How Ironical
December 15, 2006 10:03 AM Subscribe
Well if they'd done their job right they couldn't have done that.
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 10:09 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by weapons-grade pandemonium at 10:09 AM on December 15, 2006
All they needed to have done is move the fence a little when the cops come by.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:11 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:11 AM on December 15, 2006
In other news, I just herniated myself laughing.
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:13 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by Astro Zombie at 10:13 AM on December 15, 2006
Doesn't it all depend upon which side of the fence they were working?
posted by found missing at 10:15 AM on December 15, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by found missing at 10:15 AM on December 15, 2006 [1 favorite]
I knew this was going to happen! I was absolutely certain! How did I know this was going to happen?
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:18 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by Faint of Butt at 10:18 AM on December 15, 2006
How did I know this was going to happen?
Because businesses will hire the cheapest workers they can, and just try to stop them.
posted by sonofsamiam at 10:26 AM on December 15, 2006
Because businesses will hire the cheapest workers they can, and just try to stop them.
posted by sonofsamiam at 10:26 AM on December 15, 2006
So, how do y'all like my surprised face?
posted by pax digita at 10:36 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by pax digita at 10:36 AM on December 15, 2006
So awesome. Don't they realize these illegals will just put secret doors in the fence with the words "enter here for unbridled prosperity" written in that crazy moon-man language they speak South of the border?
posted by jonson at 10:42 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by jonson at 10:42 AM on December 15, 2006
When did reality become the punchline to an Onion article, or has it always been this way?
posted by loquacious at 10:42 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by loquacious at 10:42 AM on December 15, 2006
or has it always been this way?
Somewhat, but recently the Onion has lost comedy-news market share to the real news.
posted by IronLizard at 10:43 AM on December 15, 2006
Somewhat, but recently the Onion has lost comedy-news market share to the real news.
posted by IronLizard at 10:43 AM on December 15, 2006
Spot on irony! Being in the UK i only hear about this border fence issue here on the blue. This is sublime.
posted by algreer at 10:52 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by algreer at 10:52 AM on December 15, 2006
I got 800 miles of broken border
Right outside my door
There's minutemen in little pickup trucks
Who declared their own dang war
Now the government wants to build a barrier like ol' berlin, 8 feet tall
But if Uncle Sam sends the illegals home
Who's gonna build the wall
Who's gonna build your wall, boys
Who's gonna mow your lawn
Who's gonna cook your Mexican food
When your Mexican maid is gone
Who's gonna wax your floors tonight
Down at the local mall
Who's gonna wash your baby's face
Who's gonna build your wall?
- Tom Russell
posted by patricio at 10:59 AM on December 15, 2006 [2 favorites]
Right outside my door
There's minutemen in little pickup trucks
Who declared their own dang war
Now the government wants to build a barrier like ol' berlin, 8 feet tall
But if Uncle Sam sends the illegals home
Who's gonna build the wall
Who's gonna build your wall, boys
Who's gonna mow your lawn
Who's gonna cook your Mexican food
When your Mexican maid is gone
Who's gonna wax your floors tonight
Down at the local mall
Who's gonna wash your baby's face
Who's gonna build your wall?
- Tom Russell
posted by patricio at 10:59 AM on December 15, 2006 [2 favorites]
Here I need to quote the great interrobang, from a different thread.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
posted by quin at 11:20 AM on December 15, 2006
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
posted by quin at 11:20 AM on December 15, 2006
This is fantastically funny!
George W. Bush, Tear Down This Wall!!
posted by nofundy at 11:24 AM on December 15, 2006
George W. Bush, Tear Down This Wall!!
posted by nofundy at 11:24 AM on December 15, 2006
Now we just need to find out that the INS has been hiring Illegals as immigration agents, or that the Minutemen have outsourced their border patrols to Mexican daylaborers and the circle will be complete.
posted by drezdn at 11:31 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by drezdn at 11:31 AM on December 15, 2006
patricio: Who's gonna mow your lawn
Who's gonna cook your Mexican food
When your Mexican maid is gone [...]
