Friday, March 03, 2006

WFB, WSJ, SBC...UGH

William F. Buckley joins the pack of "unpatriotic conservatives"--"One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed."

My father told me recently that every time he sees a soldier on the tube, they indicate staunch support for the Iraq mission. I told dad it might be wise to turn off Fox News. According to a Zogby poll of troops, "72 percent of American troops in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year" and "more than one in four (29 percent) thought the U.S. should pull its troops immediately."

From the Wall Street Journal:

The latest Census Bureau data indicate that, in 2005, 239,416 more native-born Americans left the state than moved in. California is also on pace to lose domestic population (not counting immigrants) this year. The outmigration is such that the cost to rent a U-Haul trailer to move from Los Angeles to Boise, Idaho, is $2,090--or some eight times more than the cost of moving in the opposite direction.

What's gone wrong? A big part of the story is a tax and regulatory culture that treats the most productive businesses and workers as if they were ATMs.


As purveyors of the myth of homo economicus, economic man, the WSJ couldn't possibly countenance the notion that native-born Americans, by which they mean whites, are leaving California because the state has been turned into the equivalent of Third-World banana republic by the very immigration policies endorsed by the Journal.

Bill Kristol says "Islamists are on the offensive." Kristol quotes Democratic Leadership bigwig, and former McCainiac, Marshall Wittman: "We are in the midst of a jihadist offensive. The bombing of [Iraq's] Askariya Shiite Shrine is another indication of the world-wide jihadist offensive against the West." Can you follow the logic? Sunni's in Iraq attack a Shiite mosque and that is an indication of a "world-wide jihadist offensive against the West." Hmmm.

Will conservative evangelicals support a more porous border? SBC honcho Richard Land says "there's no consensus about what to do about the [illegal immigrants] who are already here or about how we would allow legal immigration." The only thing Land seems to know is that mass deportation "isn't realistic," i.e., lawlessness rages.

The Boston Globe says we need more workers. Restaurant and tourism industry representatives, too, are among the interests looking for more cheap labor:

The American birthrate has reached historic lows and the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that it will soon drop below replacement level. The travel and tourism industry is one that relies on personal service and therefore cannot be automated. It is clear that based on our projected growth rates, our industries will require much more labor than that which will be available among those born domestically. Coupled with an aging domestic workforce, the current labor shortage will clearly become much more acute unless additional labor is found...after decades of engaging in efforts to encourage native-born Americans to consider careers in the hospitality industry, we are faced with the reality that foreign-born workers are necessary to help fill the jobs where no Americans are available.


Illegals make up 13% of hotel industry workers and 11% of restaurant and food service workers. The problem is that as these industries are increasingly penetrated by immigrants, wages decline, making it less likely that native-born Americans will sign up.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your comment about the exodus of the "native-born" -- a WSJ euphemism for Whites, although the ethnic data is available -- from CA is, IMO, accurate. After going thru adolesence and young adulthood in the San Francisco Bay Area in the '70s and '80s, I left CA some time ago. The same Census Bureau found in 2000 that one third of adults in the SFBA were born in another country. The bylines in the local (ultra PC) newspaper resemble a UN roll call. In short, the area just did not feel like home (i.e. America) anymore; in many places it didn't look like it either. When combined with other very good reasons -- e.g. sky-high housing costs, terrible traffic congestion, etc -- the decision to leave for some place more livable and more demographically...appealing was an easy one.

But in today's America, it is difficult to tell the truth about things like that.

Just ask John Rocker.

8:24 AM  
Blogger Darrell said...

I have visited the LA-Long Beach area on two occasions and was palpably aware that I was effectively in a foreign land. Riding around Long Beach on public transporation was surreal--conversations going on all around in numerous languages, multi-ethnic signs on businesses, etc.

The WSJ mentions high tax rates, but those tax rates are driven in part by the social service costs associated with the mass importation of poverty-stricken Mexicans with little education. Yet they won't admit the obvious and carry on about "xenophobia" and the need for looser immigration laws.

9:23 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home