>Representitive McClintock to President Calderon: "Fuck off Please"

Posted: 22/05/2010 in Uncategorized

>I do not think I have commented on politics since the election of Obama. I have avoided talking about immigration since it is a polarizing issue in which a person is either a racist or a foreign insurgent depending on which side you take. I must also necessarily view people entering from Mexico as either illegal immigrants or the vulnerable poor. There is however, an issue which I think is worth a short blog post.

Imagine that it is the 1960s. We are deeply embroiled in the civil rights turmoil. The dixiecrats in the south are still pulling for Jim Crow, while representatives from various groups are campaigning for reform for what they see as racial injustice. The arguments are deeply impassioned on both sides.

Then, one day, a representative from South Africa comes before congress. He lectures the dixiecrats and anyone else who supports Jim Crow. He, a foriegner, has important insight on American domestic policy. He says the dixiecrats must change their mind and change their laws. Jim Crow, he explains, is a racial injustice in the United States. “All people are created equal,” he says. Yes, he is a representative from South Africa –the country with the apartheid.

This is somewhat analogous for today. President Calderon of Mexico spoke before the American Congress on our immigration policy. McClintock, who made me proud to be in California, responded firmly, even-handedly, but with clear indignation. Among other things he noted: 1) It is rather rude for a foreign official to lecture another nation on its domestic policy. 2) Mexico’s immigration policy is harsh and far more exclusionary than anything the United States has ever held, and consequently 3) The Mexican government is hypocritical.

Mexico’s immigration policy, in my opinion, hurts the cause of its immigrants here. Calderon’s rudeness does not help the poor of his country. If immigration rights “know no borders” or if “God created the earth for everyone” than that applies to Mexico too.

Much of Central America thinks of Mexico as arrogant and jingoistic. I am beginning to understand why.

  1. Q says:

    >Mmm, I'd actually disagree to a certain extent. Simply because Calderon is speaking as a foreigner does not negate his points. Quite the opposite actually. A lot of the time we can't see our own problems until an "other" point them out (Christian Mission is a prime example; this is the foundation of Christian witness). So on those grounds, Calderon's comments are valid. Also, if you want to take that to its end, I would expect you are also equally upset at the American government for pushing their comments and views on Iran and North Korea concerning nuclear proliferation.BUT … at the same time, I think there could be a valid argument here if Calderon is being incredibly hypocritical. I haven't read or heard what he said, so I can't comment. But yeah, you can't dismiss his comments simply because he's a foreigner.

  2. Jin-roh says:

    >Yeah, it is certainly true that someone can be right DESPITE hypocrisy. Dismissing Calderon on that basis alone is a tu quoque.However, even if he is right in his criticism of AZ's law (which I don't think he is) the manifest hypocrisy of Mexico's laws hurt the cause of every Mexican immigrant in the United States -legal or otherwise. There some validity to nuclear issues, but I don't know if the United States could be charged with hypocrisy as easily as Mexico is on immigration. We are, at the very least, trying to reduce our stockpiles though we have been obviously unsuccessful. Besides, nuclear PROLIFERATION is by definition an international concern.

  3. Q says:

    >I just finished reading articles about Calderon's speech and McClintock's response. I think his points are valid (though I'm not sure yet whether I agree with them or not), but one part of his speech is total bullshit. "Arizona's immigration law isn't about kicking people out but making sure the people who are here are legal." That's total bullshit. The law is absolutely about kicking people out. His point later in the speech only confirms this point: "If a police officer pulls over a driver with no license, no passport, and doesn't speak English that that person might be here illegally [and by extension the officer deport them]?" If Arizona didn't already have a law that made that possible, then every lawmaker in the state of Arizona is a complete idiot. There were ulterior motives at play when the new law was put in place. I'm not saying they were racist, but there were other motives.Also keep in mind that after the U.S. banned assault weapon sales on the border, the violence in Mexico decreased substantially. After Bush let them expire, violence returned to pre-'94 levels. Coincidence? Perhaps Calderon was on to something…

  4. Jin-roh says:

    >I can certainly concede the assault weapons points. Also, it is true that "making sure people here are here legally" often necessarily involves "kicking people out."

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s