Blacks and Latinos in Jail versus College

This week a report came out based on census data that alarmed many minority interests groups. The report raised the statistic that there are more Blacks and Latinos in prison cells than there are in college dormitories. Headlines read "Latino and African American groups surprised by new statistics by census bureau." My question immediately was "why," why are these groups surprised?

These statistics are in line with other statistics as to education level, economic level and in the case of Latinos, assimilation into the general society. Of course, the immediate thing to do by these groups is to blame "The Man," in crude terms. It's someone Else's fault but their own. It's the minority groups socioeconomic level that leads them to a life of crime. How could it be their fault? Blacks have been free men since the late 1800's and Latinos are going on their 4th and 5th generations here in this country. In all of this time, they've managed to have made no great advancements as races. The only reason they have political and economic impact is because of sheer population numbers. Both minority groups are nearing 40 million people respectively without counting definitively the number of illegal immigrant Latinos in the country.

With these statistics should we be surprised that there is a growing backlash against illegal immigration? The answer should be no. We should not be surprised that this country is moving closer to a racial war. The Anglo Saxon majority is growing tired of being blamed for the failures of these two major ethnic groups. It is growing tired of continuously having to carry these two races along by giving them preferential treatment, by letting them off because of their socioeconomic stagnation and underdevelopment. And it is about time that the Anglo majority is demanding a stop to the avoidance of responsibility by these two ethnic groups.

Until blacks and Latinos start to take responsibility for their shortcomings, their failures and their ultimate realities such as this statistic, this will continue to spiral out of control and we will see more and more blacks and Latinos in jail. It is up to them to progress as a people through education, assimilation, ambition and a sense of social responsibility. Why should it be up to the Anglo majority to continue to provide the crutches by not forcing them to compete evenly with whites. No one buys the argument that it's the "man" that is holding them back. It's the "man" that puts a gun in their hands as they walk into a convenience store and rob it. It's the "man" that forces them to stand on a street corner and distribute meth for a living.

This government needs to immediately eliminate affirmative action,and to significantly reduce social assistance such as welfare and force these ethnic groups to work hard and seek higher educations in order to progress. In fact, there should be a shift towards the other extreme and begin to hold them more accountable because they have for many decades now gotten preferential treatment and have chosen to waste it. They want to change these statistics then they have to change them for themselves.

Recently, a local report in Tucson, Arizona showed that high school graduates from school districts that have minority majorities can not read beyond a 5th grade level and perform math beyond a 3rd grade level. Yet you continue to hear the screams from minority interests groups and civil rights activists that more midnight basketball programs need to be implemented and paid for by the tax payers in order to keep young blacks and Latinos off the streets and from committing crimes. Other groups like the Urban League and Chicanos Por La Causa attribute these realities to the fact that blacks and Latinos tend to live in impoverished communities where schools have less qualified teachers, less demanding curriculum's and lower expectations. But who's fault is it that they live in these conditions? Who is setting these lower expectations? The "Man?" After 5, 6 or 7 generations there can only be one people to blame, themselves.

This country was built by impoverished immigrants that came from England, Ireland and other European countries. Many of these initial immigrants had little to no education yet they had the ambition, the drive, the desire to succeed in the New World. They were able to defeat a much more powerful kingdom and were able to draw up the greatest constitution in the world's history that to this day gives anyone an opportunity to succeed if they work hard and abide by the right side of the law.

Blacks and Latinos have to stop expecting a free lunch just because they are minorities. Their future is in their control and within their reach. White Americans would welcome the rise of these two minority groups into a much higher socioeconomic stature if they strive to do it on their own merit. It is only to white Americans' self interests to welcome that. The more any group contributes to the economic growth of this country the more income there is for greater services, greater technology, and greater quality of life. Unfortunately, until these groups take responsibility for their actions and their unwillingness to make it on their own, white Americans will be forced to accept less of a quality of life because they have to foot the bill for the shortcomings and failures of these ethnic groups. It's not cheap to feed these many prisoners.

Immigration Reform

Immigration reform has become far too complicated since it became such a political firestorm due to the many interest groups that have a hand in it. What is the issue in the simplest of terms can be asked in the following way. How do you balance the safety of a country's citizens and their interests, and the humanitarian perspective of allowing immigrants into the most powerful and largest economy in the world? Isn't that the basic question?

Every country has the right to protect its national interests and its borders. It also has the right to allow immigrants that represent the best option for the country. If educated immigrants are best for the country, then the country has the right to limit those only to the educated immigrant. If low cost labor is in the best interest of the country then it has the right to limit immigration to those who fit that description.

