The United States of Mexico

[papaeiche]

In "Rising Costs of Tolerating Illegal Aliens," (Feb. 2003), the Eagle Forum's Phyllis Schlafly tells of Mexicans who have learned that they can obtain free medical treatment across the border in American hospitals, in Arizona, New Mexico, California and Texas. The costs of this care are paid by the taxpayers of those states, while Americans without health insurance struggle to meet their medical bills.

Something called the "Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act," which mandates that U.S. hospitals with emergency services must treat anyone who shows up--including illegal aliens--was passed by Congress in 1986.

Schlafly writes:


We are not just talking about Mexicans who may have had an accident close to the border. We are talking about Mexicans with serious health problems who are deliberately sent to the United States after Mexican hospitals discover they can't pay for services and have no insurance. A study made by the U.S.-Mexico Border Counties Coalition, an American lobbying group, found that U.S. hospitals in border states provide at least $200 million a year in uncompensated emergency care to illegal aliens. In the four border states, 77 hospitals now face a medical emergency. Uncompensated care to illegal aliens in Arizona cost the Cochise County Health Department 30% of its annual budget, the Copper Queen Hospital in Bisbee $200,000 out of a net operating income of $300,000, the University Medical Center in Tucson $10 million, and the Good Samaritan Regional Medical Center in Tucson $1 million in only the first quarter of last year. The Southeast Arizona Medical Center in Douglas is on the verge of bankruptcy. Some emergency rooms and pre-natal units have closed because they can't afford to stay open.

Arizona hospitals have offered donated medical equipment and ambulances to Mexican medical facilities, but Mexican customs officials have not permitted much of it to enter Mexico. They apparently prefer to send their sick to U.S. hospitals rather than care for them in Mexico. Other costs of dumping Mexicans on U.S. hospitals include transporting the seriously ill by helicopter from small border hospitals to Tucson or Phoenix. This cost ranges from $7,000 to $20,000 a trip. During the last three years, Houston's Harris County Hospital District spent $330 million to treat and immunize illegal aliens, an amount estimated to be at least 20% of the indigent caseload.

In California, where the state budget crunch is forcing reductions in Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program, observers warn of an approaching catastrophe in the health-care system. Almost one in five Californians lacks health insurance, yet the law requires hospitals to continue to serve illegal aliens free.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In "Mexico's Northern Strategy," New York attorney Howard Sutherland describes President Vicente Fox's five-year plan to further "Mexicanize" the United States. In effect, the sheer weight of bodies will colonize the American territory. Sutherland cites a policy paper published by Fox's administration:


The Fox plan goes on to posit immigration to the United States as a human right: the issue of "migration, especially in the United States, needs a new focus over the long term to permit the movement and residence of Mexican nationals to be safe, comfortable, legal and orderly, and the attitude of police persecution of this phenomenon must be abandoned and it must be perceived as a labor and social phenomenon." In Fox's view, therefore, the United States has no right to preserve itself as a distinct nation. Americans must pay for the health, welfare, and education of all Mexicans who move in while accepting that Mexico will be active in our country reinforcing its emigrants' mexicanismo.

Bidding for the loyalty of all Mexicans up north--including Mexican-Americans--Fox set up a Presidential Council for Mexicans Abroad. To run it, he picked UT-Dallas professor Juan Hernandez. Unconcerned--for good reason--that his new job might jeopardize his U.S. citizenship (he holds dual nationality), Hernandez lobbied aggressively in the United States. On ABC's Nightline he said that Mexicans in the United States need to become more politically active, "like Jews and Puerto Ricans." Making no distinction between Mexican-Americans and Mexican resident aliens, nor between illegal aliens and legal residents, Hernandez threw down the gauntlet: "I want the third generation, the seventh generation, I want them all to think 'Mexico first.'"


Sutherland points out that the Mexican government continues to condemn American failure to open its southern border completely, and has taken its case for open borders to international agencies. Using "human rights" as a lever, the Mexican Senate recently presented a formal complaint to the United Nations, apparently contemptuous of this country's sovereign right to conduct its immigration policies as it sees fit. The Mexican crusade is designed, says Sutherland, "to make enforcement of U.S. immigration laws a violation of international law." Last November, Jorge Casteneda, a former government minister, publicly proclaimed, "I like very much the metaphor of Gulliver, of ensnarling the giant. Tying it up, with nails, with thread, with 20,000 nets that bog it down: these nets being norms, principles, resolutions, agreements, and bilateral, regional and international covenants."

Sutherland considers today's U.S.-Mexico relationship debilitating for both countries, and correctly observes:


Mexico has become a parasite nation, so dependent on America that its rulers fight to send their people north to work as peons and become public charges. Its unhealthy dependence drains Mexico of able-bodied people while allowing the country's oligarchs to avoid genuine reform. They ease their humiliations by attempting a cultural conquest of the despised gringo superpower. America, hobbled by multiculturalism, is largely inert in the face of the Mexican demographic challenge. Conditioned by the media, politicians, and a failed education system to see America as no more than a nation of immigrants, how can Americans object to more immigrants?

