PETA is completely clueless...

I have been a vegetarian for over ten years now, but I have nothing but hatred for PETA. Have they done anything worthwhile in their almost 30 year history? Maybe, but most of their campaigns seem counterproductive and give those of us who are somewhat sympathetic with their aims a bad name. 

As if I needed another reason to loathe this group, PETA has decided they want to buy ad space on the border fence between Mexico and the U.S. to encourage border crossers to beware of the unhealthy diet in the U.S. and to go vegan. Sounds effective.... I agree with Feministing that the proposed ads are misoygnist and racist in the way they depict Mexicans. Way to go PETA, and thanks for giving your support to the construction of the border fence!!

I have another problem with PETA's strategy as well, they should do some research on the Mexican diet:

From the Houston Chronicle:

"The billboards, in English and Spanish, would offer the caution: "If the Border Patrol Doesn't Get You, the Chicken and Burgers Will — Go Vegan."

"We think that Mexicans and other immigrants should be warned if they cross into the U.S. they are putting their health at risk by leaving behind a healthier, staple diet of corn tortillas, beans, rice, fruits and vegetables," said Lindsay Rajt, assistant manager of PETA's vegan campaigns."

First of all, they assume Mexicans have a healthier diet than Americans. While traditionally, the Mexican diet is healthy, so are many traditional diets. The problem is that the reality is far different. The increase of greasy junk food and soda in the Mexican diet since NAFTA has been astronomical, to the point where the rate of obesity in Mexico is on par, if not greater, than that in the U.S. (sorry the link is old, but things haven't changed much in three years). While there is a difference between rural and urban areas in Mexico, its not accurate to characterize the Mexican diet as mainly tortillas, beans, rice, fruits and vegetables unless we are talking about some mythical past.

Second, if PETA actually cared about the diets of Mexican immigrants in this country, maybe they would try and do community work in areas where immigrants live and try to educate people on how to eat healthy on a limited budget. But, since they don't really bother to do this with Americans either, this seems unlikely. Like most interest groups, they prefer the flashy and controversial methods of getting their message out, rather than effective ones.

(Thanks to MJ for telling me about this story!)

Keep Your Tim Hortons away from Our Dunkin'

Sometimes, I really appreciate people like Tom Tancredo. Apparently, fencing off Mexico and destroying both relations and the environment isn't enough. Now, it's time to get one on the Northern side, too. It makes me happy when wingnuts undermine their own points, points that have support amidst his crazy brethren, by going overboard in manic paranoia. It's pretty clear that all the people refused refugee status and sent away from Canada have come here to blow us up and steal our jobs, not to mention those crazy Manitobans coming down and making our North-Central states more Lutheran than they already are. Tim Hortons is an institution bound to infiltrate and destroy our Winchell's and Dunkin' Donut franchises and Canadian Club is clearly on the cusp of buying out Jim Beam and Jack Daniels' distilleries simultaneously. I, for one, welcome our new Canadian kings. If only we'd listened to Tancredo, maybe we wouldn't be in this mess.

For what it's worth, this is Tancredo's press release from his jackass website.

The Border Fence and the Constitution

Today, the Times ran this story by Adam Liptak about how the government has ridden roughshod across the Constitution to build the border fence. To their credit, the Times has run a pretty long series of stories now on the awfulness of this idea.

Liptak shows how the government, and especially Michael Chertoff, has basically used the Constitution as toilet paper. By waiving whatever laws get in the way of the fence, Chertoff and Bush are setting the dangerous precedent that the rule of law is irrelevant whenever the government chooses.

In their lawsuit challenging Chertoff waiving environmental law, the Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife said

“It is only happenchance that the secretary’s waiver in this case involved laws protecting the environment and historic resources,” the groups told Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle of Federal District Court in Washington. “He could equally have waived the requirements of the Fair Labor Relations Act to halt a strike, or the provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act in order to force workers to endure unsafe working conditions.”

Precisely. This is a slippery slope. Guantanamo was the first step, but many Americans ignored it because it was far away and the victims were terrorists or something. But this administration, as seen in the work of John Yoo and others, believes that they can ignore the Constitution whenever they want and they intend on doing so to build this pointless wall.

Of course, this is hardly the first time that Bush has ignored the Constitution. Moreover, it's a reminder of the Constitution's fragility. Any study of U.S. history, particularly racial or labor history, shows that we have a long history of upholding the Constitution only when we find it convenient. Think of Andrew Jackson ignoring the Supreme Court over Cherokee removal. Think of Rutherford Hayes and Grover Cleveland calling out federal troops to suppress strikes. Think of Woodrow Wilson and the first Red Scare. And of course, there's Richard Nixon.

Even presidents who I respect have often not respected the Constitution. Lincoln's suspension of habeus corpus during the Civil War was unfortunate, though perhaps necessary given the situation. And Franklin Roosevelt's issue of Executive Order 8803, creating the Japanese concentration camps, is a sad mark on U.S. history.

This doesn't even get into how local governments, law enforcement, and even the Supreme Court has ignored the Constitution when they don't agree with it. The long-term violation of civil rights of African-Americans is the most notorious example, but the suppression of labor struggles or just people who local communities didn't like has happened throughout U.S. history. Maybe the worst example is the Gilded Age Supreme Court. In 1896, not only did the Court rule in Plessy v. Ferguson, which for all intent and purpose flushed the 14th Amendment down the toilet, it also ruled in Ward v. Race Horse that legal precedents concerning Native American rights to the land were "wholly immaterial" because national glory now demanding white domination of the land. This is nothing more than Supreme Court members codifying their own prejudice.

What is different today is a wider spread belief in civil rights and the sanctity of the Constitution. So there are powerful groups suing the federal government over their disturbing unconstitutionality. But still, most Americans may not care, particularly when the move is so obviously to maintain the nation's whiteness in the guise of anti-terrorism. While the Constitution should be the law in this nation, it has usually operated as an ideal that must be constantly fought for. Too often those on the side of law and civil rights have lost. I'm hardly more optimistic about the outcome of this situation.

More Border Fence Stupidity

Again, the border fence is a terrible idea.

This story discusses how the Sabal Palm Audubon Center in Brownsville is basically going to end up in Mexico since the wall will be built north of it. Let me reiterate, this wall is going to do NOTHING to stop illegal immigration. And yet again, I'll say that most people on the border oppose the wall because they know that it is completely worthless. By all accounts, this is a very neat place in a very poor area. I will be visiting this area on Memorial Day weekend and I plan on going to Sabal Palm. I might as well see it while it is of value for conservation.

It's also worth noting that poor people in this country have almost no access to natural places. This border fence is not only an environmental disaster, but of course, it is also a structure of racism. Moreover, it is an example of environmental injustice, as it clearly prioritizes the desire of white people in Nebraska to feel that this is still a white country over the actual needs of local residents to experience something other than a degraded urban nature.

To top it off, it's not even necessary to build a fence in this area. As the article states:

A decade ago, he says, federal agents intercepted hundreds of illegal immigrants a month on Sabal Palm grounds. But as border security increased, and as patterns changed, the number of interceptions dropped dramatically. Now, he says, not even 20 a month are caught, with very few carrying contraband like marijuana.

Of all the stupid ideas of the Bush Administration, the border fence may actually be the stupidest. And that is really saying something.