The ongoing Utah mine disaster gets the warm and fuzzy treatment from la Times. There’s no mention that three of the trapped miners are likely illegal aliens from the nation of scabs (Mexico).

MOCORITO, Mexico - Labor recruiters from Utah first came to the rural hamlets that surround this town in the western state of Sinaloa two generations ago, with promises of dollars to be made digging deep into the earth.

Onesimo Payan Carrillo, a retired miner, remembers them as “really tall, really blond men” who persuaded him and many others to leave their cornfields for U.S. coal mines.

The bond between this corner of Sinaloa and Utah has remained alive ever since, with sons and grandsons following in the footsteps of those first miners, including two young men who were trapped following the Aug. 6 collapse of the Crandall Canyon Mine near Huntington, Utah.
[Relatives in Mexico can only pray for miners Los Anegeles Times 8/16/07]

Of course, anyone who knows the least bit about American labor history understands that US miners fought and died for those jobs, and the reason that mining isn’t as dangerous as previously is because of the long struggle of miners and unions.

But today, unions are too corrupt to protect the American worker and favor opening the border to endless foreigners whom the unions hope to organize. In an earlier time, labor leaders like Samuel Gompers understood that flooding the country with excess workers was detrimental to goals of improved wages and working conditions.

Last year I wrote about the mining industry’s assault on citizen workers in American Miners Now Targeted. The mine owners falsely claimed that mining was another “job Americans don’t want to do.”

Current propaganda efforts seem to be effective in Utah. I saw a man-on-the-street interview on cable TV and the guy piped up without being asked that those “immigrant” workers were here to “feed their families,” a popular line from the open-borders crowd.

Some Mexicans view Canadians as treating Mexicans better than those xenophobic Americans do.

There is a Mexican guest worker program in Canada which has been held up as a model for a proposed U.S. guest worker program. The guest worker program is called PTAT, acronym for Programa de Trabajadores Agrícolas Temporales en Canadá. It involves 15,000 Mexican workers who go to work in Canadian agriculture for up to 8 months.

President Calderon, before taking office declared himself in favor of sending more Mexicans to work in Canada, and not only in agriculture.

But the positive perception of Canadian treatment of Mexican workers may be changing.

Some Mexican congressmen (of the PRI and PRD parties) are starting to criticize Canada’s treatment of Mexican workers. Some even visited Canada and returned complaining about the treatment of Mexicans there.

According to a recent article in Universal, a Mexican congressional migratory working group reports that
“the more than 15,000 Mexicans who travel annually to Canada are subject to exhausting working days and lack social and medical services.”

The Mexican critics also criticize the Mexican consulates in Canada, who they accuse of not helping the Mexicans there. Sounds like Mexican diplomats in Canada aren’t as active as they are in the U.S.!

The article reports that “They (the Mexicans) live in difficult conditions, forgotten by the (Mexican) consular protection program, in isolated areas, in a situation of semi-slavery, and without medical services.”

This sounds like what Mexicans have said for years about how badly Mexicans are treated in the U.S.

Other injustices Mexicans suffer at the hands of these cold-hearted Canadians are that they don’t have interpreters and they can be fired. Also, due to lack of information, they can’t avail themselves of Worker’s Comp or retirement benefits. And, sending remittances back to Mexico is difficult and expensive.

When they get sick, complain the congressmen, the Mexican workers are just sent back to Mexico and replaced with another laborer.

Well, that all sounds horrible. Maybe Mexico should just not send any more workers to Canada, and provide them all with the same services here in Mexico!

President Calderon is set to visit Canada from August 17th-22nd, in part for the big SPP shindig . The congressional Canada critics want the Mexican president to take up the issue with PM Stephen Harper.

Isn’t this North American Union going to be a hoot!

John Rosenberg of the Discriminations blog notices this in a Charlottesville free paper

The HooK: NEWS- Déjà-vu: Group tries again to stop assaults In Issue 633 By LISA PROVENCE LISA@READTHEHOOK.COM

In the spring of 2003, when popular, mostly African-American, Charlottesville High students were charged– and later convicted– of beating up UVA students, a galvanized community met to take action. Concerned citizens gathered at Mt. Zion Baptist Church, committees were formed, and fundraisers held for the defense of the young perps.

He writes

What really caught my eye about this lede, however (dare I describe it as eye-opening?) is the glaring disjunction between its first and second sentences. What did the “galvanized community” galvanize itself to do in response to these vicious attacks? Read that second sentence again. It organized to support the perpetrators!

