Why are all these teabagger "conservative" types so opposed to illegal immigrants working in the US

[ddeclue]

I mean if they really DO believe in smaller less obtrusive government then they shouldn't care who works for whom or where they came from. I mean if they really believe in smaller government then isn't creating a law that bans people from other countries from working here just a massive government intrusion on the rights of the business owners to hire who they want?

I totally shut down a uber right winger I work with today by pointing out the cognitive dissonance of being for smaller government but objecting to "illegal" immigrant workers at the same time.

Shut him up and shut him down entirely.

I mean the nerve of all those crazy left wing laws preventing the use of undocumented workers.. What's next? A ban on child labor? :sarcasm:

The only reasons the teabaggers are opposed to "illegal" immigration so they can use it as a cudgel against the President and because many of them are clearly racist.

It's great fun to use their own rhetoric against them to blow up their illogical statements..

:rofl:

[dkf]

1. 10 million extra workers has an impact on wages, especially in times of high unemployment.

Anyone who is employed therefore has a stake in illegal immigration.

[ddeclue]

2. Not his point and not mine. I'm not arguing for open borders, just pointing out rw hypocrisy.

[dkf]

3. Oh they are very consistent in their views...rules for thee not for me.

[RZM]

4. Why the quotes around illegal?

BTW, the 'government intrusion' thing is similar to what the cheap labor Republicans argue. They generally aren't in favor of strict enforcement of immigration laws, but a lot of regular people of all political stripes are.

[mrcheerful]

5. Their leaders told them to be outraged about illegals taking their job's except when confronted

with the fact that they also believe illegals take jobs that Americans won't do, which is also a lie, Americans would take those illegal jobs if the jobs paid a decent wage. The problem is sir, you don't put things in belief boxes that are only used when the key word is spoken, so they don't have to deal with contradictions involving beliefs.

[hardcover]

6. "jobs that Americans won't do" What a lie.

When I hear that I get so mad. I wanted to smack Bush when he said that. The rich want cheap labor.

[Raschel]

14. I hate that one too. Americans not doing hard low paying jobs is b.s.

[Tejas]

7. They have a valid point shared by many.

Hang around at the check-cashing places on Thursday and Friday and watch how much money gets sent out of the country via Western Union.

[RZM]

13. Western Union and other wiring services are very much against enforcement

Which certainly makes sense

[Tejas]

16. Ahhhhh....WU = First Data Corp = Warren Buffett

[SoCalDem]

8. deep down, it's about MONEY and PURITY of race

They don't want to pay for schools for the kids of immigrants, their health care, and they sure as hell don;t want THEIR kids dating/marrying one..

If they could import mute Mexican eunuchs, their worls would be wonderful

[KharmaTrain]

9. The Rope-A-Dope

Yep...I do have a lot of fun playing with wingnuts and spinning their pretzel logic into pancakes.

Here's the one thing about the immigration game that is implied but never said. They want the cheap labor. I assure you that few wingnuts will ask to see a lawnkeeper's papers if it means he doesn't have to get off his lazy ass to do the job and wants someone to do it on the cheap. Or he needs to have the crops picked and its far preferable to find someone who works in a day what a labor worker will get paid in an hour. Then language, nationality, legality? No problem.

But the game only works when you keep those people demonized...made to be an underclass. Make them "inferior" due to their language or financial straits. Dehumanize them so it's not a person trying to feed a family doing the work but something inferior. And if they're "inferior" they surely don't deserve the "riches" such as health care or education. It's opportunism wrapped in hatred. A shameful example of "American Exceptionalism"

[LawnKorn]

10. I don't know if Teabaggers are smart enough to know about immunization, but it concerns all

The question everyone who who wants a secure life here in the United States needs to ask is can the folks who are arriving illegally be trusted to obtain the required immunizations required by law before entering the country.

CDC Fact sheet


Current vaccination requirements

Immigrants must go through a medical screening for certain diseases and receive vaccinations to help protect the public’s health. Immigrants are screened―

* before coming to the United States, when seeking permanent residence, OR
* in the United States, when changing their visa status to become permanent residents.