Who's gonna build your wall?
I'll bite. How about someone who isn't effectively a second-class citizen, without legal rights or recourse? How about someone who actually gets paid a fair market wage?
But I'm sure the agricultural monopolies are crying over the abolishment of slavery, too.
posted by kid ichorous at 11:33 AM on December 15, 2006
Who's gonna cook your Mexican food
When your Mexican maid is gone [...]
Who's gonna build your wall?
I'll bite. How about someone who isn't effectively a second-class citizen, without legal rights or recourse? How about someone who actually gets paid a fair market wage?
But I'm sure the agricultural monopolies are crying over the abolishment of slavery, too.
posted by kid ichorous at 11:33 AM on December 15, 2006
El hombre blanco dice: Tengo "outsourced" mi calcetine-marioneta a un extranjero ilegal para hacer este comentario.
posted by mattbucher at 11:34 AM on December 15, 2006 [1 favorite]
posted by mattbucher at 11:34 AM on December 15, 2006 [1 favorite]
Bwahahaha! Oh, wow.
posted by kosher_jenny at 11:44 AM on December 15, 2006
posted by kosher_jenny at 11:44 AM on December 15, 2006
I'll bite. How about someone who isn't effectively a second-class citizen, without legal rights or recourse? How about someone who actually gets paid a fair market wage?
Well, that's kind of the point of the song, which I think you missed. It's not "hey, wait, don't do this or you won't have cheap labor", it's "hey, wait, you're a gosh-darned hypocrite".
Just sayin'.
posted by davejay at 11:46 AM on December 15, 2006
Well, that's kind of the point of the song, which I think you missed. It's not "hey, wait, don't do this or you won't have cheap labor", it's "hey, wait, you're a gosh-darned hypocrite".
Just sayin'.
posted by davejay at 11:46 AM on December 15, 2006
Davejay, thanks - I thought the point was more along the lines of the "illegal labor does the dirty work YOU don't want to do" argument. Because, you know, that argument works for slavery too.
Plenty of people will pick crops provided a fair market wage and the umbrella fair of labor laws.
posted by kid ichorous at 11:59 AM on December 15, 2006
Plenty of people will pick crops provided a fair market wage and the umbrella fair of labor laws.
posted by kid ichorous at 11:59 AM on December 15, 2006
Umbrella fairs are all good fun until someone gets poked in the eye.
posted by found missing at 12:04 PM on December 15, 2006
posted by found missing at 12:04 PM on December 15, 2006
Plenty of people will pick crops provided a fair market wage and the umbrella fair of labor laws.
Which would only work if the USA would give up on the idea that we really have any ability (or right) to keep folks from Mexico et al. from coming here. Or at the very least, realize that "amnesty" coupled with vastly bigger immigrant quotas and real penalties for those that hire "illegals" (which is the actual lure for coming here).
This is an entire fucking country of "illegal immigrants." The idea of keeping people out, who just want to come here and work and provide for their family (just like every other American immigrant), is just plain stupid. By any definition, any US citizen is descended from illegal immigrants, unless you happen to be an Amerindian.
But I'm way out on the radical fringe: I don't buy into the idea that a country has a "right" to only allow so much immigration.
Our economy is predicated on growth. We're only barely growing by having babies (and that's only going to get worse). We should be thanking Mexicans for coming here, not arresting them. Our economy depends on them. It's long past time to stop the "wink wink" that goes on between Washington and the businesses (big and small) that hire "illegal" workers, so they can be treated like shit.
It's also long past time to stop all the racist xenophobia about Spanish-speaking immigrants, and the nonsense talk about how they "harm" our economy.
posted by teece at 12:13 PM on December 15, 2006
Which would only work if the USA would give up on the idea that we really have any ability (or right) to keep folks from Mexico et al. from coming here. Or at the very least, realize that "amnesty" coupled with vastly bigger immigrant quotas and real penalties for those that hire "illegals" (which is the actual lure for coming here).