Is it wrong to take into consideration the best interests of the country before the humanitarian needs of those immigrants that are seeking a better life away from their own countries that may be persecuting them or that have high unemployment rates, economic underdevelopment, etc?
The answer is of course yes. Its citizens and their national interests come first and a country is in no way responsible for people outside of its borders. The world chose to be divided into sovereign nations with borders claiming what’s theirs within those borders for the people that constitute citizens of that particular country.

It happens that in the case of the United States being the largest economy in the world it does need immigration flow in order to maintain the growth of its economy and the appropriate workforce for its industries. And the United States chooses to allow a certain number of immigrants to flee persecution, war and poverty. But there is a limit to what it can do and what it should do without affecting its rightful citizens.

Unfortunately, many sleazy politicians have chosen to demonize the illegal immigrants that are already in the country. These people seek a better life for their families and to escape harsh conditions in their respective countries. Most of these people come from the 3rd world and just south of the U.S.'s southern border. Most of these people are unskilled workers that provide valuable unskilled labor in industries such as hospitality, construction, farming, food processing and others that require a large number of unskilled workers.

Likewise, those many interests groups such as La Raza and Chicanos por La Causa, etc. and those Democrats that make up the left side of the spectrum on this issue must also stop making this strictly a political favor. The more under educated immigrants that can become citizens the more political clout these groups will have, strength in numbers if nothing else. This author may be too cynical, but for them to make us believe that they are fighting for reasons of humanity and social justice should also sell us the Brooklyn Bridge. The realities are that the average Latino has a 3rd grade education and make combined family incomes (two income homes) of less than $22,000 a year even after 5 and 6 generation in this country. Many Latinos have been living here for 20 plus years and have trouble speaking the national language, English, and yes it is the national language whether it is made a law or remains unofficial. The same argument from this side of the spectrum has been that this country was and is founded by immigrants. The "melting pot" as it is referred to so often. The major difference is that the original immigrants had mostly common cultural backgrounds and values. The second wave in the early 1900's again had common cultural backgrounds and values from that of the original immigrants that founded the country. Most were from European working class backgrounds with many similar cultural beliefs and values. Now the last several waves starting in the mid 70's have come from the very poor 3rd world where double digit unemployment runs rampant, where corruption is ingrained in its every day culture. Many of these immigrants have been unemployed or underemployed for years and have very different set of cultural values from the Anglo Saxon majority of the United States.

The truth is that this country has a right to choose the immigrants and cultural backgrounds that bests suits it. And even if it is willing to allow other cultures to immigrate it has the right and obligation to insist that they assimilate into the national identity which is to speak English, abide by its laws, work hard and celebrate its flag, national customs and holidays that define it.

Every interest group manages to point out particular studies, of the countless number of studies that are conducted regularly in this country, which best fits their specific agendas. You can find many studies that will tell you that these illegal immigrants are a tremendous benefit to the economy and others that they are a drain to the economy. Many sleazy politicians and bias news media networks that demonize these simple people for their personal political careers and financial gains initiate xenophobic emotions from particular groups of constituents (mainly the less educated and less informed) will tell you that illegal immigration hasn't been a benefit to the economy. Economic statistics show that illegal immigrants have in fact been very beneficial to the economy and consumer markets. However, the scale is slowly starting to shift.

The more expensive health care becomes, the more expensive public education becomes and the greater number of illegal immigrants coming in will at some point in the future tip the scales the other way and they will become a drain to the economy. But let us not miss the point. There are many reasons why these people are illegal immigrants. Our government puts a limit to immigration according to workforce needs, and a percentage for humanitarian purposes and this is adjusted every year according to the needs. Those that don't fall within the legal status are in fact not necessarily needed other than for purposes of hiring cheap labor. And yes, there are always differences in determining the labor needs of US industry between the private and public sectors. But irregardless of those differences, lawful means to bring consensus to immigration reform are the only way to determine policy. Just allowing for mass illegal immigration and the practices of hiring cheap undocumented workers goes against the lawful national interests of the country.

How do you bring consensus and reconciliation between both sides of the political spectrum on this issue? This is most likely the most explosive issue in this country besides the war in Iraq. The many different interests groups that are restrictive vs. the nonrestrictive are millions of miles apart. To simply say that both sides must make compromises when the gap between them is so big is just naive.

