U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 22, 2007 03:24 PM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 78 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

A safer outlet than firebombing SUVs (you know who you are).

Tweet
Share

Comments

78 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

  1. Getting an answer to a direct question on this blog is like trying to pick up mercury….everyone scatters.  Spare me the philosophical crap.
    How do we secure the border with Mexico?  Do we mine it?  Do we station soldiers with orders to shoot anyone coming across?  Do we poison water?
    Do we electrify it?  How do we secure the border? 

    Anyone?

    1. The US/Mexico border has the largest income disparity of any border in the world. And an immense amount of traffic flows over the border daily. The border itself cannot be made 100% secure.

      What we need to do is the following:

      1) Set up our immigration and guest worker policies to closely match the demand in this country. If the jobs exist they will be filled (that’s the free market). We need to have policies that allow them to be filled legally.

      2) Work with Mexico to improve their economy. If we can raise the standard of living in Mexico, thenthis issue goes away. We do not have an illegal immigration problem from Canada.

      – dave

      1. …other than a few guys on September 11th, 2001.

        Nobody ever really takes the mining of the border question seriously, and maybe we shouldn’t.

        For the purposes of discussion, wouldn’t it be a tremendously effective and inexpensive (relatively) way of getting the job done?

        1. I can’t believe you haters are still repeating the totally discredited “9/11 hijackers across the Canadian border” myth. Nobody ever told you this is false? Maybe they did and you don’t care if it’s false? Do the words “reckless disregard for the truth” mean anything to you?

          U.S. senator revives 9/11 myth about Canada
          http://www.canada.co…

          Letter from Canadian Ambassador to Newt Gingrich, 4/05
          http://geo.internati…

          “I was very surprised by your reference yesterday on Hannity & Colmes regarding Canada and 9/11 when you said “far more of the 9/11 terrorists came across from Canada than from Mexico.” Are you aware that former Attorney General John Ashcroft has said on the record that “none of the terrorists from the September 11 carnage came to the United States through Canada?” The 9-11 Commission Report detailed how the 9-11 hijackers entered with U.S. visas, and none of them entered from Canada. In fact, as the Wall Street Journal noted this week, “it’s worth recalling that the September 11 terrorists all arrived in the U.S. by airplane, and via legal means.” And none came from Mexico either.”

          Christ, I hate when you people lie. And repeat lies. And keep repeating them years after everyone knows it’s a lie, in the hope that people will forget.

          1. although the 9/11 terrorists did not come through Canada, there have been instances of terrorists commming across the Canadian border.  And some have been cought in the process.
            So Jeffco don’t get to indignant.

              1. And no minefields, shoot-on-sight orders, or electrified fences necessary to catch them–how about that? You’re referring to the “Millenium Bomber” plot in 1999.

                You’re helping me make my point, as well as giving me another opportunity to say again that 9/11 hijackers did NOT cross the Canadian (or Mexican) border illegally. That’s what “Laughing Boy” baselessly claimed, then used  it to justify, at least in theory, placing minefields on the borders of our country.

                I’ll get as indignant as I want when someone uses a ridiculous LIE to justify some horrible depredation in the name of “security,” and you should too.

          2. The 9/11 national security issue is not what border did the terrorists cross, or how can we secure our borders from terrorists.

            The national security issue, IMHO, is what are we prepared to do to the visitors from the countries — Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,  — that produced those terrorists (and who do virtually nothing to stop the terrorists they produce and fund)?

            Fifteen of the 19 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, 2 came from the UAE, one came from Lebanon, one came from Egypt.  The Taliban — who sheltered and supported Bin Laden and Al Qaeda — was supported and funded by Pakistan, which also sold nuclear technology to North Korea, Lybia and Iran.

            Banning immigration from and issuance of visas for our “friends” in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan seem like way more effective anti-terrorism border controls than mining or fencing the Mexican border or doing cavity searches on 70-year old airline passengers.

            What are we willing to do?

            Answer … nothing, ’cause the Saudis hold the leash to  our oil monkey, and anything we do to Pakistan will anger the oil-producing Islamic world.  So … our vote seeking candidates pervert the national security debate into one of how we can secure the Mexican border from dangerous farm workers.

            1. How do we stop terrorists who fly or sail into South America and then sneek across the U.S and Mexican border?  We have no idea how many may have come across that way.  I mean if I were a terrorists that is the way I would come here.  The natural physical characteristics of the two nationalities are very similar.