This is an entire fucking country of "illegal immigrants." The idea of keeping people out, who just want to come here and work and provide for their family (just like every other American immigrant), is just plain stupid. By any definition, any US citizen is descended from illegal immigrants, unless you happen to be an Amerindian.
But I'm way out on the radical fringe: I don't buy into the idea that a country has a "right" to only allow so much immigration.
Our economy is predicated on growth. We're only barely growing by having babies (and that's only going to get worse). We should be thanking Mexicans for coming here, not arresting them. Our economy depends on them. It's long past time to stop the "wink wink" that goes on between Washington and the businesses (big and small) that hire "illegal" workers, so they can be treated like shit.
It's also long past time to stop all the racist xenophobia about Spanish-speaking immigrants, and the nonsense talk about how they "harm" our economy.
posted by teece at 12:13 PM on December 15, 2006
From the article:
Golden State Fence's attorney, Richard Hirsch, admits his client broke the law. But he says the case proves that construction companies need a guest-worker program.
Help me parse this sentence. Is the guy actually saying that construction needs to be done by immigrants? And if that's the case, why?
Are construction companies not paying enough to attract American workers?
posted by quin at 1:03 PM on December 15, 2006
Golden State Fence's attorney, Richard Hirsch, admits his client broke the law. But he says the case proves that construction companies need a guest-worker program.
Help me parse this sentence. Is the guy actually saying that construction needs to be done by immigrants? And if that's the case, why?
Are construction companies not paying enough to attract American workers?
posted by quin at 1:03 PM on December 15, 2006
Are construction companies not paying enough to attract American workers?
Oh they pay cash well enough, it's the benefits and taxes they're unwilling to shell out for.
posted by IronLizard at 1:09 PM on December 15, 2006
Oh they pay cash well enough, it's the benefits and taxes they're unwilling to shell out for.
posted by IronLizard at 1:09 PM on December 15, 2006
Obscure reference filter: This post reminds of the look on Cheech's face when Chong played his song "Beaners".
posted by snsranch at 2:06 PM on December 15, 2006
posted by snsranch at 2:06 PM on December 15, 2006
teece: But I'm way out on the radical fringe: I don't buy into the idea that a country has a "right" to only allow so much immigration.
If we throw open the doors and let anyone who wants to come here do so, there would be a ridiculous flood of people in that would last as long as there was wealth disparity in the world. This country would be an overpopulated mega-slum in no time flat.
In the past, the difficulty of travelling here kept the immigration to reasonable levels, but that's not longer true.
Our economy is predicated on growth. We're only barely growing by having babies (and that's only going to get worse). We should be thanking Mexicans for coming here, not arresting them. Our economy depends on them.
I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that an economy based on growth has to change to one based on stability at some point, or you end up with hideous levels of overpopulation and pollution, and eventually a population crash.
posted by Mitrovarr at 2:19 PM on December 15, 2006
If we throw open the doors and let anyone who wants to come here do so, there would be a ridiculous flood of people in that would last as long as there was wealth disparity in the world. This country would be an overpopulated mega-slum in no time flat.
In the past, the difficulty of travelling here kept the immigration to reasonable levels, but that's not longer true.
Our economy is predicated on growth. We're only barely growing by having babies (and that's only going to get worse). We should be thanking Mexicans for coming here, not arresting them. Our economy depends on them.
I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that an economy based on growth has to change to one based on stability at some point, or you end up with hideous levels of overpopulation and pollution, and eventually a population crash.
posted by Mitrovarr at 2:19 PM on December 15, 2006
There's a contradiction in your two statements Mitrovarr.
Do you care about America, or the world at large? If it's America only (damn the rest of 'em), you can say we must cap immigration. But if you care about the entire world (as your second statements implies), then you must do the opposite.
America is the biggest polluter and consumer of natural resources, despite a relatively modest population density. If opening the flood gates destroyed the American economy (your claim, not mine), then you've already figured out the change we need to make to our economy. Let everybody in, our economy will collapse, and will quite being so gluttonous with resources and lax about pollution.
