2005 April 29 Friday
Schwarzenegger Praises Minutemen Border Volunteers
Arnold Schwarzenegger favors effective border control.
Although President Bush has criticized the group as vigilantes, Schwarzenegger said, "They've done a terrific job. And they have cut down the crossing of illegal immigrants by a huge percentage.''
Schwarzenegger, appearing on the conservative Los Angeles KFI radio's "John and Ken'' talk show, was asked his views of the Minutemen, who are using armed volunteers along the border in Arizona. The governor endorsed the effort, saying, "It just shows that it works.''
"Our federal government is not doing their job," Schwarzenegger said. "It's a shame that the private citizen has to go in there and start patrolling our borders."
Arnie also doesn't like the billboards that put Los Angeles inside of Mexico's borders.
Schwarzenegger, speaking to the afternoon drive-time "The John & Ken Show" on KFI-AM, also called on KRCA-TV to take down its new billboards.
The billboards, which Schwarzenegger called "extremely divisive," identify the station's market as "Los Angeles, Mexico." About 75 are going up around Southern California.
"I think the big mistake is that it promotes illegal aliens to come in here. And it's the last thing that we need," the governor said. "They should take it down immediately."
Arnie didn't move to California from Austria to become a Mexican.
Go check out a picture of one of the billboards. I think the billboards are great because a lot of people will see those billboards and realize that we need to slam on the brakes on immigration and deport the illegals. The pro Open Borders crowd needs public apathy to win. These billboards will tend to make people less apathetic and more angry.
The shift in support toward the "Real ID" proposal and Schwarzenegger's comments about the Minutemen strike me as signs that politicians realize that public anger is building on immigration.
U.S. Rep. Bob Filner, a Democrat who represents the district where the wall is located, is against the Border Patrol's plans. California's Republican governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, has expressed misgivings. But Hunter, Ed Royce and Randy Cunningham, three Republican congressmen from neighboring San Diego districts, are pushing legislation that would allow the Border Patrol to override the Coastal Commission's objections. It's part of a package of border security measures known as "Real ID," because it also contains provisions that would require states to produce counterfeit-proof driver's licenses.
President Bush says he'll sign the bill, even though it has become a rallying point for people opposed to his guest-worker plan.
The "Hold Their Feet to the Fire" rally in Washington DC of immigration restrictionist talk show hosts and some of their listeners is another example of building populist anger on immigration.
"I didn't particularly want to come to Washington and talk about the border," said Hedgecock, who for 10 years has participated in the anti-immigration radio blitz dubbed "Hold Their Feet to the Fire." "But the fact is that the listeners were absolutely adamant that we do this."
The radio hosts, from California, Texas, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Arkansas, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Ohio and Washington state, aired their shows live from a Holiday Inn meeting room just steps from the U.S. Capitol.
Not only did the sheer number of hosts, 17, and their fans, 400, illustrate how immigration concerns have spread beyond border cities, it also underscored how radio hosts have evolved from opinionated entertainers to political activists whose familiar voices can galvanize growing numbers of people to their causes.
Populist anger over immigration will continue to build. I expect to see larger scale volunteer efforts to patrol the border, more radio talk show hosts shifting toward a restrictionist position, and quite possibly Tom Tancredo elected President in 2008. Tancredo will have the most motivated base of supporters of any possible Republican candidate in 2008. 2009 could be the year when immigration policy undergoes the biggest change since the 1920s.
I went to DC and the event was fun and (it seemed to me) very productive.
Unless this is another example of Arnies's bad english.
I can't help but feel that you're still on the wrong side of the immigration issue. It's not that everything you say or think is wrong (far from it), but that you draw the wrong conclusions.
Consider, a RAND study, also published in the American Economic Review, finds this Hispanic immigrants (including Mexicans) are advancing in education and income as quickly as earlier waves of European immigrants did in the decades before. Third generation immigrants are only 10% behind whites, and climbing.
Many of the legitimate problems you have with immigration are OUR policy failures. It's not the lightly-restricted labor flows are a problem, it's that lightly-restricted labor flows + bad policies are the problem. A hospital system that is not allowed to (1) turn people away, or (2) seek the Mexican government for redress, will naturally have problems. Fixing either one of those problems will alleviate the majority of the problem - but the second one is far more sensible and humane.