              1. The 9/11 terrorists came from countries we know and knew to be supporting terrorists.  The simplest solution seems to be the best — focus on folks who come from and have passports from those countries.  IMHO, building a wall and militarizing the Mexican board is a waste of money and a stunningly dumb way to protect our country from terrorists.

                In my opinion, hyperventilating about border security feeds a culture of fear in our country.  We now wand old ladies at the airport, we can’t carry cigarette lighters or matches, we can’t take liquids on the plane unless they fit into a 1 qt plastic bag, we willingly go through metal detectors like sheep, take our shoes off to protect us from shoe bombers, can’t eat a meal on an airplane with metal silverware or a plastic knife, etc. etc.  I never thought I’d live long enough to see our country reduced to and accept such indignities.

                IMHO, if we build walls around our country for “security”, kowtow to massive national security agencies, and spend beaucoup $$$ to build the ultimate border security system, then the terrorists have beaten us — we’ve shown them that we’re living in terror ’cause we’re worred about all the things that “could” happen and limiting our lives to address those fears.

                Sure, terrorists could come in through South America and sneek across the Mexican border.  But, they didn’t. Mexicans didn’t fly planes into the World Trade Center — Saudis did.  They came here from countries we knew to be supporting and funding terrorists and came here mostly on student or tourist visas.  They didn’t have to sneak at all and we did not have to give them the visas that let them in. 

                Instead of building a wall, it seems way cheaper and more effective to just deny student or tourist visas to Saudis until Saudi Arabia cleans up its act.

                IMHO, border security should start with scrutinizing the folks who come from places that mean us harm. 

                 

                1. Saudi’s spend a gazillion dollars a year here as students.  Universities depend on them for “out of state” tuition.  Then, there are the landlards and every other “Support Our Troops” type who want their income from the Saudis.

                3. border security – more about economics and xenophobia than terrorism

                  airport security – raising the bar so terrorists have are less likely to succeed in bringing down an aircraft. I’m ok w/ the plastic knife and still sleep at night.

                  Good point on selective grant of visas. Wonder if this “national profiling” would be allowed in this country? We have reason to put immigration pressures on selected countries but blind equality is a national treasure.

                  These efforts, and others including eliminating funding for terrorism and exterminating the terrorist leadership has worked for us so far. What about when the next attack comes (and it will)? I hate to predict the restrictions and retribution.

                  1. The real debate about border security — particularly with Mexico — is about economics (and racism) and not about terrorism.  Yet, the folks who are most strident in the need to defend our borders cloak themselves in a national security argument and advocate militarizing the boarder when the real terrorism threat to our country does not and has never come from Mexico.

                    Folks who are truly sincere about protecting our national security, in my opinion, should be focused on different countries.

                    I don’t think that selective visa denials would be a problem.  I believe we’ve had a national policy that has denied tourist and student visas to folks from Cuba for decades, and during the Cold War I doubt whether many visas were issued to Russians and Chinese.  The “border” where our national security threat originates is at the immigration counter at Kennedy Airport, not along the Rio Grande or outside Windsor, Canada.

                    I resent folks who would see our country deteriorate into an armed camp frightened of its own shadow.

      2. What do we do-take swat teams into Mexico and kill off all their corrupt officials.  Corruption and graft is how Mexico works and why things do not improve for the masses in Mexico.

      3. How the hell can we fix Mexico’s economy when we can’t fix our own? When their economy depends on shipping poverty north and then the profit back home…

        Mexico has a small RICH elite….they benefit tremendously from our open borders, they fight tooth and nail any attempt to change their sweet ass situation…spare me the economic pie in the sky solutions…You want to change Mexico’s economy..go up to Aspen or Vail in season and buy the rich Mexicans a drink and they will tell you what is wrong with America…then you tell them you want to “help” them improve their country…THEN…you realize they are sitting in yours, you”re buying…and they wearing more wealth than you will see in a lifetime….give me a. f….break…

        Behind Mexico is all of Latin America.  Ever been in Latin America?  Ever smelled poverty? It is all coming North if we don’t secure the border…

        How do we secure the border? Davy? What are you willing to do?

      4. Just one other thing-If we raise the standard of living in Mexico-who will pick our crops and cook your food at McDonalds.  All I hear is that we need these illegals to do the jobs that Americans will not do. Close the border first, then let those in who we choose to let in. We have done many things in the past to help the Mexican economy-to no avail. The Mexican people are the only ones that will change their system of government.  If we close our border and make it more difficult for them to “escape” from their government/country maybe they will stay home and pay more attention to their government and improve it themselves.
        Then again-I could just be crazy.

