Whoa
 

I was thinking something similar. Previous documents said "superiors" which implicates Cheney, but not Bush. This clearly is saying Bush was involved in the whole thing.

Maybe Fitzgerald's pissed off that this thing took so fucking long?

Whoa
 

He's definitely pissed off.

From NYT: "The president has the legal power to declassify information, and Mr. Libby indicated in his testimony that the president's decision — which he said was conveyed through Mr. Cheney — gave him legal cover to pass on information contained in a National Intelligence Estimate." But I note that Fitzgerald's filing states that even after Libby was told the document was declassified, official word was that it was still classified when people wanted to see it.

Whoa
 

This morning's WaPo says they didn't bother to tell National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley that it was declassified, leading him to waste time on moving to declassify it. Evidently the declassification itself was secret. Oh, the irony.

George Bush, leaking coward.
 

Larry Johnson is pissed.

"George Bush did not leak to protect America. He leaked to cover his ass. That, my friends, is the definition of a coward."

Whoa
 

Sure. It's just like double secret probation.

Whoa
 

I'm quite sure that's wrong. The President is always authorized to declassify information. That's not the same as saying he can do it without actually notifying anyone of the fact except for Cheney and Scooter, but he can do it.

Query
 

If the unemployment rate is at a 4 1/2 year low, why are we in such a rush to kick out members of the workforce?

I don't get it. If we had a huge, huge unemployment problem I'd understand the "they're taking american jobs" argument a little better. But the timing of the immigration bill is just weird given the current state of the economy.

Whoa
 

Oh, there wasn't a question about the President's power to declassify in that particular interview. The question was whether the Vice President could do it, and then they went into what the law was about declassification.

Query
 

I think it's pretty well established that immigration confers very substantial benefits to society at large, but that almost all of these benefits are enjoyed by the immigrants themselves, and that the pressure on wages hurts those who are otherwise least well off. (Krugman wrote this a few weeks ago, and I have not seen his facts challenged.)

Which is to say that I do not believe that the resistance to immigration is prompted by economic factors, since it's to the benefit of much of the GOP's constuency. It's more of a cultural hot-button issue.

Query
 

No one, that I've seen, is questioning legal immigration. To be intellectually honest, you can't conflate that with illegal immigration.

Query
 

But since the debate is about, in part, what immigration to make legal, you can't separate them either.

There are two aspects to the debate:

1) What immigration should be legal (i.e., whom do we let in, and in what circumstances/with what qualifications, etc.)

2) What we should do about illegal immigrants (i.e., how severe should the punishment be; what controls do we impose upon employers to help enforcement).

Krugman's point applies to question 1, as does RT's inquiry. We don't worry about intelligent, highly paid, white collar immigration despite the fact that it may displace some citizens from being employed. At the low end, blue-collar level, we do worry (apparently) about "taking american jobs". Why is that, and should we make that distinction?

And, once we've decided the first question, to what lengths do we want to go to enforce the rules?

Unfortunately, the debate on 2 seems heavily influenced by a disagreement on the resolution of question 1. So you can't really separate them either.

George Bush, authorized Executive.
 

Byron York in the Corner commenting on this non-story.

Query
 

I'm only separating them due to Ty's "culturual" comment. I think a large majority of Americans are comfortable with legal immigration, retardless of their home country. In other words, this is not a racism issue.

I think Krugman's point is that illegal immigration depresses low end wages, and that if we got rid of that as a labor source, wages in that bracket would have to rise, which could be good for low end workers (forget about any inflation arguments).

Query
 

I wish this were the case, but I think that you are wrong. (At least with people here in this red state, anyway.) Based upon a couple of conversations I've overheard in the last few days (one with lawyers in an elevator at the courthouse, one in a restaurant), I think that this snippet from http://www.wonkette.com/politics/imm...ell-165810.php is all too accurate:

• WASHINGTON, April 7 — Immigrants. They come in many shapes, sizes, and nationalities, but the only shape, size, and nationality you need to remember is “lazy, swarthy Mexican.” Maybe with a flag (the wrong flag). The House of Representatives (that’s the crazy one) doesn’t like them. The Senate (that’s the rich one) doesn’t either, but needs them to a) vote for George Allen or whoever in 2008 and b) bus their dishes. It’s quite a quandary.
  
