Monday, January 28, 2013


28 January 2013 - 

Odds and Ends:
1)      Poor Secretary Clinton.  She falls down, suffers a concussion, has to testify before the Senate and the House about a debacle that was on her watch, and suffers from double vision due to a damaged nerve in her head.  It has not been a good couple of months for the Secretary.  She now has glasses with prisms in them to correct the double vision.  Apparently, at least this is what I heard, Secretary Clinton had to get the corrective lens immediately in order to prevent further falls and more physical damage.  It seems that when she started to see double, she instinctively walked to the left, causing her to smash into everything.  She has now corrected that action; for how long clearly remains to be seen. 
2)      Soul legend Tina Turner, is giving up her American citizenship and requesting to become a citizen of Switzerland.  Ms. Turner, 73, has lived in Kuesnacht, a Zurich suburb, since 1995 with her longtime music manager, Erwin Bach.  It seems that MS. Turner, née Anna Mae Bullock, has come a long way from Brownsville, Tennessee.  I hope she will continue to be happy and secure in a country the size of a postage stamp and that looks like a postcard.   For her naturalization process to be complete, however, the canton of Zurich has to approve her request, and then the Swiss Confederation will review the case before a passport can be issued.  The two-step procedure is worth mentioning.  Switzerland is a modern democracy that resembles the United States in the 18th and 19th century.  The cantons, or states, hold much more power that the Swiss federal government does on such matters as citizenship, voting, etc.  Local government matters there.  It works.  It seems that one can be happy and prosperous and secure with limited central government and strong canton control of the law.  I am sure that Ms. Turner will continue to love the United States, but then again, what’s love got to do with it anyway? 
3)      Rich and famous celebrities changing abodes and citizenship is not important to most average people.  The rich and famous live real lives, but they are not seen as real by those whose only contact with them is through music, sports, films, or books.  But mass immigration of real peoples into the U.S. has always been a contentious issue. The recent announcement that a group of influential senators—is there any other kind of senator?—has reached an agreement on “the outlines” of a comprehensive overhaul of U.S. immigration laws and policies is good news.  This overhaul will address creating a way for citizenship for the roughly 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the U.S., will implement stricter border enforcement measures, and will ensure stricter enforcement of visa compliance by aliens in the country legally.  There also will be procedures to ensure that young people brought into the country illegally as children will be given a faster path to citizenship.  A couple of things:
a.       Nothing about this announced plan is remarkable.  In fact, all of this easily could have been done last year, with the same group of senators leading the process.  The fact that such a comprehensive plan was announced only one week after the inauguration means that they must have been working on it for some time. So, why now for the announcement?  Because nothing contentious gets done in the year leading up to major elections.  Restructuring immigration law & policy\y—massive,  illegal immigration being one of the biggest threats to the sovereignty of the United States, simply was too contentious an issue for the senators to do anything bold and courageous until after the election.  Yawn.  Politics as usual.    
b.      Two definitions of the word reform conflict with each other as they apply to the issue of illegal immigration.  According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, the first definition of reform is to make change in a social, political, or economic institution or practice in order to improve it.   This is a neutral definition.  Any side of the argument could use it to start a stump speech.  The second definition is to put an end to an evil by enforcing or introducing a better method or course of action.  The second definition, full of moral judgment, is where the conflict begins.  Some people say that we must put an end to the evil of policy makers mocking the rule of law and creating an increasingly balkanized country for the sake of a few votes.  Others say that it is evil when local government and racist groups resist giving immigrants—illegal is such a perjorative term—the rights, advantages, and privileges of citizenry, especially because of the harsh conditions most of them escaped in coming here.  How you choose the lesser of the two evils usually determines where you stand on the issue of illegal immigration. More tomorrow on immigration reform.   

No comments:

Post a Comment