Many of the other 'ills' produced by immigration can similarly be fixed by altering something other than the immigrant's presence in the country. If Social Security were switched to a private account model (which, I hear, some people are talking about ... now who was that???), it would be impossible for an immigrant to cross illegally at 33, not pay taxes for 35 years, and retire. Similarly, school systems which fail to educate immigrants because they live in poor neighborhoods and have less funding is a problem more easily attacked with vouchers and school choice than expelling them from the country. Also, both private accounts & school choice would be good for all Americans, not just immigrants, so we should so them anyway.
There are benefits to having immigrants in this country, pretty much no matter where they come from. Thomas Sowell (whom I'm sure you'r familiar with) has shown that even black immigrants from Africa and the Carribean succeed, fail, and go to Ivy League schools in the same proportion as other immigrants (It's only US born blacks that fail consistently). Immigrants from all parts of the world come here and not only work, but save, invest, and otherwise 'do economic stuff' which helps our economy.
In addition, Hispanics are at a special turning point. For the first time in USA history Hispanic population growth is starting to come primarily from native-born Hispanics, not immigrants. This is huge, demographically and economically. Native-born Hispancics earn, on average $550/ week - 13% more than native blacks. And that number is a blended average of all generations. For third and later generations, it's higher. As these Hispanics become a larger and larger part of the general Hispanic population, the stereotypical manual laborer will be replaced by the service worker and professional.
In short, there are really, really big benefits to having immigrants here. There are costs too, but most of those costs are imposed by our own poorly though out regulatory environment and hippy-lefty law enforcement policies. Considering that (1) lefties are out of power in most States, which should lead to an improvement in enforcement powers, and (2) bad policies shoul be changed anyway, isn't it better than we embrace all of the benefits of immigration?
Just remember when formulating your answer that there are huge costs to enforcing a strict border policy too.
1. Cost of Homeland Security personel; local police.
2. Opportunity costs of lost employment & economic activity.
For an economy the size of ours, the first one is pretty negligible, it's true. The second one is not.
Regarding Harvard blacks and Sowell's claims: Yes, I've read about his latest claims. But you are missing the point that A) Harvard has much lower standards for black admissions than for white admissions and B) Harvard is recruiting blacks from abroad in order to make the percentage of blacks at Harvard equal to the percentage of blacks in the US population. Harvard is not just recruiting from among black immigrants who are in the United States. Harvard is using a recruiting pool that is literally orders of magnitude larger than the pool of blacks they have to recruit from within the United States.
Also, where does Sowell break out the percentages of blacks from the Caribbean versus Africa in its student body? Are more from Africa than from the Caribbean? What percentage of blacks at Harvard came from abroad? My guess is that Harvard doesn't want the world to know how Harvard achieves its goal of black student representation.
Benefits of immigration: Low income immigrants are a net detriment. Criminals are a net detriment. Scientsts and engineers are a net benefit. Few Hispanics become engineers. Look at Berkeley. How many Hispanics versus East Asians are in California? How many of each are studying engineering at Berkeley? The difference between the first comparison and the second comparison is enormous.
Ha ha. Yup, there I am.
Frankly, I'm not sure what to make of them all. The RAND Corp. isn't some pussy-foot hotbed of liberal sentiment, and neither are the various Federal Reserve Bank studies I've seen leading to similar conclusions. And no, I don't know where Sowell gets his numbers. TownHall isn't big on citations, and it bothers me.
By the way though, your earlier most is misleading. Your title "Immigrants Do Not Improve Academically In Later Generations" should be "Immigrants Do Not Catch Up To Whites Academically In Later Generations." They do improve, just not enough to suit you.
I'm also not sure where Huntington gets his numbers. 2003 Census data shows Hispanic's achieving bachelor degrees at an 11.4% rate, and that included ALL hispanics, so more recent generations must be higher.
Also, the California Demographic Futures Project shows much higher attainment rates for 2nd Gen Hispanics than Huntington's numbers.
It is well-known that the Latino population has below average years of education. Some of that low attainment is due to the lower opportunities that were available to Latinos growing up in California, particularly in the older generation. Even among young adults ages 25 to 34 the average rate of high school completion is only 55.4%.
What is not recognized is how much of that low attainment is generated by the
preponderance of new immigrants in the Latino population. At present, only 37.1% of
recent immigrants are likely to be high school graduates, but this share rises to 61.6%
of those who have resided 20 or more years in this country, and to 83.5% among the
second generation (Exhibit 10). By 2030, a much greater portion of young-adult
Latinos will be long settled or second generation, and, all other things equal, the
overall share who are high school graduates would be expected to rise substantially
above the current level.
