And what’s the reason “guest” workers are needed in worst economy since Great Depression?
The Periódico de la República de Arizona (Arizona Republic) must offer bonuses to reporters and others who can come up with the most novel reason why Arizona’s much emulated SB 1070 stinks. If the pro-amnesty jefes at the newspaper have bonded with an issue, be prepared for a frequent frontal assault. They have offered countless contrivances, skewed facts and figures along with vacuous arguments to make their case against the law they invariably describe as “controversial.”
Similar laws have already been passed by Alabama (HB 56), Georgia (HB 87), Indiana (SB 590), South Carolina, Indiana and Utah (HB 497) — all using Arizona’s law as a model. Eight other states Florida, Kentucky (SB 6) (SB 118), Missouri (SB 590) (HB 1549) Mississippi (HB 488) (HB 56), North Carolina, Tennessee (HB 2191), Oklahoma (HB 1804) and Virginia (HB 1060) are seriously considering enacting such laws, along with sixteen other states.
The latest approach attempts to be clever. The assertion is regardless of what the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the matter next month, it “won’t fix the immigration problem.” In fact that’s the title of Todd Landfried’s My Turn column, given prominence on the reliably liberal editorial page. And who is this fellow who is so leery of any decision other than one that includes open borders or a provision for “guest workers,” as he craftily calls them? Not much of a surprise to find that Landfried is the executive director of the Arizona Employers for Immigration Reform. Their sole purpose is keeping a steady stream of low wage workers that enable the illegal labor profiteers to undercut salaries paid to American citizens. Landfried calls those who favor respect for our laws “blind supporters.” Further he declares, “The Supreme Court decision won’t matter because it doesn’t solve the problem, it doesn’t change the impacts, it doesn’t change the history and it doesn’t provide the answer.” And if that spew doesn’t persuade, he claims to worry that our law “paints us as an unfriendly and inhospitable place.” This is who he really is. Landfried’s group has filed an Amicus Curiae brief in the SCOTUS opposing SB1070.
Notice the word “illegal” is curiously missing before each use of the term “immigration.”
Back in 2007 we linked to this produce industry post citing the remarkable progress made in the mechanical harvesting of billion-dollar-plus crops. Unlike human harvesters, daylight is not required for the harvesting system to operate, making 18-hour days routine. Hand crews often pick for only six hours a day, after waiting for overnight moisture to evaporate, harvesting rapidly to avoid the approaching darkness of short winter days. New techniques rely on the latest photoelectric imagery and computer science to map an orchard ready for harvest. Then, sophisticated hydraulic robotics take over, read maps and pluck the fruit from the trees.
Washington State’s apple industry, as well as pears, peaches, plums and nectarines and even some delicate wine grapes now employ the system. The industry is getting the job done the old-fashioned way through progress, production and profit. Since we no longer need field labor, what jobs would Landfried have these ‘guests” take?
Our popular glossary, “Lingo” will give a needed assist in navigating the daily’s convoluted articles and reading in Republicese.
Thanks to commenter Clark for providing this clearly indisputable information about the Arizona Republic’s choice of columnist Todd Landfried, whose pro-amnesty views are aligned with those of the newspaper’s editorial board. This telling press release regarding the recall election of Sen. Russell Pearce was written by Landfried: Read it HERE.