Mixed Feelings Today

I always have mixed feelings about party changes in Washington, because I have little faith the Coke party will taste much different than the Pepsi party.  But I am happy about divided government, so I will take that as a positive.

Unfortunately, while many of the Republican sweeps around the US were based on opposition to deficit spending, bailouts, taxes, and Obamacare (all issues I can readily agree with), victories in AZ came mainly in a wave of xenophobic anti-Mexican hysteria, with our governor (now re-elected) campaigning on crazy fantasy sh*t like Mexicans beheading people and leaving their bodies in the desert.  The Governor "reiterated her assertion that the majority of illegal immigrants are coming to the United States for reasons other than work, saying most are committing crimes and being used as drug mules by the cartels."


  1. Ummm:


    "CHANDLER, Ariz. (AP) – The gruesome case of a man who was stabbed & beheaded in a suburban Phoenix apartment has police investigating whether the killing is potentially the most extreme example of Mexican drug cartel violence spilling over the border. Martin Alejandro Cota-Monroy’s body was found Oct. 10 in a Chandler apartment – his severed head a couple feet away."

  2. Che is dead:


    Don't confuse him with the facts.

  3. ADiff:

    The operatives of the cartels aren't concerned with immigration laws. The most strident of such will have no impact on them or their operations here in the U.S. Their criminal activity here in Arizona is only indirectly, and very remotely, effected by things like SB1070 and such, which act mainly to deter immigration for legitimate activity (albeit whether or not authorized). The solution is simple and immediate: treat all non-citizen residents exactly as citizens with respect to application of any and all labor laws and business regulations, providing blanket immunity with respect to residency status in such cases. Once businesses can obtain no advantage in terms of trade with illegal residents, all incentive to purchase that commodity disappears, and with it almost all demand for it. In fact in such case that status (illegal residency) becomes a liability, along the lines of lack of adequate insurance or bondage. Combined with reservation of social benefits to citizens, and to a much lesser extent legal residents, this would essentially eliminate incentives to illegal immigration, while allowing those with a contribution to make, to continue to expand and enrich our economy.

    The problem remains prejudice, as always.

  4. caseyboy:

    Given the high level of unemployment we have I suspect that illegals are not coming for jobs. What do we still have in great abundance? Lets see, there is still a huge drug market available to those willing to run drugs across the border. Oh yeah, we also still have significant ENTITLEMENTS available to those that come here hat in hand (give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free...).

  5. Che is dead:

    ADiff says:

    "The solution is simple and immediate: treat all non-citizen residents exactly as citizens with respect to application of any and all labor laws and business regulations ..."

    Once employed, "non-citizens" are already subject to all labor laws and business regulations. Businesses inclined to hire illegals pay no more attention to those laws than they do laws prohibiting the hiring of illegals.

    " ... reservation of social benefits to citizens, and to a much lesser extent legal residents ..."

    This is a pipe dream. Passing out taxpayer money is how leftists buy themselves power. For the racist left this isn't about immigrants seeking work, it's about building a pro-socialist majority.

    And if you resist any of this you will get smug low-lifes calling you "xenophobic" and "anti-Mexican", despite the fact that you support the most generous legal immigration policy in the history of the world.

  6. Evil Red Scandi:

    Well, even us nutjobs out in California got one thing right. It hasn't got much news coverage, but I hope it's one of those crazy things we do (like Prop 13 decades ago) that turns into a national trend - we passed Prop 20 and outlawed Gerrymandering. It's not a perfect law (I would prefer that the rules require each district consist of four perfectly straight lines, except when one side consists of a state or national boundary), but it's a very big improvement.

    Other states: please copy!

  7. Scott:

    Yeah, that's why I voted, I fear mexicans. I didn't realize it until now. I learned a little about myself today. You always learn something at coyoteblog.

    Given my new found fear of mexicans I was thinking we should deport them by light rail, but I realized that would be too expensive. Can you help me calculate how many priuses we would have to buy to deport them?

  8. me:

    This was a sad election for liberals... you had the acting fascist conservative party running against the fascist religious right. Lose/lose. :(

    And yes, I am saying "fascist" to be crass, but that's sadly enough the only organized past political movement that displayed the same attitute towards civil liberties pepsi and cola demonstrate.