Considering all of the damned lies & statistics being thrown around which don't jive with each other, I retreat to what said in the earlier Comments section. It's the culture, not the people, and culture can change. Neither the Spanish-Catholic nor Native American cultures inherited by Latin countries encourage education. Neither do they encourage individual empowerment, but rather discourage it in favor of obedience. That doesn't mean the people are stupid. I've met too many Hispanics who are smart but have a disrespect for "book learning" to not have seen the pattern for myself. These cultural problems are harder to capture with statistics, mainly because many people don't know how to ask the right questions, but that doesn't mean they aren't there. They are, and they're a real problem. If you want to get an interesting debate going, ask how we can change a culture without undermining our American values of independence and liberty.
It seems that Arnold Schwarzenegger is on the wrong track. The United States being demolished because of the international labor arbitrage (a.k.a. outsourcing) without any illegal immigrants entering the country. At this rate, here will be no USA to protect from illegal aliens.
What Arnold should do is to start a national program for educating smart kids, as well as a method of bringing geniuses as immigrants, while reducing less intelligent immigrants. This would keep the balance of demographics.
High school graduation reports differ based on one really big consideration: Who is doing the measuring. Many school districts (especially districts have lots of poorly performing minorities!) underreport their dropout rates. So you can't trust the rosy numbers. Other methods to measure the dropout rates have been used. See my post about a Harvard/Urban Institute study on high school dropout rates. That is a far more reliable report because they went into it determined to get measurements that did not rely on the (dis)honesty of the schools. Well, that report makes for grim reading about both blacks and Hispanics and is consistent with IQ data for those groups.
Another important consideration: the average black or Hispanic graduating from high school knows much less than the average white graduating from high school. A black 12th grader knows about as much as a white 8th grader. Hispanic 12th graders are lagging by over 3 years but not quite 4 years. I'm sourcing from memory reviews of the Thernstrom and Thernstrom book on race (No Excuses if memory serves - and they basically ignore the IQ elephant in the room) of about 2 years ago. But I'm too busy to go google up some links for you.
Huntington is sourcing the Census Bureau from 1990 and also an Urban Institute book or report from the mid 1990s. My guess is he couldn't find good longitudinal data that was newer. But given the Harvard Civil Rights Project/Urban Institute report's results I link to above it seems unlikely Hispanics have improved much since then. And, again, what they come out of high school actually knowing is much less on average than what whites come out knowing.
Since you are resisting my pessimistic conclusions here is some more pessimistic evidence. This is a quote from the Thernstroms' No Excuses book whose authors are in thorough denial about the existence of innate intelligence differences between the races. 12 grade Hispanics know little more than 8th grade whites.
"Blacks nearing the end of their high school education perform a little worse than white eighth-graders in both reading and U.S. history, and a lot worse in math and geography. In math and geography, indeed, they know no more than whites in the seventh grade. Hispanics do only a little better than African-Americans. In reading and U.S. history, their NAEP scores in their senior year of high school are a few points above those of whites in eighth grade. In math and geography, they are a few points lower."
A lot of those 12th grade blacks and Hispanics are being granted high school diplomas. Well, they don't know very much. The standards for diplomas in many schools are so low that high school diplomas do not mean much.
The Terminator vs. The DemoDrones. Wonder who'll win.
Perhaps the statistics are confusing you (and the author you cited) because the author uses statistics based on all immigrant cohorts whereas Randall's figures for educational outcomes for later generations of hispanics actually measure the outcomes for the hispanic cohort specifically.
"At present, only 37.1% of recent immigrants are likely to be high school graduates" -- doesn't say recent hispanic immigrants.
"but this share rises to 61.6% of those who have resided 20 or more years in this country" -- still doesn't say those hispanics who have resided here.
"and to 83.5% among the second generation " -- still doesn't say second generation hispanics.
The author seems to assume one can interchange any immigrant for any other immigrant when more detailed measurements prove otherwise.
There has been given quite a lot of mendaciously pollyannaish information about economic performance of immigrants, especially racial minorities. This is done for a reason, to set up all opposition as racially motivated; when actually, the issue is whether the left can provide constructive moral leadership. If their only chance is to smear the majority, then they can't. Average wage data which show Hispanics and foreign born in general, close to the median, give a false picture because they are for full time year round regular workers. Foreign born are at 16k median personal income, 30% below the majority. Hispanic household income per capita is less than half that of the majority. The redistributionist programs mean that there will be only a very small percentage of net taxpayers in a group which is that far below the median. Preventing a group of immigrants from entering may prevent an addition to total output; but our economic progress is evaluated in terms of per capita growth, not the kind which brings the average down. Worse, populations on net public subsidy will tend to cause the aggregate of production to decline. To ask for an increase in the level of aggression in our society, by asking for recruitment of further additions to the net public subsidy populations, is clearly to be on the side of wrong. This is compounded by the misleading use of figures, and the attempted smearing of those who care more about the truth, as resisting leftist moral guidance for racial reasons. The fulfillment of the leftist theoretical objectives is killing on the largest possible scale.