  ********
  
  If you yourself are an immigrant, consider adopting an Irish accent. Everyone will find you too rakish and charming to deport, unless you accidentally travel back in time to the 19th Century.

We don't hear about the Irish or Eastern Europeans living here illegally -- we hear about Mexican construction workers and the fact that there's a bunch of bodegas in my mom's old neighborhood.

Query
 

I don't think any of what you say in the first paragraph is correct (well, maybe teh first sentence). Americans are comfortable with legal immigration only because it allows only certain favored nations' immigrants and educated people who can fill good jobs, and few of them. It has never been true, however, that americans favored legal immigration as a general matter. First it was italians and irish, then other europeans, and then other countries. If you wanted to say what they favor, it's wealthy, educated immigrants than aren't disfavored, not legal immigrants (I suspect many americans would vote, if put to them, to bar all mexican, central american, etc. immigration, and probably se asian too). I won't go so far as to say this is direct racism, althoug it may well be, but i'm pretty sure joe six pack, and maybe even jacques chablis, talks about "immigrants" in a condescending manner without regard to whether they have a green card or not.

As for Krugman's argument, I'm not sure it's right. He assumes that immigrants are competing for the same low-end jobs that americans are. From what I've seen, most of the jobs taken by illegal immigrants are ones that would not be filled by americans, which is precisely why there's demand for illegals to fill them. This could be because the job is nasty, or because it wouldnt' be a job at minimum wage, or some other reason. But I don't think that illegal immigrants are exactly displacing american labor at mcdonalds.

A Bone for Club, Slave, and Hank . . .
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o762HKxYMeA

[catchy tune and work safe}

Some other folks might enjoy the comments posted below the video clip itself. I liked both.

S_A_M

Query
 

There are also substantial benefits to those comsumers who (a) like low prices for goods and services, but (b) have the education and training not to be competing for those low-wage jobs.

S_A_M

Query
 

Stop. The "illegal" Irish - all 2000 of them - are single, males that work non-union construction for 4 years, send their money all back home, then leave.

You really want to deport 2/3s of the girls at Scores and the Crazy Horse?

Query
 

McDonalds pays $8 to $10 an hour. Americans take those jobs.

The argument is that where an unskilled American would possibly take $8-10 to clean grease traps, an illegal Mexican will take $3, thus depressing wages.

Query
 

Damn Americans always looking to undermine the free market. If someone's willing to do it for $3, I say let them do it.

Luckily, these wetbacks have a better understanding of American values.

Query
 

That assumes anyone with grease traps would pay 8-10 for someone to clean them.

although I concede the wage might end up somewhere in between, with less grease trap cleaning.

Thank an immigrant
 

My guess is that businesses owned by immigrants provide more jobs than there are immigrants. Small business provide for sixty to seventy percent of the jobs in this country and almost every small bodega, dry cleaner etc in the large cities on the coasts is owned and operated by immigrants.

A large portion of the growth in the Silcon Valley is fueled by immigrants.

We all benefit immensley from the economic growth provided by immigrants in this country and to suggest otherwise is pure stupidity.

Who you calling queer (NTTAWWT)?
 

I got no beef with them Micks. I'm just sayin', we don't hear anyone talk about talk about the illegals who look like the dude on the Lucky Charms box.

So long as it doesn't affect Natalie. She really understands me. And she's very appreciative of the fact that, thanks to me, her niece in Minsk will be able to have that surgery.

Who you calling queer (NTTAWWT)?
 

Weed bitches about them all the time.

Except it's in Gaelic, and no one has a friggin clue what he's talking about - even them.

thread titles
 

you know for years I k-raced to get the chance to name one, and i never got close. then I was just posting with no idea of the post count and I hit it, w/o trying! You wanna know how to win? Trust the force.

Query
 

1. Interesting Freudian slip when describing "the majority of Americans." I couldn't agree with your subconscious any more.

