Archive for March, 2005

Black, Yellow, White, Brown, Red and Green: An E-ssayer on Immigration (March 28, 2005)

Posted in Immigration, Language, Military, Race on March 28, 2005 by

“We’ll give some land to the niggers and the chinks, but we don’t want the Irish,” the mayor observed in the movie Blazing Saddles (1974).  If America can survive the invasion of the Irish, it can survive anything, even the invasion of the Hispanics.  Even a half-breed who is 1/4 Irish can hold down at least a part-time job in this land of easy living.

The southern invasion of Mexicans across the American border is causing anxiety.  Republicans decried illegal immigration at their convention in San Diego while ordering high balls from the “illegals” working the room.  Repubs hire “illegals” and do not pay minimum wages or unemployment taxes, if they pay the “illegals” at all.  By maintaining the pool of “illegal” workers, Repubs are able to cut labor costs substantially.  The “illegals” do the work that 1) regular ‘Mericans will not do that also 2) cannot be outsourced.  Even with today’s technology, an Indian (from India that is) cannot mow our lawns, make our beds, or raise our kids.

Is the invasion calculated and organized with a secret agenda?  Land acquisition principles over time are revealing.  A young American country expanded geographically in the 19th century by buying land (Louisiana Purchase; Alaska) from countries that did not own the land (France; Russia).  The land was stolen, fair and square.  Time and practices change.  One of the central lessons of the 20th century is that the world will allow a country to take another country by investment but not by invasion (Germany; Japan; China in the current century).  The American landscape and mapa may change.  “California” and “Baja California” may become “Alto Peninsular” and “Peninsular.”  What will happen when (blue) California and the (red) swath running from the Gadsden Purchase region, through Texas and the Southern Southern states become the de facto 30th province of Mexico?  What will happen depends on what we want.  It’s that simple.

Someone once said that stereotypes are unfair, but they are earned.  What stereotype have these people earned?  Are they hard working or lazy?  Are they patriotic or provincial?  Are they selfless or selfish?  The “-ezs” (Alvarez, Fernandez, Gonzalez, Hernandez, Lopez, Martinez, Ordonez, Perez, Ramirez, Rodriquez, Sanchez, Torrez, Valazquez, etc.) have contributed a disproportionate share of blood to the recent blood drives conducted by the U.S. military.  Seems that such a contribution suggests hard work and patriotism and selflessness.  The answer is simple.  They are in large part what they are allowed to be.  By us.

The War on Immigrants is like most of the wars that America initiates.  There is no strategic thought and no thoughtful strategy.  By forcing the illegals to act illegally, they are being taught to behave illegally and are learning to behave illegally.  Once here (which they will be), they will maintain a distant, distrustful and confrontational relationship with all the institutions that they otherwise might support if they were allowed to support them and be supported by them.  They will never trust authority or an individual in a uniform, even a fireman or a park ranger or a brownie scout.  They will fear every uniform except the one they wear proudly, the one that allows them to sport the combat infantryman badge.

The immigrants who are allowed to participate above ground in the economy will be subject to taxes easily collected even if unwillingly remitted by their employers.  All the whining about the aging baby boomers may be moot if there is a new pool of imported labor into the country.  The fundamental and growing problem they will also confront, however, is that America cannot competitively produce goods and provide services that are sought by other countries.  Perhaps they will have a solution or be part of the solution.

What about language?  The language of the USA is and should be American English.  The critical documents and the laws and the literature are crafted in American English.  Whether it should have been German or French or Gaelic or Swahili is now moot.  The country should not adopt bilingual status such as our more enlightened neighbor to the north.  Different traditions; different history; different concerns.  English is a bugger of a language to learn except at one’s mother’s breast.  There should be many specially tailored programs to make the transition and the translation as easy and seamless as possible.  Lessons in both languages in school are appropriate and desirable, particularly in the younger grades.  Bilingual signs and directions aid Americans who should be learning Spanish.  The signs act as public flash cards; the bilingual instructions are free homework assignments with the answers provided in American.  The welcoming sign should say “Rio Grande / Big River”; translations into Mandarin and Cantonese would be prescient.  At the end of the day, however, everyone should be expected to speak and write in American English.  Did the German immigrants learn English?  Did the French immigrants learn English?  Did even the Irish immigrants learn the peasant language of the invaders?  Will the new immigrants learn the language?  Sure.  Make the transition smooth and pleasant.

Because no one can win la Casa Blanca without the Hispanic vote, both political parties will be patronizing and condescending.  This reality offers great promise.  Imagine Paul Rodriquez as Ambassador to the United Nations.  Imagine welcoming new citizens who become welcomed citizens.

Samuel Huntington does not need to fret.  Everything’s cool.  We will get precisely what we want and cultivate from this new wave.  Do we really know what we want?

America The Bankrupt (Jan. 17) Revisited (March 21, 2005)

Posted in Economics, Law on March 21, 2005 by

On the domestic front:  The new bankruptcy reform bill may be a trigger for America’s bankruptcy.  The new bill makes it more expensive for someone who has no money to file bankruptcy.  Everyone mired in debt is now under the gun to file bankruptcy under the current scheme before the effective date of the new legislation in 180 days or to forsake the opportunity.  Debtor bankruptcy attorneys will be doing a land-office business filing petitions in the next six months.  The credit card industry that benefits from usurious interest provisions and late fees is protected by the new legislation.  However, the very industry that provided the “crack cocaine of the middle class” (Feb. 7) now may be hoisted by their own petard.