  9. ADiff:


    I've seen recent studies to the effect that immigrants, legal residents and otherwise, are obtaining those new jobs available at a far greater rate than citizens. Some of this is no doubt due to a somewhat greater effective mobility and willingness to be flexible with respect to terms and compensation. But a large part must also be the better terms of trade available when employing non-citizen labor. Most of this results from the willingness of undocumented residents to accept sub-standard terms, and to do so with realistic expectation of near complete impunity on the part of the buyers. This can be considered a sterling example of the effect of discrimination against illegal resident labor in encouraging its demand, and hence more supply. While increased mobility and perhaps a somewhat greater tolerance for terms might still be expected among legal residents, removing those benefits to employers from undocumented labor might go far toward removing incentives to use it, and tend to discourage further supply.

    The government benefits argument is a valid one, to a large extent. Arizona's done a lot of good work toward rectifying that problem, although both further work and adjustments are, and will continue to be, required.

    Note that in order for labor market benefits to be obtained, there's no need to exclude enforcement of residency laws when applying for or receiving social services, including available emergeny care.

    There is a way to deal with the issue, to the benefit of the economy....but we haven't even begun to avail ourselves of these. So far all we're doing is 'cutting off our nose to spite our face', so to speak.

  10. astonerii:

    It always seems depressing when you give yourself the choice of worthless and destructive. Get over yourself already on the immigration thing. The voters did not vote for candidates because they HATE the brown people. What a joke you are becoming. People vote in there own personal best interest, and not against someone else' interest. Seems to me that you may just be a bit racially biased (RACIST) Warren, because everything you find important in life revolves around other people's race or perceived racial biases. It is called projection, and you really seem to have a very high amount of it on this topic.

  11. Henry Bowman:

    I have to agree somewhat with astonerii, Warren. You're starting to sound like Keith Olbermann.

  12. Mark:

    Usually Warren's' posts are fairly well thought out, and occasionally stretch my thinking about issues.

    It is unfortunate that in this post he chooses to use baseless racism charges and other hyperbole to make his point.

    Still to give him credit his 80 page pdf on AGW is one of the best documents on the subject I have ever seen.

  13. astonerii:

    Warrens coverage on the other issues is why even have him book marked. Mostly I agree with him, on many things. Unfortunately, on immigration, he has only one argument for it. That it is racist to appose illegal immigration, in fact having any laws making borders is racist.

    The problem with his love affair with illegal aliens and aliens in general is that he is on the wrong side of any evidence that has any credibility. Illegal Aliens by far are more likely to commit crimes (beyond just the jumping borders and identity theft) than any other constituency in the United States of America, other than inner city blacks. All credible evidence points to this being fact. All credible evidence points to the fact that from cradle to grave the average and median illegal alien is a net drain on state tax revenues, and overall as a whole are a net drain on community public resources, even if we leave out food stamps and hospital visits from the calculation. All credible evidence indicates that illegal alien anchor babies are a detriment to the educational chances of all legal resident children. All credible evidence shows that illegal alien workers drive down the already low wage earners wages, making more workers poor. All credible evidence shows that there are no jobs Americans will not do, but there are jobs Americans will not do for a third world wage. All credible evidence shows that every single workplace sweep ends up with the net effect of sweeping out the illegal alien workers and the company hiring workers that are legally able to accept work in this country, frequently at reasonable area wages.

    When we are talking global warming, we demand evidence, and we demand credible evidence that is not tainted with bias.

    The best evidence for crime rates is criminal conviction rates.

    The best evidence for whether or not a person is a drain on community resources is their income. Illegal aliens do the work that Americans will not do for a given low wage, this places them in the lower income earning arena, and we all know that the lower earning income people pay net negative federal taxes and that their sales taxes in states where there is one and there income taxes where employers actually pay them are too low to account for the median level of money required to keep the community well served. This means that they are in fact a drain.

    The best evidence for determining the educational losses caused by illegal alien children in classes would be to look at schools where many children are first generation English as a Second Language students and districts where the vast majority of children grew up in an English speaking household. Compare not just test scores, but cost per child as well, and it tilts very much in favor of the English as a first language school districts. For the most part, I can understand a racially charged person would love to say, "but we got school districts in inner cities that do even worse than the English as a Second Language districts, so we are already doing that bad!", but this is only an argument for disenfranchising more children than is needed. Inner city children do not grow up speaking English as any dialect that an employer would accept as beneficial.

    The evidence for illegal aliens driving down the wages of legal resident workers can be found in the outcomes at the workplace enforcements. The wages paid to the illegal aliens were artificially low and once the illegals were gone the price premium of workers at the very same plant increased, sometimes by as much as 50%! Somehow the company stays in business.

    The evidence for the fact that Americans will factually do the work that the illegals are doing is that amazingly enough, Americans invented most of those jobs, filled most of those jobs, and to this very day fill in those job roles, they will just simply not do it for the wages an illegal alien from a third world nation will.

    I will agree with Warren that minimum wage laws are counter productive. But I will not agree with Warren that getting cheaper labor at any and all other than wage costs is beneficial for communities, from the small farm to the large city, to the state or the country. In every single place where the primary labor force of a nation is the insatiable demand for outsourced migrant workers, the cost to society has always been wholesale decline.

  14. IgotBupkis:

    Warren, you constantly approach this as mere racism and not a perception of a qualitative differnce between the latin "invasion" and prior national ones.

    This is categorically, demonstrably false.

    When you can refute the blatant evidence of the difference between other influxes and the "Hispanic invasion" shown by this little internet toy using census figures, then I'll take your position more seriously.

    I realize you don't generally respond directly to commenters, and I understand and concur with your reasoning for the most part -- but the point here is anything but subtle or hard to understand.

    There is a VAST difference between this immigrant influx and previous immigrant influxes in US history.

    These graphs make it **abundantly** clear.
    Pure and simple.

    These graphs are US Census data, they aren't adjusted, manipulated, or culled in any way I am aware of, and, given that it's from the Old Grey Whore I think I know which way I'd expect bias to run if any were being introduced.

    Now, to illustrate my point most clearly:

    Click on the above link.
    Set the timeline to 1880.
    Select a national group -- say, "Norway". Do NOT pick any of the Latino influxes to this point.
    Now click the slider through each census year.
    Watch the behavior of the bubbles showing how the population percentages changed over time.
    Now, back to 1880, and pick another, say, "Poland". Repeat.
    By all means, pick your own group(s), as long as they aren't the Latinos, they all look about the same... a slow build then a decline or, at worse, a stablizing basis up to current time.

    NOW set it to 1880, and then pick "Mexico". Repeat.

    And TELL me you don't see an inarguably HUGE difference -- one which clearly represents a difference of KIND, not just quantity...

    Some of us can SEE this represents a destabilizing and destructive influx, most especially in these times of multiculti PC bullsh** telling immigrants *their culture* is not only not something to respect and appreciate but largely abandon in favor of our American polyglot culture, but, in fact, that it is actually BETTER than that rapacious, "evil", and thieving American brand of culture.

  15. ADiff:

    As far as the 'race' thing's concerned, I pretty much have to agree with Warren on this one. I think the vast majority of activism in opposition to illegal immigration is a reflection of fears that are fundamentally ethnic and racial. Sorry guys, but that is the way it seems to me. This is not to say most such advocates are explicit racists, but xenophobia and fear of cultural change are at the root of most.

  16. Fred from Canuckistan:

    Check your Coke today . . . doesn't it have very strong Tea flavour, sorry flavor?

    Great taste, fewer "calories" as well.

  17. DensityDuck:

    You need to remember that Warren trades on cheap illegal labor paid cash under the table. If we cut off that spigot then his costs go way up, and his profits go way down, and he gets paid from those profits.

    See also his extensive library of posts bitching about minimum wage.

  18. jt:

    I don't see that Warren is being racist at all. Rather, I think he raises an important issue that's really tough to solve: If human rights (the right to work, own property, enter into contracts, etc.) are truly universal, then it's hard to explain why any non-citizen should need government permission to exercise those rights here. Should we conclude that fundamental rights are *not* universal after all? Or that they don't apply during an "emergency" situation? Lots of slippery slopes here...

    (For the record, the concept of universal rights does *not* imply that the U.S. has an obligation to provide free social services, voting rights, exemption from criminal laws, yada yada. There's arguably a separate set of rights that belong only to citizens, though the U.S. has always been rather fuzzy about this distinction.)

  19. MJ:

    You need to remember that Warren trades on cheap illegal labor paid cash under the table. If we cut off that spigot then his costs go way up, and his profits go way down, and he gets paid from those profits.

    See also his extensive library of posts bitching about minimum wage.

    Do you have any evidence for your assertions about Warren "trading in cheap illegal labor"? He has actually mentioned in several posts that many of his workers are part-time and/or seasonal employees, mostly retired folks looking for supplemental income.

  20. MJ:

    Who cares who Arizonans voted for? Four years from now they'll still be stuck with Brewer, their economy will still be in the gutter, and they'll still be blaming Mexicans for its condition.

  21. astonerii:

    Nice one world talk.
    Universal rights also includes property ownership, the right to assemble, and thus the right to create governments to defend our rights from being trampled on by people not in our group, not part owners of our land (country). Got it? If not then you are just simply as bad as Warren.

  22. Henry Bowman:


    Property rights: would you mind if folks started showing up in your backyard to stay, well, for as long as they wanted to? Maybe they'd knock on your door and ask for food. You wouldn't have to give them any, of course (but the U.S. government would). Would you like squatters like that?

    That's the argument that I find most persuasive about immigration and its control. The U.S. is ours, and other countries (e.g., Mexico) belong to them. We are not permitted to trespass on their property, and they should not be permitted to trespass on ours. If we want them to come to our property, they'll have to have an invite (or a permit). It's up to us to grant such, not up to them. And, vice-versa.

    That doesn't mean we shouldn't grant lots of such permits. There are lots of reasons to grant such; Brian Caplan has listed many. But, it should be for us to decide, not them.

  23. el coronado:

    shorter coyote: " i cahn't *believe* gov. brewer won re-election! i don't know of a SINGLE person in my exclusive neighborhood or at my club who voted for her!"

    it's a frickin' shame when the ungrateful proles get uppitty, and disregard voting instructions from their betters, ain't it? how else is a businessman to keep costs and profits up down except for ignoring immigration and labor laws?!? (interestingly enough, the 'wall st. journal' exhibits this exact same phenomenon. you won't find a more law-and-order paper anywhere - except in the case of labor & immigration laws. THOSE, we should ignore lest they negatively impact the bottom line, and never mind that it slowly destroys the country to do so.)(but perhaps this confluence of disgusting political notions is but a mere coincidence.)

  24. coyote little sis:

    When I hear the word "racist" I think of that person's character. I have known Warren longer than any of you and I guarantee that Warren is a man of integrity and fairness. You may not agree with his opinions or his biting wit, but he is most definitely NOT racist. Nor is he practicing any cheap illegal labor exchanges.

    and "everything you find important in life revolves around other people’s race or perceived racial biases." Way off, commenter. way way off. Do not judge a man's character by a blog entry or two. You stand a good chance of getting it wrong.

  25. mahtso:

    “I have known Warren longer than any of you and I guarantee that Warren is a man of integrity and fairness.”

    This post is one of many in which the blogger did not report fairly Governor Brewer’s position. And the assertion that “victories in AZ came mainly in a wave of xenophobic anti-Mexican hysteria” is nonsense.

    Little sis may be right about the blogger not being a racist, but the blogger is wrong when he implies that the hundreds of thousands who voted for the Governor are racists. And, as I see it, that does go to his integrity.