2. Krugman is an idiot. Getting rid of those workers would only force the jobs they do overseas. Those low end jobs that can't be outsourced will continue to be done by legal immigrants who already do them.

Protectionism doesn't work. Market forces work around it every time.

ETA: Isn't it a little offensive to argue for keeping hard working people out of our country? Aren't these Mexican people the same as the folks who came in through Ellis Island? Give them a chance. We need some ambitious people here. get them working and get them paying taxes and contributing. Throw the lazy ones back over the border.

Query
 

You might enjoy a class in basic economics. If illegal immigrants weren't around to take these jobs at the present wages offered, wages would go up to the point at which Americans laborers were willing to fill the jobs.

Query
 

You're right - I'm going to outsource all the office cleaning to India right away.

And I'm sending the grease-traps to China.

Query
 

Krugman suggested that, empirically, the benefits are not all that substantial. Not non-existent, but not nearly as considerable as the benefits to immigrants themselves.

Query
 

When you figure out a way to send landscaping work to India, you just let me know.

eta: stp

Query
 

Or the jobs wouldn't get done, and you'd clean your own damn office, you slob.

Query
 

Those jobs are already done by legal immigrants. The cleaning people in my last four jobs look like a cross section of people from a UN assembly. Joe Six Pack American Complainer isn't going to get - and frankly, doesn't want to perform - a cleaning services gig for $8/hr.

Cut through all the bullshit and get to the meat of the argument here. A whole lot of American workers who don't have skills want to get paid a lot and can't compete with foreigners, so they want laws enacted sticking it to businessmen and hard working immigrants. Thats what this dispute is - people who can't survive are trying to work a wealth redistribution scheme against business and people from other countries who desperately want to come here and make a better life for themselves.

Call me nuts, but I say give the ambitious foreigner a chance, and don't fuck business because workers didn't see the writing on the wall years ago. That you didn't take the time to enlighten yourself to the fact that your job was not secure in an emerging world economy is not an immigrant's or your boss' fault. If you think its unfair that your CEO downsized you and paid himself handosmely, go hire yourself a Lerach and sue him.

Query
 

Let me say first that I don't remotely like the proposal to try and deport 12 million people.

But I don't buy this "taking jobs that americans don't want anyway" argument. If we stopped lettuce farmers in the Imperial Valley from hiring illegals to pick their lettuce crop, they will either have to increase wages (and, thus, prices) enough to attract legal residents to pick the lettuce, or they will have to let the crop rot. I suspect that most would choose the former. Nor do I think McDonald's franchises will shut down if they can't hire illegals. They may have to pay more, but tough shit.

Again, I see lots of reasons to hate at least the harsher proposal that's been floated recently, and possibly the other proposal (proposals??? I can't even keep track lately). But those reasons, in my view, have to do with cost and humaneness, not with making sure low-end jobs are filled.

Query
 

See my response to Greedy.

Query
 

I'll take that class if you agree to eliminate minimum wage laws that cause employers to be unable to pay the value offered by the employee.

Put differently, you're assuming that the jobs filled by many illegal immigrants would, absent that labor pool, be economically viable jobs from an employer perspective at the current minimum wage or market-clearing wage (if higher). I think neither is the case.

Query
 

More likely it would simply get cleaned somewhat less often, and that certainly would not be enough to incent me to clean it myself.

Query
 

I saw it, and I think you are deluded. If I were poor, I would ask why you are so intent on letting foreigners into this country to drive my wages down.

Query
 

A good place to start fixing wage issues is to also stop the "lock-step" tradition present in many businesses. People should be paid individually, based on what they negotiate and bring to the table. There should not be cost of living increases or guarantees of certain wages at certain rungs on the ladder.

Think of how much law firms could save.

Query
 

The empirical evidence that I've seen suggests that the sorts of effects predicted by classical economics -- and you're going to have to take that class to find out what they are -- are not actually borne out. If they were, I would be more inclined to support repeal of minimum wage laws.

Surely demand for such labor falls as the price rises. But it doesn't fall off a cliff.

Query
 

But I like my cheap strawberries.