the back seat and abandon the car in the middle of the road.”

    Bring us your tired/poor and all that, but if you’re not motivated enough to learn some English and then go through the proper channels to get a work visa, get a job, then get a green card, do you really deserve special privileges?

  1. It seems like the right’s argument is that there are lots of entitlements that are paid for by taxes, so we want to make sure the only people that can avail themselves of those entitlements are taxpayers. But there are American citizens that pay no taxes, or whose taxable income is zero, which means they aren’t contributing, to the expense of the entitlements. What, then, does it mean to “deserve” these special privileges? To contribute nothing, but happen to be born north of the border and grow up speaking English?

    When the US, or Arizona, or hospitals in Phoenix are giving things away for free, of course it is to be expected that all sorts of people, citizen or not, would line up to get them. The problem here doesn’t seem to be that people want free stuff, that’s human nature. The problem is giving stuff away for free and expecting that people will not try to take what’s being handed out.

    To suggest that these people don’t contribute anything might actually speak to the problem, but there is no way to test it, since it’s effectively impossible for a Mexican to go through all the proper channels and then expect to be able to get hired for a job that by law must pay more than seven dollars per hour.

    All I’m saying is that there are people that have Mexican housekeepers and landscapers, and pay them with cash. This happens for a reason – there are jobs to be had, but it’s illegal to pay someone less than the federal minimum wage. Even if these people aren’t making a contribution in that their income is being taxed, the employer in these cases is saving money on labor, which can then be used for other things, blah, blah, and so on.

    As for the abandonment of a car? Would you run the risk of Sheriff Arpaio’s corrupt cops separating you from your child so you could save your Pinto?

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: