Luis Valle eats a hard shell taco fast Monday afternoon at Taco Bell, his knee jerking up and down. It’s the first thing he’s eaten, he said, in 24 hours. Times are tough for the 27-year-old illegal immigrant and day laborer — an out-of-work farmworker who lives in Watsonville and gets jobs these days by standing outside the new Home Depot on 41st Avenue.

Carlos Rodriguez, an unemployed brother in arms, sits next to him, but he doesn’t eat his taco as fast. He’s more methodical. He’s also had better luck of late. He scored $40 for two hours of work cleaning up somebody’s back yard on Calabasas Road on Sunday. He’s still got the dirt beneath his nails to prove it.

But such great pay is rare, he admits.

“It’s probably because I was working on a Sunday,” joked Rodriguez, 28. “It’s something I shouldn’t have been doing.”

For the most part, Rodriguez says, he’s doing what hundreds of other day laborers are doing these days: Standing around and waiting for jobs in Santa Cruz instead of actually getting them. When times are good, their numbers are thick. By noon, most of them are long gone, snapped up by those who need them.

When times are bad, their numbers are equally thick, but they tend to stick around, the result of a labor shortage.

The slumping economy, the record number of home foreclosures, the lag in house sales and an idle construction industry aren’t just affecting middle-class Americans.
Advertisement
The bad times are trickling down to the lowest rung of the work force: the illegal labor pool, which has long been tapped by both contractors and homeowners for convenience and low cost.

And somewhere in Mexico a wife and a family are having a rougher go at it than usual. That’s because a large number of day laborers are single men who send their money back to Mexico via wire transfers — when they’ve got it to send back.

No worried, though, right? The $1.4 billion economic stimulus/border security package for Mexico from the US taxpayers will soon be on its way…

***
The Sunday edition of the Dallas Morning News carries a lengthy lead editorial extolling the “illegal immigrant” as the 2007 “Texan of the Year.” The full piece is here. (hat tip – Freedom Folks and MM.com readers). I’ll cut to the chase and give you the paper’s rather underwhelming, “on the one hand, on the other hand, time will tell” ending:

If critics are correct, we could be seeing the advent of the kind of fractiousness that bedevils public life in Canada and other nations where peoples who speak different languages, and come from different cultural backgrounds, live together only with mutual suspicion and unease.

On the other hand, perhaps the alarmists are wrong. Maybe these ambitious, hard-working immigrants, whatever their documentation, will write the next great chapter of a story that’s still deeply American, though with a different accent. If the optimists are right, much work remains to be done to incorporate all immigrants fully into new cultural traditions.

We end 2007 no closer to compromise on the issue than when the year began. People waging a culture war – and that’s what the struggle over illegal immigration is – don’t give up easily. What you think of the illegal immigrant says a lot about what you think of America, and what vision of her you are willing to defend. How we deal with the stranger among us says not only who we Americans are today but determines who we will become tomorrow.

I respect the Dallas Morning News editorial board’s desire to foster debate and break new ground. But it always amuses me when newspaper editors think they’re doing something fresh and new in putting a “human face” to illegal immigration. Most immigration news coverage amounts to little else besides peddling illegal immigrant sob stories and whitewashing the negative consequences of open-borders chaos on the law-abiding population. This is the rule, not the exception.

Question: Why is it that the human face they want us to see belongs only to the law-breaker…and not the human face of those who have to enforce the law or bear the costs of lax enforcement?

Question: Why is the “illegal immigrant” the “Texan of the Year”–and not, say, the “Border Patrol agent?”

Question: Why is the “illegal immigrant” the “Texan of the Year”–and not, say, the victims of catch-and-release and failed deportation policies…like 15-year-old Dani Countryman of Kaufman, Texas–who was murdered in August by two illegal aliens with prior records who had entered the U.S. from Mexico illegally.

We’re also always lectured by many newsroom types about the “complexity” of the issue. But who’s guilty of oversimplification here?

There are non-violent, hard-working illegal aliens. There are violent, dangerous illegal aliens. There are moochers. There are militants. There are border-crossers. There are visa overstayers. There are earnest dishwashers. There are drug smugglers. There are jihadists. There are gangbangers. There are con artists. There are legitimate victims of bureaucratic screw-ups. To lump them all together under the “hard-working illegal immigrant” archetype and award them a “Texan of the Year” award strikes me as an unhelpfully reductionist and hackneyed approach. And a missed opportunity.

Instead of planting themselves safely in “middle ground,” wouldn’t the DMN’s readership be better served by an editorial board that could tell them where they stand on substantive policy questions facing communities across Texas–and across the country. Try these for starters:

- Should the government continue to provide funding to cities that adopt sanctuary policies or not?

- Should illegal alien ID cards issued by foreign consulates continue to be acceptable in the face of strong opposition from homeland security and law enforcement experts?

- Does the board support or oppose the expansion of the federal employer verification system being challenged by the ACLU?

- Would the board back efforts by sheriffs and police who want to participate in the 287(g) immigration enforcement training program?

- What exactly is the board’s position on the DREAM Act?

Instead we get this:

The newspaper’s Editorial Board recognizes the myriad, profound ways in which this group of people impacts Texas, ranging from the economy to politics to the most basic sense of culture. Lamenting that “there seems to be little middle ground in [the] debate,” the Board notes that “spectacular fights over their presence … broke out across Texas this past year, adding to the national pressure cooker as only Texas can.”

“Everything’s bigger in Texas, and history and geography guarantee that the immigration problem is no different. And many issues are flaring sooner here,” the editorial reads, as it dedicates unusual length to explore all sides of the issue and put a face on the people at the center of the debate. “Illegal immigration exacerbates the natural tension in American society by injecting more change than can be absorbed — and by defying laws designed to control the rate of change,” the editorial reads.

“The story of the illegal immigrant in Texas is rich in history, complexity and controversy, and the impact on the state is pervasive,” said Keven Ann Willey, vice president and editorial page editor of The Dallas Morning News. “Because of this complexity, and also because of their illegal status, it was not possible for us to call out a single individual, but as the Board debated it became clear to us that as a group, these people merited recognition.”

“How should we deal with this stranger among us?” the DMN editorial asks.

Well, wouldn’t it have been truly novel for the paper to take real, clear stands on immigration enforcement policies and provide some concrete answers to the question is so grandiosely poses in its Sunday showpiece?

Or would that have “exacerbated” too much “natural tension” and pushed them off the safe space of “middle ground?”

Turns out the suspect is an illegal alien gardener. MyFoxLA reports:

A man who allegedly raped a 24-year-old woman whose car broke down on a San Diego freeway was expected to enter a plea today to six felony charges, prosecutors said.

Alejandro Martinez Leyva, 25, is charged with forcible rape, two counts of sexual penetration, sexual assault with the intent to commit rape, dissuading a witness and making a criminal threat.

He faces up to 23 years in prison if convicted, said Farrah Emami of the Orange County District Attorney’s Office.

The alleged victim was driving south on the San Diego (5) Freeway toward her home in San Diego County about 2:30 a.m. Saturday when her car spun out near the Junipero Serra Road off-ramp and became disabled.

Leyva allegedly stopped in front of her vehicle and offered assistance, then sexually assaulted her, according to authorities.

Semen found at the scene has been linked to Leyva, and the alleged victim has identified him from a photo, said sheriff’s spokesman Jim Amormino.

Leyva was arrested late Tuesday night at his San Juan Capistrano home, which is near the crime scene, Amormino said.

Leyva, a gardener and apparent illegal immigrant, was being held at the Orange County Jail, and an immigration hold was placed on him, Amormino said.

Here are some ugly details about the attack that you won’t read in the NYTimes or Washington Post:

The woman broke free and began to run away, but tripped in front of the car. Leyva allegedly grabbed her and threatened to push her down a nearby embankment if she did not cooperate, Emami said.

Leyva is accused of digitally penetrating her, then pushing her back into the car and trying to pull down her pants. He allegedly digitally penetrated her again before raping her, Emami said.

Leyva is charged with dissuading a witness for allegedly grabbing the cell phone at the beginning of the attack and throwing it out of reach, Emami said.

There are Good Samaritans and Bad Samaritans. There are illegal aliens who are just here to work and there are illegal aliens who are here to do harm. It is not nativist to point out that our government at all levels is incapable of distinguishing between distinguishing between the two–and utterly incapable of regulating and controlling who gets in, who stay out, and who should be kicked out.

Paul Mirengoff lambastes the WaPo editorial board’s nativist-smearing tactics.

John Derbyshire spells it out for the slow learners:

The U.S.A. has an immigration system, under laws passed by the people’s representatives in Congress. For twenty years the federal government, for reasons to do with ideology and “interest,” has failed to enforce those laws. As a result, tens of millions of foreigners have settled in our country unlawfully, while other foreigners who wish to settle here but respect our laws, wait long years in their home countries for permission to enter.

A great many Americans are very angry about this. If you were to poll those angry Americans on the topic of legal immigration, you’d get all sorts of answers, from severe-restrictionist to couldn’t-care-less. The center of gravity of the answers would probably be somewhere like: “Sure we should have immigrants, but it should be done legally, properly.”

The anger, the shouting, the jammed Congressional switchboards, the cable-news bloviating, is about the federal government’s failure to enforce federal law…

The New York Times gives us the sad story of Purna Raj Bajracharya of Nepal. Shortly after September 11, Bajracharya was seen videotaping a building that contained an FBI office. He was detained for three months in New York City, then deported.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post tells us the sad story of Ansar Mahmood, a Pakistani pizza deliveryman who was detained after he asked a stranger to take a picture of a reservoir. He had violated immigration rules and has been ordered deported.

Bajracharya’s principal complaint is that he was not deported more quickly. Like many illegal immigrants rounded up in the aftermath of 9/11, he had to wait for three months while overloaded caseworkers at the FBI made sure he was not a terrorist. It is unfortunate that Bajracharya was not deported more quickly, but a three month wait is legal and is understandable given the context. (At the time, the FBI was investigating the Sept. 11 attacks and the anthrax attacks; speed took a back seat to security.) Bajracharya’s other complaints–that he was forced to stand naked, that he was “manhandled,” that he was not allowed to return home in a suit–do not amount to much. Even Bajracharya does not seem to feel too wronged. “I still believe the American government is the best in the world,” he told the Times.

The principal objection in the other story is that Mahmood came under scrutiny because he is from a Middle Eastern country. As one supporter put it, “His case was so clearly a case of racial profiling, it seemed only right that they shouldn’t deport him.” Yes, Mahmood probably would not have been detained if he was a native-born, blond-haired man. So, notwithstanding the denials of government officials, there was an aspect of national origin profiling going on here. This is not something to be ashamed of. Focusing on Middle Eastern men is entirely appropriate in the wake of a major terrorist attack carried out by 19 Middle Eastern men.

The bottom line: there is nothing wrong with enforcing immigration law even if those deported were singled out because of their national origin and have no ties to terrorism. As Temple University law professor Jan Ting noted in testimony before the 9/11 Commission, “Such removals indirectly serve the war on terrorism by reducing the number of illegal aliens and the resulting culture of fraudulent documents among whom and in which foreign terrorists can conceal themselves.”

As for the idea that the government is being paranoid when it comes to Middle Easterners acting suspiciously with cameras, here’s a reality check from former federal prosecutor Andy McCarthy and here’s the latest on those Iranian security guards who were taking pictures of New York landmarks and structures.

Captain Ed has some cogent comments on the failure to kick these guys out after being caught three times around these sites:

Counterterrorism is an unusual place to put in a “three strikes and you’re out” rule, isn’t it? After the first incident, we should have demanded the videotape back, and perhaps we did, but any further incidents should have resulted in immediate expulsion. After all, as the AP notes, it’s not as though it would risk our diplomatic relationship with the Iranian mullahcracy, because we have none to damage.

Taking pictures of infrastructure and transportation appears to be more of a preparation for an attack on the ability to keep people alive in the city rather than just a showy (but deadly) attack on a building complex. Again, when would such systems be taxed to their limits? In August, when thousands of Republicans come to the Big Apple to nominate Bush for re-election, with the nation focused on the convention. I wouldn’t be surprised if something similar has been happening in Boston, either, especially since two of the four 9/11 flights took off from Logan Airport and AQ terrorists continue to operate out of Beantown.

IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY DENYSE SABAGH: Well, I would disagree that people had to learn English before they came to the United States. That never was the case.

Tell that to the legions of foreign students and workers in the U.S. who are still required to demonstrate English proficiency today (at least the ones who haven’t hired lawyers like Sabagh to weasel their way out of taking the language test). I didn’t get to point this out, however, because the audience was too busy booing me.

Sabagh’s other laugh line (well, nobody was laughing but me) was her complaint that “there’s a tremendous amount of law enforcement going on right now. As a matter of fact, there’s-there’s… The law enforcement today is much more stringent and punitive than it used to be.”

Reality check: Just outside the WETA studio where this show was taped is a tax-subsidized day labor shelter for illegal aliens that was opposed by WETA’s own CEO, Sharon Rockefeller. On the evening of the taping, a few dozen men hung around the shelter. Everyone in Arlington knows they are immigration law-breakers. No one, including the local acting police chief who attended the town meeting, enforced the law against the illegal aliens.

I tried to point this out, but Sabagh was too busy blabbing out the urgent need for another illegal alien amnesty.