      5. First, Reagan and now Bush with the dems are about to award citizenship to illegals.  That is one of the worst mistakes that we can make. We need to set those that were born elsewhere in a different class (legal workers for life with real rights and taxation?), but their children who are born here should be declared citizens (they are). If we award citizenship, then we will have another massive flow.

        Second, the problem is the large economic difference. As long as it exist, there will ALWAYS be a flow. W’s folly on the wall is as stupid as anything that he has done (monster deficit, invasion and occupation, etc). It is just another way to flow money to his friends. So what do we do? I would say start encouraging the manufacturing that we send to China to go to Mexico, and elsewhere in South America. It actually makes sense to encourage it.
        The other side of that coin is that we have all but wiped out our low-end jobs except for those that are being handled by illegals. I went into the new Long John Silver in highlands ranch(1/10 mile away from home). If you talk and listen to them, you realize that they are ALL illegals. I suspect that that even the manager, David, is illegal. So what do we do?

        Automate these low-end jobs. This going to happen in other countries esp in Japan (they are further along with the issues of an aging nation). There are just a few industries where illegals work. Basically, Agriculture, Construction, Manufacturing, and low-end service such as janitorial and fast-food restaurant. By automating these, we can lower the costs of these industries as well as the pay. For instance, homes are moving to steel studs and pre-made structures. These can be done in automated factories and then shipped. Even the final construction can be automated. Agriculture is also possible to automate. I have been working on one idea that is of use to here (even pinapple and sugar cane 🙂 ) and to mars (the moon and mars will require heavy automation for us to survive and certainly to thrive there). But I know that I am not the only one. There are other good ideas that will work. Finally, Manufacturing is a great place to automate.  There is much that we can do there.

        Of course, this needs energy to work with. But  even that has an easy solution in the IFR (integral fast reactor).  Poppa Bush started development nearly 2 decades ago, but Clinton cut it in a deal with John Kerry (very short sighted on both part esp. kerry’s).

        There are solutions to illegals. We just need good politicians to start doing these.

      7. The idea of helping to foster growth within the Mexican economy is certainly worth repeating. I said fostering – not sponsoring. More jobs at home, fewer people willing to leave home for jobs in the US. How do we do this? That’s the next question.

        But even if Mexico had jobs for every one of its people, the pull of a larger, most robust economy right next door is a magnet. Add to that an aging population and an underground economy that depends on this cheap labor and it makes for a very complicated situation.

        I also believe Mexico needs to do more to control its own borders both north and south.
         

        1. Mexico has a major issue with illegal immigration on their southern border as well.  Whether poor immigrants are escaping to Mexico or on their way the the US, it is a big issue.

          I have a problem with those who say helping Mexico’s economy is the answer to solving our immigration problem in the US.  The US is already Mexico’s biggest trading partner. We already invest serious money into the country. We already buy all their drugs. What more can we offer?

          We also don’t have a very good track record with building up other nations’ economies under the current administrations. NAFTA and CAFTA aren’t the answer.

          Helping their economy is one prong of the attack, but we still need to do so much more.

    2. Underground electric lines. Mark the corridor with plenty of signs in Spanish, English and pictures.  Place the lines in areas where border patrol has difficulties patrolling.

      Here’s another question that is always ducked. What do you do with the illegal immigrants already in the US? Critics of the proposed new immigration law declare amnesty is unacceptable because the illegals broke the law. Yet, there is never a coherent answer on what to do with the 12 million living here.

      Thoughts?

      1. I realize that we need a quest worker program and an immigration policy for the mexican illegals.  I like the idea of them going back to their home country and applying for legal entry.  That way we can choose who to let back in. We can weed out those that have been in trouble in this country (gang members-drug dealers-any criminal element). But, it all hinges on closing the border first.  If the border is not secured any effort at a concise immigration policy is just a waste of time.  In 86 Kennedy said Amnesty first and then border security.  They lied to us then and they expect the same lie to fly again.  It’s the border first.

        1. You heard my idea on that issue.

          But, if I heard you right, you’re suggesting we ask the 12 million illegal immigrants to leave, reapply and then we’ll decide who is allowed back. Is that right?