Invisible, I'm with you on this - its not genetic, rather its probably the cultural / social environment.
My guess (ie I'm not going to sully my argument with mere facts) is that the major predictor of whether a particular person has a high educational attainment is whether or not the person's parents (biological or adopted) had themselves achieved a high educational level - ie social/cultural environment.
The empirical evidence argues strongly against the importance of environmental influences.
For example, the income of Korean adoptees raised by American parents show no correlation with adopted parental income. That is an absolutely stunning result and argues very strongly for the greater importance of genes over environment. Also see these follow-up comments on that report.
How can the environmental hypothesis explain the Korean adoptees study? It can't. the environmental hypothesis can not explain the Minnesota trans-racial adoption study results either. I could go on. But you need to read the hereditarian evidence.
Environment's importance has decreased in the United States and the other industrial countries as environment has improved for all social classes. Nutritional, disease, and social environments all have much smaller effects than they used to. All are far less responsible for differences in outcome than genetic inheritance.
Also, Judith Rich Harris marshals a lot of evidence to argue that the biggest non-genetic influence is not parental/home environment. She thinks either peers or something else is accounting for the non-genetic influence. I think a large part of the non-genetic influence is just plain random noise effects on embryonic and early post-natal development.
If you care to read the hereditarian arguments I can offer a number of pointers: Start with The Bell Curve. Also read Intelligence,Race, and Genetics: Conversations with Arthur R. Jensen by Jensen and Frank Miele and The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability by Arthur Jensen. If you want a free book on IQ then check out the free download of Chris Brand's IQ book g Factor (same title, different book). I haven't read Brand's book.
Here and here (both PDF format) are two recent papers by Jensen and Rushton on the IQ, heredity, and environment. You can also read Linda Gottfredson's paper (again PDF) reacting to the first of those two papers.
More to read: The NURTURE ASSUMPTION: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do by Judith Rich Harris and also The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature by Steven Pinker. Note that Pinker sidesteps the whole IQ controversy. Also, Harris is not focused on that as her topic either. Still, they present arguments that undermine the assumptions of the left-liberal conventional wisdom about the importance of environmental influences which are due to parents.
I guess the educational and economic success of U.S. born Hispanics is why the students at University of California schools, including science and engineering classes, are 40+% Hispanic?
The reality is that the numbers simply aren't there. Latinos only make up a few percent of UC science and engineering students and around 10 or 15% of students overall despite being 40% (and perhaps 50% in the 18-22 age group) of the state population. It's true that U.S.-born Latinos do significantly better than foreign-born ones, but that is all the more reason to stop the flow of new immigrant Latinos, who are worse off than blacks on many measures.
The age structure of the Latino population (often touted as being a positive) is also problematic. Get the age structure of the Latino population by cutting on the Latino birth rate (cutting immigration and welfare benefits would probably help here) would also raise per capita Hispanic/Latino income. IIRC, while the per capita income of Hispanics is less than half that of whites, the income for a worker age 29 are only different by a factor of something like 1.2:1 or 1.3:1 rather than 2:1.
The salaries of less bright people do not grow as much with time as the salaries of smarter people. Basically, smarter people learn more with time and therefore become more economically valuable in middle age.
Also, occupation matters. A bright person driving a truck isn't going to become much more valuable with time the way that, say, a bright person working as a tax accountant or lawyer will.
Good point. But still, stopping immigration and giving fewer incentives for poor people to have lots of kids should cut the white/Hispanic gap significantly, even though a large gap will remain.
"stopping immigration"--stopping unskilled immigration, that is. I'm all for skills/education based immigration, even several hundred thousand per year, or more when the economy is particularly strong.
That said, anyone with half a brain should realize that bringing in more people to do burger wrapping jobs is not going to grow the economy. How some people can still support mass unskilled immigration is beyond me. Does anyone really think that the economic growth over the last 30 years was due to bringing in millions of peasants from Mexico rather than major technological advances? Have these people seen the slums in Southern California and elsewhere?