Unfortunately, the blame for the mess that defines our current immigration policy was created decades ago. The person most responsible is the most revered Republican in modern history, Ronald Reagan. When President Reagan pushed through and blessed an amnesty program that allowed scores of undocumented workers to become legal aliens and were given a path to citizenship, the flood gates were open and have stayed open for many millions of new illegal immigrants hoping that history will repeat itself. And it is for this reason that a new amnesty program is a game of Russian roulette. Patch up the wound with a new path to citizenship for the illegal immigrants and hope that another 11 million or 20 million more will not take that as an invitation to cross the borders.

There is another new issue that was absent during the Reagan years, homeland security. The country has a new and probably the most formidable enemy in its history, fundamental Islamic terrorism. Border security takes a very different and imperative concern. Terrorist organizations are not only slipping in through the southern border but from the northern border as well. This enemy is cowardice as it does not wear a uniform and is clearly identifiable, this makes it very difficult to be stop Islamic terrorists from entering America. This further complicates the issue. Often times it is difficult to differentiate Arabs from Latinos because of skin color and other similarities in physiological facade. After all, most Latin Americans come from a mixture of Spanish and native indigents. Spain was conquered and ultimately ruled by the Arab Moors over a period of 500 years.

Islamic extremism is rapidly disseminating like an unstoppable plague. And the American homeland therefore becomes a greater target more and more everyday. Making it even more important to determine a strict set of criteria for who are candidates for legal immigration or guest worker programs. The US as unjust as it may seem to the liberal left, must deny further entry of Islamic Arabs and racial profiling must take a part in determining the criteria of the what constitutes the ideal legal immigrant.

Getting back to the need for immigration reform, if in fact the private sector is correct that there is a grave need for foreign workers, a policy that creates a guest worker program is essential. However, it is also important to clearly define such a policy and program. It must be restrictive in nature that addresses the national interests of the country. This gets back to defining the type of immigrant that bests suits the interests of this country. Do they need to be educated? Should they be required to speak the English language? Since it would be a temporary guest workers program, should they be allowed to bring with them their immediate families? Should the government discriminate based on race and religion? In other words, should Islamists be singled out and denied entry simply for their set of beliefs like those described in the Koran. The belief that infidels must die (infidels are defined as anyone that is not Islamist or Muslim). How often should they be required to return to their homelands to reapply for another term as temporary workers? Like these there are hundreds of unanswered questions that must be analyzed and clearly defined.

Even after many of those questions are well defined and a specific criteria is created that defines who exactly will make up this guest worker program, the issue of the 11 million illegal immigrants still remains. Do these illegal immigrants take precedence because they are already here and have employment? Are these people criminals because they are breaking the law by illegally immigrating here? These questions must be answered only after a specifically defined set of criteria is created for what makes up an ideal candidate to be a guest worker in the US. And only after that can we evaluate those illegal immigrants currently living in the US. Since they have already become part of the economic machine it becomes difficult to deport that many illegal immigrants. That does not exclude them however from having to meet the criteria. Those that meet the well defined and specific criteria determined by both private and public sectors based on the best interests of the country can stay and those that do not must then be deported.

It is important for our leaders to be completely objective and non-partisan (very unlikely, this is why this issue is so complex). Those politicians as stated earlier in this blog that use this issue to win votes by demonizing these people and fomenting racism for political favor will only worsen the gap between both sides of immigration reform. So are these people criminals? They are in fact breaking the law by crossing illegally into the US. But is there a legitimate argument that the intent to break the law exists or is absent in the minds of these people. Are they doing this to escape brutal conditions in their respective countries in order to save their families from famine, persecution and disease? Does that make them bad people? Come on now, who wouldn't do the same for their families? Anyone that has a speck of decency and love for their families should feel compassion for these poor people. But no matter how much one feels compassion, every sovereign country has the right to control and determine what is best for their countries with regards to immigration. Mexico deports illegal immigrants from Central and South America, so does Guatemala and so on. It is a horrible reality that these poor people have to risk their lives, live in the shadows and constant fear of racial persecution, but our government must first see for its own citizens. Period!


What really is disturbing is the gull of the current Mexican president and his predecessor and many other Mexican politicians that are campaigning for immigration reform in the US. Now that is something infuriating. He and any Mexican politician or Guatemalan politician, etc. should feel responsible and brought to justice for the fact that their greed and corruption are the reasons that these people must flee from adverse conditions in those countries. Mr. Calderon you want compassionate immigration reform then pay for it. Cut the US government a check to provide these people with the tools to meet the criteria that will make them candidates for a guest worker program or citizenship and the social needs that they will require. And while you are doing that fix the rampant corruption that creates the adverse conditions that your citizens are trying to escape.