Currently, immigration law requires that immigrants have proof of vaccination against―

* Mumps
* Measles
* Rubella
* Polio
* Tetanus and diphtheria
* Pertussis
* Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib)
* Hepatitis B

[zbdent]

11. their "opposition to illegal immigrants" is lip service ...

remember, their true god is the bottom line, their religious symbol is the dollar sign ...

[RZM]

12. That's very true

McCain's campaign last year was a particularly glaring example of pandering to the base on immigration to get votes despite his history of friendliness to the cheap labor crowd.

[pampango]

18. The repub "base" (freepers, teabaggers) oppose "illegals" as "others" whom they are better than.

Of course, there are lots of "others" (racial/ethnic minorities, gays, legal immigrants) that their base is afraid of and/or feels superior to.

The repub party has, at least, two wings on illegal immigration. One is the corporate "cheap labor" wing that wants to maintain a pool of as many illegal immigrants as possible. They represent easily exploitable workers so, it is understandable that this repub group opposes comprehensive reform because it eliminates "illegals" ("exploitables") by giving them a path to citizenship.

The other repub wing is the "base" exemplified by teabaggers who "want their country back" from "illegals" and every other minority that is changing the face of the US. This wing argues for a impenetrable wall on our Mexican border, "Arizona-style" immigration laws in every state, and a strategy of "attrition through enforcement" by which "illegals" will deport themselves (if the government doesn't do it first).

I think their corporate wing supports the "base's" focus on "attrition through enforcement" as a tactic. The corporates think it will not work so it will not cut into the pool of illegal immigrants they can exploit. It also keeps the "base's" focus on an opposition to "amnesty" (a path to citizenship) which is a real threat to the size of the pool of exploitable workers. There have been many instances in the past month of states rejecting "Arizona laws" put forward by teabag legislators but opposed by employer groups.

Likewise, our party has, at least, two wings. One agrees that "attrition through enforcement" (self-deportation) coupled with the government deporting as many illegal immigrants as possible is the best way to deal with illegal immigration. They share the belief that if we make things miserable enough for illegal immigrants they will all go home. Problem solved.

Our other wing pushes for comprehensive immigration reform which combines border control, employer sanctions and a path to citizenship. If employer sanctions are never to be effective then no strategy to control illegal immigration will work (including, obviously, "attrition through enforcement" since there would be no effective "enforcement"). Obama's administration has done more than any previous one to audit, fine and jail illegal employers. This group (including the Congressional Progressive Caucus and organized labor) also prefers a path to citizenship for many, if not most, illegal immigrants who are here. They do this both as perceived "fairness" and in the belief that studies show that most illegal immigrants will not go "home" anyway (they have American children, things are worse back "home", etc.). Both for the sake of "fairness" and efficacy giving them a path to citizenship removes the "exploitability" of their illegal status

[ItNerd4life]

15. They aren't the ones who seem illogical to me.

Smaller government doesn't mean 'NO' government.

Illegal workers take away jobs, I guess that's okay with you? Please study Supply & Demand, more workers means lower wages.
I can't believe how some people on DU think lower wages is a good thing.

[davidthegnome]

17. Convenient scapegoats IMO

I'm certainly no expert on the issue, but that's my opinion. Consider the difference between CEO and employee pay - consider the average and compare it with previous decades.

Does the issue with wages really have a great deal to do with illegal immigrants? I don't think so - but again, that's just my opinion. I think that the majority of the wealth overall is hoarded by the few and that when they need to further their agenda (an agenda fanatically supported by most republicans) they bring out some convenient scapegoats to whip. Then the focus alters to what they see as a common enemy. Don't worry about what our corporations or their leaders are doing, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, that's not a private jet he's flying....

I think illegal immigrants are often painted and used as the common enemy to unite Americans against them - all while subtly convincing us to ignore larger issues.