They have seen the slums of the third world future and they take delight in the degradation of our minimum standards, apparently. The use of the term slums, became rare for a while, in the brief forgotten decades when great progress was made in eliminating the literal slum conditions of high crowding, uncontrolled spreading of infectious disease and parasite infestations, swelling servile orders of society, illiteracy and general backwardness. Today the word slum is again appropriate for large districts of our cities, in a literal sense. Officials and their too easily suborned intellectuals, would command us to celebrate, but above all, not express outrage over this aggressively imported diversity of standards and heritages. Supposedly practical conservatives tell us that population growth is economic growth. How could they be so dishonest as to expect everyone to be fooled by such an obvious equivocation as that between total, and per capita, economic growth? We might miss out on employment growth, by failing to use aggression on the net taxpayer to bring in another few million assisted immigrants. Civilization is not the maximization of employment; it is the minimization of freedom for aggression.
Searching google for "net worth of immigrants and natives" brings up Linxin Hao's study, which reports the top minority immigrants, namely Asians, are at only one third the median net worth of European immigrants. Table one also shows Asian immigrant median net worth at only one half that of native born nonhispanic whites. Other minorities are much further down, which fits the findings of another study which reported nonwhite per capita household net worth at only around 1/10th that of the majority in LA. This sort of information indicates how rare it is immigrants for to be net taxpayers, rather than participating in aggression on the net taxpayer. Aggression is wrong, immigration almost always involves aggression on the net taxpayer; therefore, immigration is almost always wrong. Schwarzenegger has an inkling of this, being into the questions of how to improve the careening state finances of CA, which are being capsized by immigration onto net public subsidy. The possibilities of assimilation are no excuse for aggression today; they serve only as a means for the anticulture to distract attention from their moral unfitness for leadership, by setting up for irrational smearing, anyone who points out the extent of this mass aggression and its consequences for the survival of civilization.
About half of all immigrants in the USA are from Spanish-speaking countries, yet Spanish-speaking countries have less than 1/6th of the world's population. About a third of all immigrants in the USA are from Mexico even though Mexico has less than 3 percent of the world's population.
In my opinion it is not a good idea to allow such a high proportion of immigrants to be from Mexico, given that Mexico lost about half of its territory to the United States, especially when there are many alternate sources of labor.
Some may say that Hispanics are better than blacks. Yet non-Hispanic white Americans and Asian Americans seem to be more economically and educationally successful than black Americans and Hispanic Americans.
Interesting educational attainment data for US residents age 25-44 in 2004 (percentages are rounded and were calculated from U.S. Census Bureau data; hopefully there are few errors in the below data):
30% had a bachelor's or higher degree. Among the native-born it was 30%, and among the foreign-born it was 27%.
Non-Hispanic whites, 34%. Native-born whites, 34%. Non-Hispanic white immigrants, 46%.
Hispanics, 12%. Native-born Hispanics, 17%. Hispanic immigrants, 9%.
Blacks, 19%. Native-born blacks, 18%. Black immigrants, 26%.
Asians, 56%. Native-born Asians, 57%. Asian immigrants, 56%.
Interesting educational attainment data for immigrants age 25 and older living in the USA in 2004:
27.3% had a bachelor's or higher degree. For those born in Europe, Asia and Latin America the percentages were 36.4, 49.7, and 11.5, respectively. For those born in the Caribbean region, Central America (includes Mexico), and South America the percentages were 19.5, 6.1, and 29.7, respectively.
Immigration from Mexico and Central America should be reduced. Immigration from Eastern Europe should be increased.
Kris Kobach's State and Local Authority to Enforce Immigration Law: A Unified Approach for Stopping Terrorists can be viewed here.
Information about the “California Border Police Initiative” can be viewed here and here.
Sat, 7 May 2005 00:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
From: "derek mchenry"
Subject: Jose Ouinonez on Lou Dobbs Tonight 6 May 2005
CC: "Sondra Chavis" , "Lisa Fandel" , "Harold Johnson" , "Charlie Jones" , "derrick payne" , "sam putney" , "Brenda Session" , "Stephanie Spann" , "Stephanie Spann" , "Public Information"
7 May 2005
I was quite offended by your comments on the
Friday 6 May 2005 broadcast of the CNN network's
Dobbs Tonight program. I am especially offended,
make that pissed off, by your having a petition
your web site trying to get him fired. That will
First off, Lou Dobbs tells the "American" people
truth about illegal immigration. It is you blue
latinos, whatever the hell that is, that lie to
These vermin are polluting our land as they cross
the border of our sovereign nation. Thousands of
pounds of refuge are left every month by these
breaking and entering into my nation. Some more
1. 30%, 1/3, of the prisoners in the federal
penitentiary are ILLEGAL ALIENS. That makes them
criminals TWICE. It is illegal to enter this
without authorization in the first place and then
commit crimes like murder, rape, etc., you know
harmless shit. As if this were not enough, the
jails all over the southwest are spending
dollars housing ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS at the expense
their hard working, American taxpayers and are
being reimbursed by Presidunce Bush-Fox or the
in Washington, D.C. The state penitentiaries are
running at about 40% of inmates that are ILLEGAL
2. Parkland Hospital, in Dallas, Texas delivers
babies than any other hospital in this nation.
