So I'm told that today was the "day without immigrants," during which they and their supporters were supposed to not go to work or school, and about which, a few points:
Uh, for a day without immigrants, they sure as hell were all over the television. Which is exactly what they wanted. So, uh, just what is it that they want? Or that the activists in question want? Are they the same? Are their interests even compatible? Has anyone thought to question this? Is anyone in mainstream media competent to even consider questioning this?
Didn't think so.
I saw an older guy, a barber and presumably an immigrant (he certainly had an authentic-sounding accent, although his English was just fine) interviewed on one of the local El Paso news stations. He didn't think much of this kind of "demonstration," and in fact laughed as he opined that hey, you don't want to do your job, there are plenty of people willing to take your place. And he's right. If it's about work, about improving lives, then what the hell is the point of this kind of gesture?
Unless it's just, as a friend offered to me, just more agitprop. Which it is.
Those who went to work today: way to go. That's how things are done. Those of you who didn't: we didn't miss you. We don't need you. Good job proving it.
Idiots.
Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out....
(For more immigration reading, check out Harry Binswanger and Arizona Watch.)
Posted by Craig Ceely at May 1, 2006 11:26 PM