  26. el coronado:

    for coyote's little sis -

    with all due respect, why is it wrong for us, those who read this blog, to use the word "racist" to describe your brother or his writings? (not that i can recall that ever happening - he's usually called 'elitist', or 'wildly-out-of-touch', but i'll take your word for it) especially when HE so willingly applies that word/concept to those of us who dare disagree with his (many, many) posts on why a)it's wrong to oppose the tidal wave of illegals from mexico b)it's wrong to enforce the *existing* laws in re said ILLEGAL immigration, and c)anyone who does so must be, by definition, a "racist"? filled with pathetic, irrational fears of the wonderful, obedient brown people who come here and work so cheaply, with no backtalk and none of that troublesome 'union' or 'legalities' nonsense bandied about? (and commit crime after crime after crime, ranging from simply *being here* illegally [find out someday how mexico treats ITS mojados] to fake social security #'s to giving fake names at hospitals where they get free med care and stick the gringos with the bill. and all that's *before* we get to the astronomical social costs.)

    is it racist to note that once-quiet, sleepy phoenix is now the kidnapping capital of america? is it racist to object to that fact? is it racist to ask, "saaaaay, how'd that happen, anyway?" is it racist for the sheriff and the governor there to try & take steps to put a stop to that?

    coyote seems to think so. i'll find and put up the relevant posts for you, if you'd like. so just where exactly did we (ok, let's make it personal: where did *I*) get it wrong?

    it's a shame, really. this blog has a lot of good things to say - the forbes piece on vanderbilt & rockefeller is just great, and the kind of thing that should be taught in schools - but the owner has a blind spot 10 miles wide about the not-small, not-irrelevant issues of whether or not the USA (and/or arizona) has the right to control immigration and secure/defend it's borders; or whether **non-citizens here ILLEGALLY** should be allowed to access rights and privileges that A) DON'T APPLY TO THEM! & B) THEY DIDN'T AND WON'T PAY FOR!

  27. astonerii:

    coyote little sis:

    When a person believes that every person in the world they meet is a jerk, it is actually much more likely that they are in fact the jerk.

    When a person thinks everyone around them is insane and cannot see what they see, it is a forgone conclusion that this person is in fact the insane one.

    This list goes on and on, and I for one, after having seen the racist charges flung around in this country have found that it is far more likely that the people making the charges of racism are in fact the racists. Think about it little sis, when there are 5000 reasons not to support something and the only one that ever gets any blog time is the fact that those who oppose must be racist xenophobic cretins, do you not think for a moment that perhaps the person making the charge might be projecting? By the way, disliking someone or some group because of their race is racist, the opposite is also true, blindly liking someone or whole groups of people simply because of their race is racist.

    I am sorry, but Warren has done far more than one or two of these articles trying to charge everyone who disagrees with his personal immigration desires as racists and xenophobes who have not one other legitimate reason not to support his love affair.

  28. dmon:

    From CNN( a well known bastion of reactionary fascist thought):


    NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Immigrants have gained hundreds of thousands of jobs since the Great Recession is said to have ended, while U.S.-born workers lost more than a million jobs, according to a study released Friday.

    Native-born workers lost 1.2 million jobs in the year following June 2009, when economists say the recession officially ended, reported the Pew Hispanic Center, a division of the Pew Research Center.
    In that same period of time, foreign-born workers gained 656,000 jobs, according to the center, which based its analysis on statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Labor.

    The study did not specify whether or not the immigrants were authorized to be in the United States. A separate Pew study released earlier this year said 7.8 million immigrants, about a third of the foreign-born labor force, are unauthorized.

    The disparity is even more extreme for the two-year period ending June 2010. During that time, foreign-born workers lost 400,000 jobs, while U.S.-born workers lost 5.7 million, according to the Pew Hispanic Center.

  29. coyote little sis:

    i fully admit that when astonerii called my brother racist, i reacted from a completely emotional place where i wanted to defend my big brother. i also understand that in the mental masturbation blogosphere, speaking from emotion is frowned upon. i may be naive or uninformed or both, but i still do not believe my brother is racist. and if it makes you feel any better, i guarantee warren is rolling his eyes and groaning that his stupid little sister even tried to participate in this discussion.

  30. astonerii:

    So, Lil Sis understands the position that Warren puts his readership in every time he claims the only reason those who do not support unlimited, particularly illegal, aliens coming into our country is racism. I read the blog because on most things Warren has much good information to spread.