Although the terrorist attacks of 2001 have slowed down some proposed U.S. policies favorable to Mexican immigration, Mexican officials appear certain that eventually all of their demands will be met. They've got plenty of time to wait as craven U.S. businesses, local governments, and labor unions go to bat in their behalf, in order to assure the continual stream of labor.

Copyright © 2009 Issues & Views

Wake up and smell the coffee, Juan is serving you next.

Theodor
 
 

[Der Koeniggraetzer]

"To me tolerance is an evil thing. Tolerence means how much strychnine can you take before it kills you"... - Unknown

I thought that was a good quote. Unfortunantly, I can't remember who said it.

I was doing a quick google search and heres a snippit of a totally unrelated topic that showed up on my search - "Expelling the Jews was actually a not-as-evil thing as what the Portuguese .... "

Funny how something like that pops up and catches your eye. I diddn't realize expelling someone from your country or anywhere else was EVIL..... Wow I always thought of much worse things when I thought of evil i guess doing anything that unpleases "Gods chosen people" > as they like to call themselves, is satanic too ... <sarcasm*

[Crusader651]

this is the way for them to justify what you are to their children, when you walk down the street. the jewish kid looks at you and asks his mother. 'what is that mommy?' they are nazis.

what do you expect them to say about you? 'they say we have done great harm to them, but of course we didn't. but they do not believe us so we still are mad at one another.'

endoctrination right there, but this is how politics are and have been for so many centurys, raising your kid into your religion,culture is the same as raising your kid under your views, or at least a general one. unlike nowdays where it is stereotyped that everyone is the opposite of his father.

what do the nazi say to their kids? the jews organize a counter protest the next day. a white kid would ask his mother the same thing. they are jews. they have done great harm to us, of course they say they didn't. they do not believe that they actually caused this much harm.

a century's later

when you walk down the street. the jewish kid looks at you and asks his mother. 'what is that mommy?' they are nazis.

'they have done great harm to us, of course they say they didn't. they do not believe that they actually caused this much harm.

'they say we have done great harm to them, but of course we didn't. but they do not believe us so we are still mad at one another.'

one is proven the other isn't . actually... weren't some people here denying the holocaust? as opposed to reductionism which reduces or compare to other ethnic cleansing or genocide. or merely stating the fact that the goal was ethnic cleansing, not genocide in order to reduce the scandal and controversy of the thing.

somewhere between the line you believed in ethnic loyalty, that belief which favor your kind are the one which you will both logically and subconsciously end up with. and then it was, by no coincidence, that you were far more open-minded to descriptions of history which make your kind appear as peace-seeking and honorable.

some holocaust deniers ask for those of jewish descent to be more open-minded. forgetting that the reason they are open-minded to the same marginal account of history is because of their self-interest. and it was so obvious in everyone's eyes that it's silly.

however when it comes to them, it wasn't silly at all because it was a mainstream account.

years ago when the jews told the other white that no, they are not a sect who sacrifice their babies, and we do not have 'special jewish prices' on goods. nobody believed them. it was, yet again ethnic loyalty believing what is good for their kind. it wasn't silly, it was mainstream. just like folk and tradition is a very strong part of third world countries.

[papaeiche]

I really have to ask this, I have read your last three posts and I really can't figure out what or who the hell you're talking about. Using words like they, them, those leaves everyone lost. Try a simple grammatical thing like putting a SUBJECT in your sentences. Der Koeniggraetzer, good start wheres the rest?

Theodor

[valken09 =Malaysian National Socialist=]

To:-Crusader651
I'm really lost when you talk about the Jews. I thought we were discussing about Illegal Aliens:)

To:-papaeiche
Obviously the Mexican Government don't want to fund the medical cost, wheter because the Medical Cost is Expensive or they Lack the Facilities and Specialist. Either way they have the responsibility to care for their own sick and injured, why put all the care for their sick to their Rich and Powerful Neighbour? Because their neighbour(America) is rich and powerful of course. I see some exploitation between Mexico and the United States. If the US/Obama don't handle the problem immediately, I sense the next Depression will come. They(America) really should stop all these senseless spendings.

[Crusader651]

hehe , sorry all of you . i was merely trying to point out that for illegal aliens, you stole this land from someone else then claim it as yours. to expel them from it and keep the priviledge.

and for you? oh 1. they commit a crime, and come in before everyone who is in line. 2. they are greedy, they want better wages than in their own country, thus greed is a motivation. both seem equally guilty from this line of thought, both are criminals and both are greedy.

what about mexico? they will tell their children, to learn about history and how border changes. and new mexico could be part of mexico in 200 years. and for us? revanchism, an old and obsolete one. at least this is how we will defend our territorial gains, and this is how they will defend the idea that the territory is theirs.