On the international front:  Japan, China and South Korea are approaching one trillion (T) in Yankee debt.  Japan is looking askance at China and South Korea; China at Japan and South Korea; South Korea at Japan and China.  Europe is looking East then West then East then West the East.  Each player knows that pulling the plug will produce devastating economic consequences; not pulling the plug will produce devastating economic consequences.  What does game theory suggest?  One country will concoct a convenient domestic political crisis to diversify out of American dollars or to simply quit acquiring dollars or American debt.

International Economic Seismic Activity (IESA):

Player:        Stake (Bs): Anxiety:

Japan         701.6  March 12-Prime Minister Koizumi seeks “diversity”

China          194.5

U.K.            163.0

Caribbean    92.5

Korea           67.7  Feb. 22- Central Bank thinking about foreign currencies

In addition, the Producer Price Index (PPI) is stirring and soon the Consumer Price Index (CPI) will accelerate in response.  The price of oil is driving up the PPI (John’s dear tractor is more expensive to fuel) and also the CPI (Jane’s dear SUV is more expensive to fuel).  Gas may hit $4 a gallon.  The Fed must raise interest rates to stave off inflation.  With inflation on the rise, the nominal interest rates must rise even more to provide a real rate of return.  Those half dozen Americans who have the discipline to save also have the knowledge to understand a ROI (return on investment).  The rising interest rates will tank the bond market.  The stock market is tanking of its own excess.  And few are concerned with domestic spending.  The body politic needs life support.  Congress will soon need to pass a Crisis Budget (CB).

“Strict Construction” Strictly Construed (March 14, 2005)

Posted in Law, Supreme Court on March 14, 2005 by

“Strict construction” is a legal philosophy that construes every law and regulation to promote and advance the interests of rich white boys.

Its adherents urge the abrogation of all legislation and Constitutional developments since 1787, with desperately few exceptions.  The movement springs from a conviction that no good ideas have been propounded in over 200 years.  In addition, anything that worked poorly in the past is considered good enough for us today.  The Ninth Amendment to the Constitution may state:  “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”  The party faithful disparage this inconvenient language in part because it was not asserted until 1791.  Too late, they say.

However, in deference to this fundamental principle, a few newfangled notions are tolerated.  For instance, they contend that Blacks will not be treated as 3/5ths of a human being under the law.  With rises in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), they will be endowed by these creators as 7/10ths of a human being.  White women are to be accorded 3/4ths status; Black women are to be accorded 72.5 percent status.

Virginia proclaims that it is for lovers, but it wasn’t for Loving.  When a consenting Black adult and a consenting White adult sought to marry, they encountered a Virginia government edict precluding them from engaging.  In Loving v. Virginia (1967), the Supreme Court allowed the two to decide for themselves.  Nine souls on the Court spoke with one voice to reject miscegenation laws.  This type of clear thinking is anathema to the strict deconstructionists.  They want neo-activist judges to actively legislate against these legal developments.

However, the strict constructionists are not unreconstructed in their antipathy to all developments since 1787.  They condemn the Supreme Court in action but champion Supreme Court inaction.  When the Supreme Court had an opportunity a generation ago in San Antonio v. Rodriguez (1973) to provide adequate funding for public schools, the Court implicitly found that “separate and unequal” schools passed constitutional muster, although “separate but equal” schools perforce failed muster.  Later courts did make valiant efforts to equalize funding between poor kids and rich kids.

Advocates of the reactionary doctrine note that men’s and women’s bathrooms are still separate but equal.  Why not the schools and other public and private institutions, they suggest?  Strict constructionism is coming to a demagogue near you.

The disdain for miscegenation laws and anxiety over “separate but equal” treatment is still at play among concerned individuals.  Today, a California trial judge held that California’s ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional, comparing it to the miscegenation laws that once blocked interracial marriage and promoted “separate but equal” segregation.  Once again, the strict constructionists seek to keep litigating the issue and advancing unequal protection under the law.  The America antinomy is to proclaim equal protection under the law and to practice oppression.

Mutual Assured Incompetence – The Missile Defense Hoax (March 7, 2005)

Posted in Foreign Policy, Iran, Iraq, Military, North Korea on March 7, 2005 by

The star wars missile defense system is designed to fight a war that we actually won.  Beat CCCP; we did.  Former President Carter’s grain embargo and decades of internal decline doomed the former Soviet Union.  In 1989 when the [Berlin] wall came tumbling down and exposed the border and then in 1991 when the center of the “evil empire” imploded, defense policy needed to change.  The missile defense system assumes there is a threat from a source that is capable of reaching the United States with a projectile.  Any missile launched from overseas likely would land in the ocean, if it got off the ground.  Any missile sent by the U.S. in response likely would land square in the center of an American town square, if it got off the ground.  Mutual Assured Incompetence.  The savior of humanity.

The real threat is from individuals and small groups able to access a wealth of readily available material and hand deliver a weapon in a suitcase or box to the target while operating under the national security radar.  Those in power make little effort to secure that dangerous material or combat the obvious and effective delivery methods.

On February 23, our enlightened friends to the north opted out of the insanity.  Canada rejected the growing “weaponization of space.”  Rational individuals agree that Iran and North Korea should not have access to Fourth of July fireworks or water balloons.  However, these countries have been forced in part to pursue a nuclear option because the “Bush Doctrine” only respects a foreign country’s sovereignty if it is a nuclear power.  Placing complete faith in an expensive boondoggle missile defense system designed to confront an unlikely threat while completely disregarding the present and real danger is self-defeating and self-destructive.  McCain, front and center.  Duty calls.

[When the country is forced to establish a Crisis Budget (CB), this program will be abandoned.]