I've been wondering lately about the overall effectiveness of these planned boycotts.
Maybe a way around it would be to allow yourself to purchase the necessities of the day from a Mexican establishment in your illegal home city. But, that wouldn't really work either since there would still be taxes generated by the sale; unless of course the establishment doesn't report any.
The same thing can be said for any of the things you may need that day, no? What about the posterboard for you placards; the spraypaint; the gas for your car (purchased the day before?).
One final note before you read below from The Uncooperative Blogger. The leader in the city of Phoenix of this fiasco has asked that people "absent" themselves from work or school. "Absent" themselves? Are we not supposed to catch on to what that really means? If you "absent" yourself from work aren't you still "skipping" work? Or does it now have a new meaning, like illegal immigrant has been revised to just plain old immigrant?
Cross posted from The Uncooperative Blogger
This one is long, but worth it…
A boycott on May Day has likewise been called in many cities across the country as part of pro-immigrant pro-illegal alien invader demonstrations. Called a paro in Spanish, the term is generally understood to mean both refusing to buy and refusing to work or go to school.
Activists are urging illegal alien invaders across the United States to skip work, avoid spending money and march in the streets to demonstrate their importance to the U.S. economy.
But the plan for a paro is not universally endorsed by all immigrant Illegal Alien invader-rights groups. In Chicago, the organizing coalition known as the Movimiento 10 de Marzo, or the March 10 Movement, decided not to call for a boycott or general strike in the city, largely because of the involvement of labor unions that said they could not legally endorse such an action because their contracts prohibit them.
The question of whether to participate in nationwide calls for a May 1 boycott was hashed out at a contentious April 22 meeting, where the local coalition decided to support calls for boycotts in other cities, but refrain from a boycott in Chicago. But some organizers described this as caving in to unions and politicians that were pushing for a more moderate stance.
“I wish the unions had stayed out of it and let people celebrate May Day the way they wanted,” said Rafael Cervantes, an activist from Monterrey, Mexico who has lived in Chicago for decades. “The boycott was a symbol for people, an icon, a way to say we matter, we are an important cog in this machine, we produce and we consume. It’s ironic that the unions are saying they could not support it because it would be illegal, but the whole reason we’re marching is that people are here ‘illegally.’”
Did Rafael just say that the whole reason we are marching is because people are here illegally? So, that means they should illegally march in our streets? Hmm…
**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let us know at what level you would like to participate.tag: DeMediacrat tag: Illegal Immigration Reform tag: Coalition Against Illegal Immigration
DeMediacrat
Iran
Islamofascism
War On Terror