In 2003, he compared these actual attacks by local black teens on local white college students, to the alleged attack on Daisy Lundy, a black student, who claimed to the be the victim of an attack by a collegiate looking white male. The black teens were charged with assault, but not with hate crimes.

We did several articles in 2003, ourselves:

Diversity vs. Safety (contd.): What The Charlottesville Hate Crimes Say About America’s Future By Sam Francis

Diversity vs. Safety And Honesty (contd.): The Charlottesville Hate Crimes Reach the Establishment Ideological Converter By Sam Francis

Racism 101 At The University Of Virginia By Peter Bradley

But it’s an important point Rosenberg is making here–in the face of semi-organized black on white violence, the local African-American community, as represented by the Reverend Alvin Edwards, of Mount Zion Baptist Church, organized to defend the perpetrators.

This is one of my favorite stories about politics:

Immigration policy stupid, evil and hurting Americans

By Peter Brimelow

Contra Costa Times
Published Saturday, December 4, 1999

“IN AMERICA, WE have a two-party system,” a Republican congressional staffer is supposed to have told a visiting group of Russian legislators some years ago.

“There is the stupid party. And there is the evil party. I am proud to be a member of the stupid party.”

He added: “Periodically, the two parties get together and do something that is both stupid and evil. This is called—bipartisanship.”

Our current mass immigration policy is a classic example of this fatal Washington bipartisanship. It is a stupid policy because there is absolutely no reason for it—in particular, Americans as a whole are no better off economically because of mass immigration.

It’s true on other issues as well: if you live in Europe, or Canada there is no party you can vote for that can reinstate the death penalty, or abolish gun control.

I mention it because we frequently link to that story, or reuse that anecdote, and it came up in William Rusher column on August 9th. [townhall.com--The immigration counterattack begins]

Rusher writes

When the American people rose up in wrath a couple of months ago and stopped dead in its tracks a bipartisan effort to ram a phony immigration “reform” bill through the Senate, I warned that our triumph was inspiring but very probably short-lived. It is extremely difficult to focus the attention of the people at large on any policy, however bad, that is wanted eagerly by an influential minority.

The policy in question — namely, to legalize the status of the 10 or 15 million illegal aliens in this country, keep them working here for peanuts, put them on track for citizenship and open the doors to millions more (all in the name of “reform”) — has the support of not one, but two powerful minorities: professional Democratic politicians, who calculate that the great majority of them will vote Democrat if they ever become citizens, and greedy businessmen (mostly Republican), who want their cheap labor no matter what the social consequences for the country.

My fellow columnist M. Stanton Evans is responsible for the brilliant perception that the Republicans (in John Stuart Mill’s formulation, transposed from Britain) are “the stupid party” and the Democrats are “the evil party.” Every once in a while they get together and hatch some policy that is both stupid and evil. This is called “bipartisanship,” and the immigration reform bill was a spectacular example of it.

For the record, the mordant “Republican congressional staffer” who made this remark was the late Sam Francis, who worked for Senator John East. M. Stanton Evans used it in a speech to the Philadelphia Society, lo these many years ago, (not online, the Philadelphia Society is still pretty much pre-internet) but he credited it to Sam Francis.

I’m not blaming Rusher, just setting the record straight.

Meanwhile, Rusher has a warning about the Bipartisan Betrayal–it’s coming back!

But, as I say, our victory almost certainly won’t last. Having lost the battle for the moment, the proponents of what amounts to “open borders” are already preparing to win the war a little bit at a time. We will be offered small sips from the fatal cup, at first so minor and seemingly innocent that we will be tempted to let down our guard. But gradually, over a period of years, the whole draught will be imbibed.

Paul Mulshine writes in the New Jersey Star-Ledger

Morristown’s mayor was right on immigration

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

Well, I won’t say I told you so.

But I will say Don Cresitello told you so.

Two weeks ago, I wrote a column about a rally in Morristown at which Cresitello, who is the mayor, spoke on the question of illegal immigration. [Bush stands on the wrong side of the street - NJ.com
July 31, 2007]His main objective is simply the attainment of 287(g) status for the local cops. That status deputizes them as agents of the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement service. This entitles them to hand over any illegal aliens they encounter to the federal government.

“We’re not going to go after jay walkers,” he told me when we spoke in his office after the rally. The mayor, who is in all other respects a liberal Democrat, said he intended to target gangs like MS- 13, which ran a drug and prostitution ring in town. He also hoped to avoid a repeat of a 2001 case in which an illegal immigrant was ar rested in the slaying of a 10-year-old Morristown boy. That suspect had been arrested twice in 1998 for incidents involving knives, but after his release from jail, he was permitted to stay in the United States despite being an illegal alien.

