This sweatshop brought to you by... liberals (Michael Bianco Inc.)

Posted Thu, Mar 8, 2007 at 9:06 pm
All is not so well in the land of cheerful foreign workers just doing the jobs Americans won't do. As you read the following, keep in the front of your mind that these conditions were enabled by all the many "liberals" who support illegal immigration:
Conditions at the Michael Bianco Inc. manufacturing plant harken back to the sweatshops of the early 1900s, according to the U.S. Attorney General's Office.

...[Joseph Thomas, publisher of Spinner Publications in New Bedford] researched the SouthCoast garment industry in the 1970s and 1980s, interviewing and photographing work conditions, but he did not discover any conditions that came close to those at Michael Bianco Inc. "This sounds much worse. ... It might have been the norm in the 1880s or 1890s," he said.

Information in the federal indictment, based on an undercover federal agent who worked at the plant, stated employees were fined $20 if they were in the restroom for more than two minutes. If they went to the restroom twice, they were fired. One roll of toilet paper was placed in each stall and was gone within 40 minutes of startup time. It was not replaced...

The U.S. Attorney General's Office said employees worked in "deplorable conditions," and that workers actually made far less than $7 an hour because they were fined for so many violations.

Employees were forced to work double shifts stitching military gear, but Mr. Insolia did not pay overtime, they allege...
As long as there are illegal aliens, there will be people like Insolia to exploit them. If all workers are legal, then these types of abuses are much less likely to occur.

So, the "liberals" say, let's legalize everyone! The problem with that scheme is that if you do that, many millions more will try to come here; if they can't do it legally (because of "guest" worker caps), they'll do it illegally. That will result in more illegal aliens and more possibility for abuse.

So, when you think it through, you see that there are only two ways to prevent illegal immigration: either literally pass out worker permits at the border to anyone who asks, or enforce our immigration laws. Not just promise to "enforce" the laws, but actually do it. And, enforcing those laws means deporting people. Because if you don't, then everyone around the world will know that we don't deport illegal aliens, we just let them loose in the U.S. as either legal or illegal workers. As for passing out worker permits at the borders, something like that would only be supported by about 0.05% of the populace at most. It's not going to happen.

In summation, the only practical way to prevent sweatshops like this is to enforce our immigration laws across the board. Those who oppose that enforcement - such as corrupt politicians, corrupt businessmen, and useful idiot "liberals" - enable such sweatshops. Regarding the latter group, that brings us back to the usual formation: is it that they aren't able to think things through, or that they just don't care?

Comments

amanda (not verified)

Sat, 03/10/2007 - 04:41

It's actually beyond worker permits. If it's absolutely, positively impermissible to deport an alien under any circumstance, we might as well substitute green cards for the permits. But even that would be unnecessary because if you can't deport than why even bother with a 'permanent resident' card? Your very presence would be equivalent to green card status. Robert Justich of Bear Stearns stated on ABC news that the harm done to the children of illegals makes any raid by ICE 'indefensible'. The good ol' emotional blackmail card. OK, Mr. Moral High Ground, what is the answer then? Naturally, the hard hitting reporter never bothers to ask about the implications of such a stance. But what else does his virulent anti-ICE position imply other than zero enforcement of law which = de facto open border? Same with the Hutto crybabies. OK, bleeding hearts, if it is wrong to detain the parents and their kids together, your answer is what? Detain the parents separately from the kids? Oh, heavens no. They'd be bitching even more about that. Oh, so by process of elimination it must be do nothing and let the law be a big joke? Exactamundo! Remember, these people aren't rounded up like they want you to think. These are people who have already gone through a legal process and been ordered to leave this country. They are given the opportunity to do so on their own but instead choose to blow off a federal court order. A (citizen) mother can't thumb her nose at a prison sentence just because she has kids but that seems to be the logic here. The process should be at its end. But any rationalization, however shameless, will be trotted out even though it's plain to all these are just obstruction tactics. But as you are saying, in exchange for a big amnesty we're to expect these constant complainers and obstructors to do a full 180 from their current radical position? No, they would just get MORE emboldened (if that's possible). I wonder why these types are never up front with their true position and plainly state 'We think it's wrong for a sovereign government to decide who can be in its country. In other words, we don't believe in sovereign nation states at all.'

D Flinchum (not verified)

Sat, 03/10/2007 - 11:13

If we take this logic to its natural conclusion, how can we send the parents of small children to jail? This is a smoke screen.