In all reality, I think you're quite wrong about open immigration causing " a ridiculous flood of people in that would last as long as there was wealth disparity in the world."
But in any event, what's helpful for America may still be immoral. Building a fence around a chunk of land we ended up in completely by accident, and not letting others come to live and work here if they so choose, is immoral, even if it is better for our economy (which it isn't).
posted by teece at 3:46 PM on December 15, 2006
Do you care about America, or the world at large? If it's America only (damn the rest of 'em), you can say we must cap immigration. But if you care about the entire world (as your second statements implies), then you must do the opposite.
America is the biggest polluter and consumer of natural resources, despite a relatively modest population density. If opening the flood gates destroyed the American economy (your claim, not mine), then you've already figured out the change we need to make to our economy. Let everybody in, our economy will collapse, and will quite being so gluttonous with resources and lax about pollution.
In all reality, I think you're quite wrong about open immigration causing " a ridiculous flood of people in that would last as long as there was wealth disparity in the world."
But in any event, what's helpful for America may still be immoral. Building a fence around a chunk of land we ended up in completely by accident, and not letting others come to live and work here if they so choose, is immoral, even if it is better for our economy (which it isn't).
posted by teece at 3:46 PM on December 15, 2006
teece: Do you care about America, or the world at large? If it's America only (damn the rest of 'em), you can say we must cap immigration. But if you care about the entire world (as your second statements implies), then you must do the opposite.
I care about both. However, us throwing open the doors will not help the rest of the world. With their population density temporarily relieved, but without the root causes of their overpopulation solved, they'll breed themselves right back into the same situation again. The only change will be that we'll be afflicted with their problem as well.
Letting everyone in would not exactly collapse the economy. It would ruin the environment, and would damage life for everyone here, but the wealthy would still be able to live their consumptive lifestyles. In fact, the availability of ridiculously cheap manpower would probably make it worse.
With regard to it being immoral, I really don't see why. It's not our responsibility to accept the surplus population some other nation creates because of their irresponsible population growth policies. When I get to vote on whether some country institutes population control policies is the very day I think it will be necessary for us to deal with their fallout.
posted by Mitrovarr at 4:23 PM on December 15, 2006
I care about both. However, us throwing open the doors will not help the rest of the world. With their population density temporarily relieved, but without the root causes of their overpopulation solved, they'll breed themselves right back into the same situation again. The only change will be that we'll be afflicted with their problem as well.
Letting everyone in would not exactly collapse the economy. It would ruin the environment, and would damage life for everyone here, but the wealthy would still be able to live their consumptive lifestyles. In fact, the availability of ridiculously cheap manpower would probably make it worse.
With regard to it being immoral, I really don't see why. It's not our responsibility to accept the surplus population some other nation creates because of their irresponsible population growth policies. When I get to vote on whether some country institutes population control policies is the very day I think it will be necessary for us to deal with their fallout.
posted by Mitrovarr at 4:23 PM on December 15, 2006
See, I think we have a responsibility to the rest of the world to allow as many immigrants in as we can take. We aren't anywhere near that, hence the massive illegal immigration. Perhaps if those considering illegal immigration had a small bit of hope that they might actually get here legally someday, they might wait until their number is called, so to speak.
As it is, we allow so ridiculously few immigrants from most countries, especially poor ones, it can easily seem as if their only chance to live in this country is to jump the border or overstay a visa and work illegally.
I don't personally have a problem, in principle, with immigration quotas, but I do have a problem with artificially low quotas that have no sound basis in our ability to accept new immigrants without destroying ourselves in the process.
Basically, I like my country and I don't want it to become some third world shithole due to massive overpopulation, but I also would like to allow as many people in as we can take without reaching that point. With less than a massive flood, we give immigrants time to get established before the next million come in, and there's nothing wrong with that. It takes time to develop the resources to employ and support the immigrants.
posted by wierdo at 4:48 PM on December 15, 2006
As it is, we allow so ridiculously few immigrants from most countries, especially poor ones, it can easily seem as if their only chance to live in this country is to jump the border or overstay a visa and work illegally.