This is a familiar pattern and one that was repeated in the recent slayings of those three college kids from Newark. The alleged ringleader of the gang charged in the murders, Jose Lachira Carranza, is an illegal alien from Peru who had prior arrests for such crimes as aggravated assault.

You can read more about the Carranza case here,and Chris Roach wrote us an impassioned letter about Carranza being one of Bush’s “willing workers.” By the way, you should know that workers and criminals are not mutually exclusive–many criminals have some sort of job. When the Wall Street Journal asks why the we “nativists” want to harass “busboys,” they forget that busboy is a job that doesn’t pay much, and some busboys supplement their income by committing crimes.

Mulshine goes on:

So these days Cresitello is looking like a prophet. Meanwhile, his critics are at a loss, most prominently U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie. In something of a master piece of bad timing, Christie was quoted in the Morris Daily Record lambasting the mayor’s views on immigration on the same day that the first reports of the mass slayings hit the news. Christie attacked the mayor for saying that some of the counter-demonstrators at the Morristown rally were Marxists – which they indeed were — and also for saying that the federal government isn’t doing enough to enforce immigration laws.[Christie: Cresitello 'grandstanding' at Morristown rally Calls anti-immigration rhetoric unproductive BY MICHAEL DAIGLE DAILY RECORD Friday, August 3, 2007 ]

“It is an enormous problem, and we’re doing, I think, the best we can,” Christie said in the interview.

If this is the best, I’d hate to see the worst. There are about 10 million people in this country illegally. The feds ignore the problem, leaving small-town mayors like Cresitello to sort out the mess.

Remember that small towns like Hazleton, Farmer’s Branch, and Costa Mesa are only able to fight back because amnesty didn’t pass. If Bush had been able to legalize Jose Carranza et al, they would have been causing exactly the same problems, but any attempt to do anything about it would bring the full weight of the Federal Government’s Civil Rights machine on the town.

As for New Jersey, it’s still having problems with gangs left over from the previous great wave of immigration, although I hear they got a hell of a TV series out of it.

When hundreds of day workers line up by the post office in Morristown every morning, they and the employers who pick them up are violating federal laws that are ignored by Christie. Meanwhile, the people in the more prosperous suburbs get cheap labor, he says.

“The people in Mendham, one of whom happens to be Chris Christie, have them doing their landscaping,” [Mayor Cresitello]said.

I’m sure the U.S. attorney, who is a Republican, cuts his own lawn. But that “we’re doing the best we can” attitude is typical of the elites of both parties.

Perhaps the U.S. attorney does mow his own lawn–after all, the President cuts brush on his Crawford ranch. But I’d like know for sure, since in 2003, the President was found to have had an illegal working on the White House lawn raising tents.

Read the rest of Mulshine’s column here.

A math teacher in Oklahoma writes:

“At my professional development class for math teachers, I’m starting to hear the term “low confidence learners” as a euphemism for the d*mb kids.

“I think this is great! Having a euphemism for the single biggest reality that we teachers wrestle with everyday — some kids are smarter than others — means that at least the concept is officially thinkable. Before we had a euphemism, we had to pretend that everybody was equal in their math capabilities, which was hugely dysfunctional from a teaching standpoint in all sorts of ways, as you can easily imagine.

The philosophy behind the term “low confidence learner” is that all our students already understand everything about math, we just have to stop harshing their mellow by doubting this, and let them let all this math knowledge flow out of them on the test.

“The funny thing is that us math teachers all think we’re smarter than the other teachers. (Which we are.) Of course, the other teachers boast about it: “I’m not a “math person.” I never got into all that times table stuff,” they’re always saying with a smug look on their face.

“Well, excuse me … How would they look at me if I said, “I’m not an “alphabet person.” I never got into all that now-I-know-my-ABCs stuff.” Yeah, right … But they’re totally complacent about being innumerate.

“The principal was giving one of his talks to all the teachers and he told us that 90% of 50 was 40. He must have got a funny look from somebody (thank God for the union!) because he stopped and tried to work out exactly what 90% of 50 was. It took him about 30 seconds. It made my day! Of course he makes three times what I do.”

In a lot of school districts, the principals have their own union, which is kind of like baseball team managers having their own union so they can’t be fired, only worse.