Sorry, Ms. Longoria

…But you, and many others, have got us totally wrong. You said, “The immigration issue is interesting because historically everyone has immigrated, this is a country of immigrants. So it kind of shocks me that people have such a vile reaction to immigrants.” I shouldn’t be surprised, though, given your history of stupid remarks on immigration.

I’m pretty sure I speak for the vast majority of people when I say we have absolutely nothing at all against immigrants. I know I can safely say that because you forgot one word in your statement. One very important word: illegal. Sure, this is a country of immigrants. The promise of freedom and prosperity has brought droves of people here. But they’ve all followed the legal process. They come in through legal ports of entry, NOT sneaking across a remote section of border at night. They’ve studied and gone through the process of becoming a citizen, NOT hiding away in remote apartments, hoping to not get caught and sent back. They have legal jobs, and pay their taxes, NOT work “under the table,” leeching as much as they can out of us before they do go back. They are contributing members of our society, NOT rapists and murderers.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying that all illegal aliens are rapists and murderers. I’m sure there are many that are not criminals, and truly would be a benefit. I’m also not saying that all legal immigrants and citizens are not criminals. We have plenty of those as well. But a lot of illegal immigrants are criminals. And on top of taking our money and property, raping and killing our citizens, and not contributing to our society, they get fed and housed in our prisons for years before being deported. All at a cost to true hard-working, taxpaying citizens. But, if there were no illegal immigrants, there would be THOUSANDS fewer crimes every year, and MILLIONS less money spent on them.

Most of my family immigrated three generations before me. They all came through Ellis Island, mainly from Poland and Ireland. They became citizens, legally, and spiritually. Most of the men came first, and worked hard to build enough savings to bring the rest of their families in, legally. They were part of what helped build this country into something great. Now, that greatness is being torn apart, and a big part of the cause is illegal immigration. Illegals come here and see what they can get away with, and they tell all their friends and they all come, etc. Now, if they all wanted to become citizens, and worked legally toward that goal, great! I, and the majority of the rest of us, would love to have them.

The New Racism

Recently, during Obama’s healthcare speech, South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson interrupted by shouting, “You Lie!” Now, I expected there to be somewhat of an uproar over that. Let alone breaching protocol, it’s just plain rude. He has a valid point. But, interrupting and yelling is just not the way to do it. There were some comments along those lines of protocol and rudeness. But, what really surprised me was that people were actually calling him a racist. I should say shocked, not surprised. With the way people are nowadays, it doesn’t surprise me.

It all started with Maureen Dowd, a columnist for the New York Times. She wrote, “But Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president … convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.” That is just plain ridiculous. How can calling someone a liar have anything to do with his race? He felt what Obama said was a lie. Obama just happens to be a black man. If this were President Clinton giving the exact same speech, with the exact same outburst, would you still bring race into the issue, Ms. Dowd? Of course not. Well, I’ve got news for you: Criticizing a black man for reasons other than his skin color is not racist. But, criticizing that man, solely because his target was a black man, is racist.

Although, she’s not alone. Former President Carter said the same thing, and even went on to claim that an “overwhelming proportion” of the opposition to the new healthcare plan is based on the President’s race. Mr. Carter, please. Presidents, and ex-Presidents should just keep their noses out of issues they obviously  know nothing about. Which reminds me…

Another ridiculous race issue recently was the whole Henry Louis Gates arrest fiasco. Let’s have a quick recap… A woman makes a 911 call reporting two men that appear to be breaking into a house. The police respond. Officer Crowley arrived at the house with the door ajar. He found Mr. Gates inside. He asked for identification. Mr. Gates refused. He asked again. Gates refused again. Gates began yelling at the officer.  He continued being uncooperative and disorderly. He was arrested. Another officer arriving on the scene later corroborates this story.

Now, notice I didn’t mention anything about race. That’s because I didn’t need to. The story makes complete sense. A police officer arriving on the scene of a reported possible break-in, finds a person inside. This person is not cooperative, and is arrested. Nothing racist at all about that. Let’s try the replacement strategy again. Say it was Bill Gates instead. Two white guys. Is that story racist? Of course not. Again, just because the target is a black man, it does not make the arrest racist. Playing the race card in that situation is being racist.

When our esteemed President Obama was asked about this issue, he responded, “I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played … But I think it’s fair to say … that the Cambridge police acted stupidly” and “that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately.” Ok. Let’s see… you didn’t know all the facts. So how about maybe… you keep your mouth shut? No, you had to go on and run your mouth about stupid police and racism. Now let’s look at the facts that you did know. Gates is black, and was arrested by Crowley, who is white. Hmm… who is injecting race here? And even worse, how much time, effort, and money was blatantly wasted with this issue? Bringing both men to the White house for a “beer summit,” which was really just a very thinly veiled distraction from the real issues going on. Especially when this should not have even been national news, let alone having the President open his big mouth on issues he doesn’t know the facts about. Uh Oh… I just criticized the President. Am I a racist now? Ms. Dowd? Mr. Carter? Please, let me know. Mr. President, am I acting stupidly?

One more ridiculous incident I’d like to mention here is not so recent. It happened just over a year ago. A Dallas county official said that the central collections office was a “black hole,” because paperwork has been lost there a number of times. Obviously, he was referring to those celestial phenomenon where anything getting too close, including light itself, gets pulled in and “lost” forever. Since there is a complete absence of light, they appear black. Since they are round, they look like holes. Hence the name black holes, imagine that. Anyway, it’s called a metaphor. He is comparing the committee where paperwork goes in, and never comes out, to a black hole where light goes in but never comes out.

Nothing racist about that story, right? The problem is that this official happened to be white, and there happened to be a black man on the committee. He interrupted and responded that it is a “white hole.” So what is a white hole? Basically, it’s the reverse of a black hole. Where a black hole brings stuff in and never lets it out, a white hole constantly emits stuff. This committee loses paperwork, and so it compares to a white hole that constantly emits? Now that metaphor doesn’t make sense at all, so he obviously isn’t using it as a metaphor. So, again, who is the racist here? The man that commented about the facts and used a valid metaphor that makes sense? Or the man that responded with a comment that cannot be construed as a metaphor, and can only be based on race?

So if black holes are racist, what should we call them? How about “Areas of total absence of light.” That’s convenient. I have a black car, do I now have to call it a Fully-Pigmented car? When I describe my dog, which is white, brown, and black, do I now need to say those spots are Completely Saturated with Melanin? No, because that would be ridiculous. So why isn’t it considered ridiculous to call Mr. Wilson, Mr. Crowley, or the Dallas official racist?

Finally, don’t get me wrong. There is real racism in this world, and even this country. It is a real problem. True racism is wrong and should not be accepted at any level. But to waste our time and energy arguing about these non-issues, that have nothing at all to do with race, until some faux-anti-racist injects it, is just plain ridiculous.