PERIOD!!! Over 60%, 2/3, of the babies delivered
Parkland are born to ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. These so
called "anchor babies" are draining the counties
ability to give health care to the citizens of
County because so many of their resources are
spent on caring for people that will never pay a
single dime for these deliveries and don't belong
in the first damn place. This same scenario is
played out in hospitals across the nation. The
hospital in Bisbee, Arizona has to close because
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS taking healthcare without
single penny for it.
3. ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS like MS-13 gang members are
killing our citizens here in Texas, North
and all over the eastern seaboard. This
group of thugs are from El Salvador. BLUE
problem is so bad that the U.S. Justice
formed a task force to hunt down and hopefully
these miscreants, much as it has had to do with
Mafia. MS-13 has also made threats against the
4. There is a rising rate of TB in the U.S. in
border states of California, Arizona, New Mexico,
Texas because ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS are entering
nation without proper immunizations and are
5. Over 42% of African AMERICANS are in direct
competition with ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS for jobs in
nation. You can thank God that the Congressional
Caucus is only a social club with no real power
political agenda for this. We built this nation,
literally, clearing the trees and a black man
the plans for our nations capitol. Not Mexicans,
Salvadorians or any other BLUE LATINOS. Black
and their descendants did.
6. Our school districts are going broke because
are too many ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS entering the
The Cedar Hill ISD, where I live, had planned for
districts growth based on AMERICAN children and
schools to accommodate them. However, the flood
"anchor babies" born to ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS has
outstripped our budget and my property taxes have
up 37% and we are having to build more schools
Mexicans in this state as a whole and in Cedar
and Dallas County in particular are overwhelming
schools. I see this Mexican woman every morning
walking her 4 children to Highlands Elementary in
Cedar Hill. Those are 4 children that DO NOT
Cedar Hill schools. To add insult to injury, she
now about 7 months PREGNANT with yet another
that will drain our budget. That child will be
Parkland which will absorb the cost and pass it
me and all but one person this is being sent to
lives in North Carolina. The child will go to
Hill schools which will absorb the cost and pass
to ME!!! Another ESL- English as a Second
teacher will have to be brought in to teach this
how to speak English, which they don't want to
Then this child will more than likely be in a
gang and have to be feed and housed in the Texas
Department of Corrections for years. The cost is
7. We are not anti-Mexican, as you asserted. We
anti-ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.However, I am personally
beginning to become anti-Mexican. When I call an
AMERICAN company and have to "push 1 for
irritates me to no end. When the ILLEGAL MEXICAN
IMMIGRANT ran into my daughter back in February
hurt her it began. When he got out of his car and
he "speakee no english" it got worse. When the
bill of the damage to her came in at over
became anti-Mexican. Mexicans, at least in Texas,
don't carry insurance on their low riders or
8. I can not go to Minyards grocery store in
Hill, Texas, on a Friday afternoon to cash a
check. Why? Because every ILLEGAL MEXICAN
the area is there using Western Union to send
Mexico. The line is just too long. So I go Friday
mornings. The amount of money being sent to
these ILLEGAL MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS is about to
the amount of money that they oil fields in
produce. Mexico has one of the largest oil
the WORLD and yet money sucked out of the U.S.
is the number one or two source of revenue in
What is wrong with this picture?
I could go on for days. Long story short. Don't
AMERICAN television and tell your lies. Telemundo
available to you for your propaganda. Stop the
campaign to get a great AMERICAN, Mr. Lou Dobbs,
from an AMERICAN television network for telling
unvarnished truth about ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. We
going to your web site, bluelatinos.org, and
just the opposite message to CNN using YOUR WEB
SITE!!! Now, get the hell out of MY NATION!!!!
Derek P. Fagan-McHenry
AMERICAN CITIZEN, Veteran, Patriot
Cedar Hill, Texas