In conclusion, the complexity of this issue brought by such a massive gap between both sides of the political spectrum of this issue has me unable to give a clear solution to the problem. I hope that at least I provide some more food for thought about this politically explosive issue. One thing is for certain every country has the right to control immigration according to the best interests of its citizens.

US Marine is an American Hero

Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich is currently awaiting the decision by a court hearing on whether he and 4 other American servicemen will be tried for murder. After a roadside bomb went off in Haditha that killed several Marines including Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, Sgt. Wuterich opened fire and killed 17 unarmed Iraqi men following the explosion.

So what! They are at war! There are enemies at every corner and every turn that want them dead. You want to argue about whether the war was justified, whether it was a mistake, great, argue all you want. As far as I am concerned, the war was a mistake. But, the war happened and now this country must get behind the American service men and women that are laying down their lives for their country. Irregardless of whether the argument that the war's purpose is to keep America safe is valid or not. Every American serviceman wakes up telling himself that he is keeping America safe. They face the high probability that they will not make it through the day, "I am here to keep my country safe". The greater mistake now is retreating and sending a message to our enemies that we can be defeated. We must not allow the media and the liberal left to run the war and ensure victory to our enemies. They are the most dangerous enemies this country has ever faced. They are not fighting for territory, economics, oil, national pride, they are fighting for a fanaticism that transcends reason and humanity. Now, they must be crushed and so demoralized that even Muhammed would go into hiding. But instead we are letting liberal senators with constituents in San Franscisco and Manhattan that don't understand exactly what is at stake here to determine the outcome of the war. Instead, we are crushing the morale of our Marines by conducting public lynchings of our own men and women that are facing the barrels of AK-47s held by the most fanatical followers of another crazed man, Mohammed.

Now, Sgt. Wuterich should not have opened fire on these men, but under extreme conditions, under attack that killed one of his own, how do you tell that Marine to kill but turn it off and analyze whether those men were armed or not? How do you demand that these American soldiers turn on and off their killer instinct when under attack? War is difficult, war is violent, war is unjust, war is about killing, period.

Why don't we hear from the liberal left in our country when our fellow Americans are tortured and decapitated? Why don't we hear them say, "we demand justice for the atrocious murders of our fellow Americans"? Instead its Sgt. Wuterich's fault that the US is the oppressor in Iraq. Is that it, liberals? Are we to condemn this young Marine because you do not agree with the war? Is it his fault? He signed up voluntarily to protect his country even at the cost of his own life and if his Commander-in-Chief orders him to engage in war in Iraq and he complies because that is exactly what he has to do, he now represents the guilty party for the war.

How dare you liberals! He is only doing what he was trained and instructed to do. Under extreme distress he saw the enemy in front of him. How do you tell them apart? They don't wear a uniform to clearly identify them as friendlies or enemies. Where are the peaceful Muslims that clearly stand behind our country? Those very unarmed men can very likely be the enemy. Instinctually he makes the decision to eliminate a further threat. Live with it, its WAR!

Those unfortunate Iraqi men are victims of collateral damage, but collateral damage they are. If you want to bring reason into the purpose of the war, great, argue away. But trying to bring reason into the acts of war, the acts of killing the enemy will only undermine our fellow Americans that were ordered by their Commander-in-Chief, to fight to defend our country's interests and its people.

So leave Sgt. Wuterich and his fellow Marines alone, they have a job to do even if it is a misguided job!

Where has the Republican Party Gone?

As a conservative Republican that stands for fiscal responsibility, I must finally scream even if it means nothing, "Enough!" The war was a mistake, the handling of it has been a mistake and now I don't care who reports on its progress, it is going to cost an additional unexpected 50 billion dollars this year. This war will cost the US a trillion dollars before we see significant changes to its policy. In case our administration forgot, reducing taxes is good policy if government spending is kept in check, reducing taxes and letting government spending run uncontrollably allows for severe budget deficits. The Republican Party used to stand for fiscal responsibility, smaller government, strong defense, patriotism and moral conservatism, not what it is today, giant government, budget deficits, Christian fanaticism, strong offense and turning on fellow Americans who have even the slightest difference of opinion and calling them traitors. Who hijacked the Republican Party?

Now I may sound like another dissenter from the Republican party and against President Bush's war. Though I think it was a mistake to have entered into a war, it would be a far greater mistake to withdraw now. Enough with going about this war like we did in Vietnam. Don't give Bush his 50 billion, give him 500 billion to crush once and for all the enemy at hand. Let it be well spent by decisively and with full steam ahead defeat these terrorist insurgents. Giving little sips of water will not rehydrate our positions. We must give him everything he needs to unmistakeably take down the enemy.