I don't personally have a problem, in principle, with immigration quotas, but I do have a problem with artificially low quotas that have no sound basis in our ability to accept new immigrants without destroying ourselves in the process.
Basically, I like my country and I don't want it to become some third world shithole due to massive overpopulation, but I also would like to allow as many people in as we can take without reaching that point. With less than a massive flood, we give immigrants time to get established before the next million come in, and there's nothing wrong with that. It takes time to develop the resources to employ and support the immigrants.
posted by wierdo at 4:48 PM on December 15, 2006
wierdo: See, I think we have a responsibility to the rest of the world to allow as many immigrants in as we can take.
I think the rest of the world has a responsibility to not breed themselves into such a humanitarian disaster that they have to dump surplus population on other countries.
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:09 PM on December 15, 2006
I think the rest of the world has a responsibility to not breed themselves into such a humanitarian disaster that they have to dump surplus population on other countries.
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:09 PM on December 15, 2006
Throw open the floodgates, I say! Let's worry not about ourselves and let the huddles masses in en masse! (This thing in the statue, by the way, is a bit of snarky insult from the french.) We can deal with it, we're Team America after all. By God, we'll have so much cheap labor so quickly that the world market will crash right along with our falling dollar. But no matter that would cause a collapse of the planets global economy, done so quickly. We're America, after all. A silly thing like that wouldn't mean anything at all. When our already slummy inner cities become completely lawless hellholes filled with starving masses that destroyed our already overburdened social services and caused a huge glut of excess unskilled labor, why, we'll just point at the statue of liberty! We're America! We can take the rest of the world's mistakes on our shoulders and barely complain as we sag under the weight of billions. Hell, when wages are depressed enough all the manufacturing that left will flock right back here for the cheapest slave labor anywhere!
So I'm exagerating, you get the idea.
posted by IronLizard at 5:21 PM on December 15, 2006
So I'm exagerating, you get the idea.
posted by IronLizard at 5:21 PM on December 15, 2006
See, I think we have a responsibility to the rest of the world to allow as many immigrants in as we can take.
Go visit a third world country or two for a while. We'll talk when you get back.
posted by IronLizard at 5:23 PM on December 15, 2006
Go visit a third world country or two for a while. We'll talk when you get back.
posted by IronLizard at 5:23 PM on December 15, 2006
i hope you all appreciate the irony of this as much as i do.
I would, had you not just broken my irony meter. Thanks, analogue.
posted by oaf at 5:27 PM on December 15, 2006
I would, had you not just broken my irony meter. Thanks, analogue.
posted by oaf at 5:27 PM on December 15, 2006
Ha! I've been saying all along that if they tried to build a wall along the South Texas border, they'd have to hire Mexicans to do it. There ain't no one else down there.
posted by Clay201 at 6:45 PM on December 15, 2006
posted by Clay201 at 6:45 PM on December 15, 2006
IronLizard, wake up and learn to read. Obviously we can't let every Tom, Pedro, and Achmed in all at once. But really, do you think letting another hundred thousand a year in will make a whit of difference?
Your strawmen are on fire.
posted by wierdo at 9:55 PM on December 15, 2006
Your strawmen are on fire.
posted by wierdo at 9:55 PM on December 15, 2006
I know how to read. You obviously can't even read your own writing. Where would you draw the line, exactly? Do you have any idea how many immigrants, legal and illegal, pour though our borders daily? I think not.
posted by IronLizard at 11:10 PM on December 15, 2006
posted by IronLizard at 11:10 PM on December 15, 2006
I suppose you also missed this part:
So I'm exagerating, you get the idea.
posted by IronLizard at 11:12 PM on December 15, 2006
So I'm exagerating, you get the idea.
