This is a real photo!!! And Trump's disrespect for our judiciary and of our constitution is a big potential problem. Why is it that "Conservatives are the ones most wanting to change the constitution instead of achieving their goals within it? Aren't they smart enough to show that their goals are in the best interest of the American people? My guess is that they don't really want the rule of law, but instead want the rule of and by their tribe. There is a clear and present danger to our society, and the Washington Post articulates that threat much better than I can do.
- - - - - -
I find it interesting that Ted Cruz (at the time of writing this entry) has not yet endorsed Donald Trump. He may actually have a small amount of principles he can stand on. (Although he has not enough principles for me to show him any respect.) But what's most interesting is how many of the GOP elite stayed away from the convention, using the flimsiest of excuses to stay away. Normally, I find political conventions unwatchable, as they are only meant to stir the passions of their associated tribe. But this year is even worse than usual, because the quality of "entertainers" (yes, this is political entertainment - the serious stuff is still being done outside the public view) is so totally amateur.
Next week (at the time I started to write this entry), it will be Hillary's turn to entertain the public, and the Democrats will throw their quadrennial party. And, like the GOP, their entertainers will take the stage, make a lot of contentless speeches, and stir up the passions of their tribe. Unlike the GOP's convention, I expect the entertainment to be much better than what is on the TV now.
- - - - - -
It is eerie to many that Trump has the same kind of charisma that a certain Central European had 85 years ago. People respond to him in a more primitive way. He appeals to people's feelings and not their minds. And they are being led like sheep. I'm not saying bad things about these people - many want a real change, and are disgusted with the political elite of both parties.
Hillary represents the "Nomenklatura" of America's political elite. Leaders of both parties have their lists of people who are in power, and those being groomed for power. Like the Mafia, people have to pay dues to the system before the system takes care of them. And I am just as disgusted with this group of people as most of the public is. But at least, much of the system functions, albeit poorly.
Trump, on the other hand, buys and sells Apparatchiks. Even though he hob nobs with the high and mighty, he knows which low level palms to grease to get things done. Yet, whatever business he touches turns to lead, while his bank account turns to gold. He has no idea of how to run a business for the long tern, nor does he have an idea of how to manage a large bureaucracy. If he were to do even a small fraction of what he proposes to do, he will likely cause the whole system to collapse. (Imagine what would happen if he were to start trying to expel illegal immigrants - how many legal residents and citizens would get caught up in the INS sweeps? It's bad enough now that many American citizens fear the INS. But what would happen if this part of the bureaucracy were given extra power?) But then, he speaks to the fears of the public, and not to their aspirations.
- - - - - -
In short, this is an election that indicates whether America is a nation who fears the world, or whether America is a nation who stands up to the world. America can be a beacon that inspires the world or one that terrifies the world. Acting out of fear will create terror for everyone. Acting out of courage will embolden others to be more like us. We have a choice, and I hope America can make one in line with its better qualities.....
I am not a fan of how Jorge Ramos acted at Trump's question and answer session. Would Ramos have treated the current president this way? Probably not. However, Trump is not the president yet, and he has to subject himself to the full onslaught of the press - some of which are actively (but covertly) agitating to end his run for the presidency.
- - - - - -
Since I am not a Spanish speaker, I do not watch Univision. I am told that Ramos has the reputation in the Spanish speaking communities that Walter Cronkite had in mine a generation or two ago. With this being said, I had to wonder - why was he cutting in front of other journalists to pose his questions to Trump? Why couldn't he wait his turn, like other journalists there?
There was only one easy to come up with answer to these questions - Trump's campaign people may have been avoiding Ramos's request for an interview with Trump, so that he could explain his positions on immigration to Ramos in detail. Trump is a bombastic demagogue whose message is more of style than of substance. He attracts angry old white men who feel that their nation has been ruined by newcomers. Yet, reality proves Trump otherwise. First world nations that actively accept immigrants usually outperform their peers.
Ramos is not innocent here. From what I understand, he has had a bug up his ass in regard to the issue of immigration for a while. The idea that a nation has a right to reject (and send home) uninvited, illegal immigrants may be abhorrent to him - which is the opposite of where Trump stands. But the people who watch Ramos' news reports have much to benefit from uncontrolled borders. So he can not have an objective viewpoint on this issue.
- - - - - - -
What is really happening here? The average Trump Supporter has no clue about the real nature of illegal immigration. Mexican immigration to the USA (illegal and legal) has fallen, now that there are greater legal opportunities to provide well for their families. Mexico is also helping the USA keep other foreigners from crossing the border to illegally work here. (Many of these people are illegally being denied asylum here because of the civil unrest in their home countries. Of course, the combined issue of the narcotics trade, illegal immigration, and American demand for both illegal drugs and workers never gets mentioned for the cause of their countries' unrest.) But the real problem is that the vast number of illegal immigrants simply overstay their visas and absorbed into the cash economy.
Trump supporters actually believe that a 40 foot wall and mandatory deportations for all illegal immigrants will keep unwanted foreigners out of the USA and keep them from taking jobs from Americans. This is complete B.S.! But what would happen if we were to develop a realistic plan to deal with the illegal immigrants already here? What would it look like?
- - - - - -
One of the complaints that many "conservatives" have with allowing the illegals to stay here is that they jump in the line for citizenship, and that this benefits the "liberals". This is not as true as it sounds, as most illegals prefer to stay out of sight of the government, and choose to avoid things like voting fraud - simply to keep as low a social profile as possible and avoid detection from the INS.
So I pose the question: "Why not give these people only 'American National' status, but not ever let the illegal immigrants gain full American citizenship?" The nationals would have the following rights:
- The right to work anywhere in the USA (and pay taxes)
- Eligible for a US Passport (in the same way as residents of American Samoa and Swains Island).
But they would have the following restrictions:
- No right to vote or hold public office.
- (In this case) permanently ineligible for American citizenship.
This way, they could not affect American voting patterns, nor do they gain much from jumping ahead of the immigration queue. But by being legal participants in the labor market, they can actively negotiate higher market rate prices for their labor, pushing labor prices up, not down as they currently are doing....
What about their children, you may ask? To me, this is a simple question. If the child came over the border before the age of consent, they could immediately become American Nationals. But after serving in the military or performing other appropriate community service, they could apply for citizenship at the age of consent.
Doesn't this reward people for breaking our laws?
Sadly, our economy has already done that - these people have often created their own jobs in the cash economy, and we have already been rewarded by lower priced goods and services they provided us for our cash.
My question is: "Why don't we bring their labor efforts into the open where we can tax their income?" Conservative types have no answer for this. They think that an Albanian operating a food cart on 6th Avenue in NYC is taking work away from Americans. But what kind of native born American is willing to do this kind of work? We already know that much of the back breaking harvest time farm work is done by immigrants (legal and illegal). Would we see a rush of Americans to do this back breaking labor? I doubt it!
What will likely happen if we keep these immigrants in an "illegal" status?
As I see it, they will lose respect for more of our laws over time, and flow into the "illegal" economies - drugs, gambling, prostitution, etc. - where their experience of working in the cash economy is an asset instead of being a liability. Can we afford to risk this? I doubt it.
- - - - - -
So I have a question - when will the United States become serious in what needs to be done in regard to illegal immigration? Hopefully, it will be sooner instead of later....