      2. Car- I am not opposed to the fine idea-I just think that $5000 is just a little low.  $5000 over the time frame that new proposal states comes out to about $5 a week. Another thing I do not like about the proposal is that these Illegals will not be required to pay back taxes.  A double amnesty for them.

        1. about the back taxes – but what can we do? If it was all off the books to begin with, there’s no place to start. Besides, I imagine most of them made so little money that they might not have even owed taxes if everything was on the level. So it’s just practical to let it go.

          1. Most of the work these illegals do is not off the books. It is done with fake papers and stolen ID’s.  I worked for a company that hired illegals and let me tell you that these people were making some money $30,000 to $45,000 a year with overtime.  It was a hellacious job but they were getting $15 to $22 an hour straight time and time and a half for overtime. And each one of them claimed at least 6 dependents. And if the employer got a notice from the state as to the taxes and how the SSN did not match a name-he would just tell that employee that it was time to get another ID.

            1. that the effort to recover these unpaid taxes will be worth it? In other words, the amount recovered (if it can be – if they have assets that can even be seized) won’t be significantly, if not totally, offset by the cost of going after it? Because unless we’re talking about a net recovery of, shall we say, $10 billion, it seems like a lot of effort that can be better spent.

              We need to be sure we’re being practical, whatever we decide to do. It may be more practical to let it go.

    3. grandstanding pols, such as Tancredo, who love to hear themselves talk tough,  grown-ups ought to eliminate the “ain’t never gonna happen” for starters.  News flash:  We aren’t going to be doing any mining, shooting on sight,poisoning or electrifying the entire border. Never gonna happen.  Period.  We also aren’t going to be rounding up 12 million (or 20 million) people for deportation. We will never have the manpower or be willing to pay the taxes that would require. Period.  Everyone, including pols like Tancredo, must know this whether they like it or not. These pols are just making political hay out of calling for fantasyland, soundbite solutions.  The sooner we eliminate such nonsense from the discussion, the sooner we will be able to focus on solutions that may not be perfect but have the advantage of being somewhere in the general neighborhood of real world feasibility.

        1. Just saying that proposing things we all know, in our heart of hearts, are never going to ACTUALLY HAPPEN is counter productive.  Just for an example, do you honestly believe any US government is going to mine the border any time soon? Seriously?  If not, you throw that “solution” out and proceed to something that could actually be done here in real world, not in lala land.  Or do you believe that we are really going to find the astronomical amount of man-power and funding, while we are already spending hundreds of borrowed billions and using up our military in Iraq, to round up and deport all of the illegals? Tough talk is cheap and wishful thinking isn’t a strategy.  Just look at Iraq.

          1. But it seems to me that we can do some deportation when the police pull over an illegal alien for a dui-it seems we could get INS involved.  I would just think that anytime a police is called to a scene and there are illegals present that INS should be called. Deport them and save the cost of the trial on the DUI  or whatever. Outlaw sanctuary cities.

            A wall with troops and electronic survielence I think would work. Put our training bases along the border.

        2. If you tighten up the paperwork, ID requirements and monitoring for illegals and those who hire them, they suddenly can’t keep a job unless they go back and get their shit in order and do everything above the board.  They will have no choice.  I think that is a good idea.

          1. I never said we couldn’t do ANYTHING.  I’m just tired of non-starters and the people who KNOW the things they spit out are non-starters but get them votes.  I express a few suggestions of my own a little farther down.  I know it’s a long shot to actually get our pols to put the squeeze on the corporate elite, but less of a long shot than stuff like mines and mass deportation round-ups!

            1. Have them build the wall as part of the deal-I mean put them to work, pay them, and charge them a hefty fine to go towards becoming legal. LOL

      1. The only people who would benefit from electrified fences are Excel and fencebuilding companies. The only people who would benefit from a wall is Aggregate Industries (a major concrete company). The poor immigrants will always find a way around any obstacle we put up, short of a DMZ as someone pointed out yesterday.

    5. You want to secure the border? You really only have the following options:

      1) Give employers a fast effective way to determine if employees are legal and then have large penalties for hiring illegals. Back it up with regular inspections and heavy fines. That would eliminate the jobs.

      2) Support unions in industries like meatpacking, construction, and agriculture. If those jobs are unionized the pay will be high enough to attrack American workers and the unions will assist in making sure there are no illegal employees.

      3) Encourage college education in Mexico. Offer scholarships in Mexico and maybe in the US for the top 25% of their students. Those students will go on to create a growing economy with middle class jobs there.