posted by IronLizard at 11:12 PM on December 15, 2006
And just who the hell made it our responsibility? I say this as a second generation immigrant, myself. The United States already puts forth more foreign aid than any country on earth and this is without including the voluntary charities the citizens contribute to. Perhaps if the nations that received it co-operated a bit more than their politicians grafted from it, everyone would be a bit better off. We can't fix everyone's problems, we can hardly fix our own. I'm just glad some are still trying.
posted by IronLizard at 11:17 PM on December 15, 2006
posted by IronLizard at 11:17 PM on December 15, 2006
wierdo: "See, I think we have a responsibility to the rest of the world to allow as many immigrants in as we can take."
teece: "Which would only work if the USA would give up on the idea that we really have any ability (or right) to keep folks from Mexico et al. from coming here."
I'll play devil's advocate here. This is a bit like saying that Google and IBM don't have the right to hire whom they want - that they have an obligation to give jobs out to the unemployed, regardless of completely mismatched skill sets.
In some ways, nations do handle immigration much like companies handle hiring. They want an influx of talent, education, and skills that match up with their economic goals. Overall, they do NOT want a massive influx of uneducated agricultural and manual laborers, despite the fact that certain sectors of the market are just clamoring for the deflated wages. The US, just like every other first-world country, still craves nuclear scientists, PhDs, and the like. They already have quite a supply of unskilled labor. It's just that farmer John doesn't want to pay for their living wage and their health care.
Do you think any other country would roll out the red carpet for droves of gradeschool-educated American farm workers? How about if they were our top biochemists and nuclear physicists instead?
posted by kid ichorous at 11:41 PM on December 15, 2006
teece: "Which would only work if the USA would give up on the idea that we really have any ability (or right) to keep folks from Mexico et al. from coming here."
I'll play devil's advocate here. This is a bit like saying that Google and IBM don't have the right to hire whom they want - that they have an obligation to give jobs out to the unemployed, regardless of completely mismatched skill sets.
In some ways, nations do handle immigration much like companies handle hiring. They want an influx of talent, education, and skills that match up with their economic goals. Overall, they do NOT want a massive influx of uneducated agricultural and manual laborers, despite the fact that certain sectors of the market are just clamoring for the deflated wages. The US, just like every other first-world country, still craves nuclear scientists, PhDs, and the like. They already have quite a supply of unskilled labor. It's just that farmer John doesn't want to pay for their living wage and their health care.
Do you think any other country would roll out the red carpet for droves of gradeschool-educated American farm workers? How about if they were our top biochemists and nuclear physicists instead?
posted by kid ichorous at 11:41 PM on December 15, 2006
True, immigartion policy is pretty classist. But the hoops they make people jump through is kind of crazy. I've known people who sponsored famiyl and have to give up a lot of their salary adn bank account info just to have a college student come study. Seriously INS knew more about their income and spending habits than IRS!
The system assumes that everyone who comes will go on welfare and cause trouble. It's very humbling to see this slow, slow process in action.
posted by Freecola at 9:08 AM on December 16, 2006
The system assumes that everyone who comes will go on welfare and cause trouble. It's very humbling to see this slow, slow process in action.
posted by Freecola at 9:08 AM on December 16, 2006
True, immigartion policy is pretty classist. But the hoops they make people jump through is kind of crazy. I've known people who sponsored famiyl and have to give up a lot of their salary adn bank account info just to have a college student come study. Seriously INS knew more about their income and spending habits than IRS!
The system assumes that everyone who comes will go on welfare and cause trouble. It's very humbling to see this slow, slow process in action.
posted by Freecola at 9:11 AM on December 16, 2006
The system assumes that everyone who comes will go on welfare and cause trouble. It's very humbling to see this slow, slow process in action.
posted by Freecola at 9:11 AM on December 16, 2006
Jon Stewart called this over a year ago.
(but I can't find it)
posted by LordSludge at 6:33 PM on December 16, 2006
(but I can't find it)
posted by LordSludge at 6:33 PM on December 16, 2006
« Older audiomap | A weekend that will have them second-guessing Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by analogue at 10:09 AM on December 15, 2006