      The wall itself doesn’t stop immigration, it just affects how it occurs.

        1. THe only way to validate EVERYBODY is to force all of us to have universal IDs. Do you read history?
        2. Or alternatively, automate those jobs. Monfort’s beef actually automated a lot of meatpacking. But it can go further. A lot of industries can be..
        3. Perhaps we should start sending American students down there to get a cheap education. It fills their universities AND encourages future business there.

        But yeah, I agree with you about the wall.

  2. Only three responses to my question: How do we secure the border?

    1) Mine it

    2) Electrify it

    3) Abandon all attempts to secure it

    thanks for the direct answers. Now what?

    1. We won’t have the resources to improve  border, port and cargo security until we stop the bleeding in Iraq so starting an orderly withdrawal there has got to come first.  We need the resources to enforce the laws that we aren’t bothering to enforce now and we need to come down very hard on the corporate employers who are the only ones who truly benefit from suspending the law of supply and demand by illegally bringing in cheap labor. 

      The wink,wink system we have now, allows the corrupt elite of Mexico and the rest of Latin America to go on their merry way doing nothing for their own people while profiting from the money sent home by America’s illegal workforce and the American corporate elite doesn’t have to pay what American workers need to make a decent living.  Working people, be they American citizens or Latin American, all get screwed.  We see wages fall and illegals are ripe for exploitation. 

      We have lower costs for lots of things, but with well paying jobs drying up and being replaced by low-paying jobs, we’re on our way to a society where nobody but the elite can afford a decent lifestyle no matter how low prices go. Kind of like Mexico.  But the elite here and there don’t care. They’ve got theirs.  And of course prices for fuel, healthcare and housing aren’t getting any lower.  They keep going up and most Americans AND illegals are just running as fast as we can to get nowhere.

      We need a user friendly, tough to game verification system, laws to require compliance with the system and fines and prison terms that cause real pain, not wrist-slapping, to employers who skirt the system.  American citizens working their asses off in dangerous mines, on crab fishing fleets, as contractors in Iraq etc. are proof that Americans WILL work as hard as anyone, even at highly dangerous jobs, for good money. 

      Less cheap labor will bring higher prices in some sectors but will also bring higher wages and revive our working middle classes.  The corrupt regime in Mexico will never change as long as we keep acting as a safety valve for them.  The corrupt corporate culture here will never change as long as we keep letting them get away with busting our working middle class by cheating with cheap illegal labor.  Border security must be improved but by itself can’t stop the tide.  Stopping demand is the only answer and that has to start with  employers. 

      They have to be subject to consequences harsh enough to cause them real pain.  It really isn’t us versus the illegals.  It’s people who make their living off paychecks versus the power and wealth elite who couldn’t care less about the other 99.9%.  As long as they can play divide and conquer, pitting hardworking people on both sides of the equation against each other they don’t have to do anything while their pet pols encourage us to chase our tails with pretend solutions.

      1. had like a $25,000 fine attached to it not like the $5,000 fine in the current proposal.  Keep it at $25,000 (thats only $25 a week over the current proposal) and use that mnoney to pay for the wall and border security.  Also, have big fines for the corps that use illegals and put that money towards the border security.  Have an additional tax on foreign workers and have that go towards border security (I believe that other countries have taxes on workers who are not citizens).

        Why does the U.S. have to have a less stringent immigration policy than other countries?

        1. Well, there is that “give us your tired, your poor” thing at the base of the Statue of Liberty… I guess we could sandblast it off…

          1. but I do not think that we have to abide by whats on the Statue-just what is in our Constitution. And gee doesn’t that say to protect our borders. 

                  2. I actually saw her in a soft porn cable movie ca. 1982.  Full nudity and feigned sex. 

                    Like so many legit actresses, she went the usual route to stardom and now refutes it.  MM, Streisand, an endless list.

                    1. MM, Streisand, an endless list

                      I am trying to figure out which is worse? The thought of Marylinn Musgrave being in a porn movie, or those that would want to watch that? Oh wait, Wrong Marilynn.

    1. OOOOh, Angie. Why are you doing this to yourself? It’s embarassing. You couldn’t do it in a Dem year and you think you can really do it now? There’s a lot more to being a Congressperson than getting a haircut/blowout/highlights and wearing skirts in public.

      I like you but this ego is really turning me off.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

172 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!