Immigration

[wkmac]

Ron Paul comments on the Immigration bill

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul389.html

To be honest I really didn't see the 2nd amendment connection until I actually went to Gun Owners of America's website for their take. Here it is.

http://www.gunowners.org/a052307.htm

OK, whether real or imagine, just forget that for the moment because here's the reality. The ultra rightees boy Bush is in reality a change agent and is working for the other side. Proof? Well Ted Kennedy's agenda in front and center in the legislation (this schitt happens all the time to fool the masses)and whose out here selling the whole thing with all his might? None other than Captain Wonderful from Texas himself and he's has his storebought conservative spokesman Tony Snow all week hitting the talk shows that service the repub. base trying his might to get the masses to drink the coolaid.

How do you guys keep seeing time and time again where he betrays America and it's core values but follow him blindly into the darkest of night on Iraq? The dems are no better granted but geez wake up before it's too late and I happen to believe it is but you guys way outnumber me so I must be wrong. Majority rules!

Do you ever wonder why your a#s hurts so bad all the time and when you turn around to look behind you, standing there is someone from the gov't with a smile on their face? I'm noticing more and more of them with "I Love GW" buttons on their lapels too. I even think I saw Kennedy wearing one as he seems to be batting 1000 in getting Bush to do his dirty work! Education, Prescription drugs and now this. Did I miss the memo that Bush switched parties?

Wake UP SUCKA'S!

[osustuident]

Bush hit a trifecta w/ this piece of legislation. Destroy the Republican party, Social Security, and Medicare.

[SeniorGeek]

Originally Posted by wkmac

Ron Paul comments on the Immigration bill

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul389.html

Originally Posted by Ron Paul

Additionally, one of the most absurd incentives for people to come to the US illegally is the promise of instant US citizenship to anyone born on our soil. That is why when Congress returns next week I will be re-introducing my Constitutional amendment to deny automatic citizenship to individuals born on US soil to parents who are not US citizens or who do not owe permanent allegiance to the United States.

I hope his proposal is more compact and readable than the current not-even-a-bill-yet proposal.

Reading this one-paragraph description, I began to wonder if Paul's proposal will make it so my birth certificate will not be enough to show I am a citizen. Will I have to prove citizenship of one or both of my parents? Will that require proof of citizenship of one to four of my grandparents? Maybe some national system of registration will have to be established, to simplify the pedigree process and make it easier to determine who can be a citizen.

With that national database of citizens, we won't have to put up with quite so many requests of "Show me your papers, please". We could just get a barcode or something.

Many countries do not automatically grant citizenship to the native born, but I think they grant permanent resident rights to anyone native born. Otherwise, they would be creating people who are not citizens of any country - would they be called "philistines"?

Originally Posted by wkmac

To be honest I really didn't see the 2nd amendment connection until I actually went to Gun Owners of America's website for their take. Here it is.

http://www.gunowners.org/a052307.htm

They recognize that power we give to our government is likely to eventually be used against us!

Originally Posted by wkmac

...
How do you guys keep seeing time and time again where he betrays America and it's core values but follow him blindly into the darkest of night on Iraq? The dems are no better.... Did I miss the memo that Bush switched parties?

When there are two sides of the same coin, each side thnks the other side is a rectal orifice. They do not care to see how much they are alike.

I found a line by P.J. O'Rourke that describes one difference between our two major parties:
"The Democrats are the party of government activism, the party that says government can make you richer, smarter, taller, and get the chickweed out of your lawn.
Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it."

[wkmac]

and get the chickweed out of your lawn.

BY GOD THEY GOT MY VOTE! And if they can do something about wild violets, I'll even join their stinking party!

Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it."

ROTFFLMAO!!!!!!
I'm gonna be laughing at that one for the rest of the day. Man that was good!

[wkmac]

Originally Posted by osustuident

Bush hit a trifecta w/ this piece of legislation. Destroy the Republican party, Social Security, and Medicare.

Actually I think they believe just the opposite in that immigration will save it. The American stock population is declining (that's fact) with an ever increasing amount of the core hitting retirement and the SS and medicare payment window. If nothing is done, both will find themselves to be the next manifestation of a federal version of the Central States crisis. An influx or legal and illegal worker bees in their belief pump monies back into those coffers and in many cases no future payouts meaning to them free money. The problem is folks like Lou Dobbs, the gentleman at BrazenBrown's video link, etc. are showing where the real costs of this is located elsewhere in our society and the longterm damage may be nothing compared to what a sinking medicare or SS system would cost if we let that happen in the near future.

These guys have proven on many fronts to be willing to pay much bigger later in order to do little now.

I really do think PJ has it right about both parties but especially the repubs when he said:

"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then get elected and prove it."

JMO

D@mn Senior, there I go laughing again! See what you did!

[brazenbrown]

Originally Posted by wkmac

BrazenBrown,

Nice link my friend. Sometime back I saw a piece on TV about immigration (both legal and illegal) and the suggestion at the time was that the core or "Stock" population to use Mr. Beck's terms was going negative and the influx was what was moving the US total population forward. Mr. Beck's numbers seem to suggest this very thing although his threashhold seems another 20 years out and maybe his numbers are right or I misheard the other guy as this problem being more contemporary.

Thanks!

To achieve an environmentally sustainable society, we need to be reducing immigration numbers to a level that will allow the U.S. population to stabilize. We also need to stop illegal immigration.


And
by Roy Beck
June 2006 :

"The courageous heroes on the world scene are not those men and women in poor countries who have the energy, the intelligence, and the skills to escape to a rich country but rather those remaining with their people. Rather than focus on improving conditions for themselves and their families by emigrating, they strive to raise the conditions for whole communities."

I'd have to say amen to that!

Originally Posted by wkmac

His examples I must admit do catch your attention but one thing I've noticed in the video as I have in real life. Both White and Black Americans are growing more and more concerned about this issue. Ironic that such an issue might end up a galvaning force to bring these 2 groups together in the political and social realm. At the same time I think now we are beginning to see how the American Indian must have felt 400 years ago and the regret they must feel now that they didn't kill the pilgrims. IMO, we owe the American Indian such a huge debt of gratitude that we will never be able to repay.

Personally I think it should bring all Americans together regardless of race or political standing. Having the influx of people coming into this Country at an alarming rate should concern all of us. If this continues it will affect all socioeconomic levels and change our Country dramatically.

WE MUST SECURE OUR BORDERS!!

Originally Posted by wkmac

I also think it sad that from the posts above the only one to watch it was Cheryl. I think had the others done the same the following posts would have been about the video link instead of taking pop shots at one another.

Thanks again Brazen. Very nice Job!

Ain't that the truth!!

[SeniorGeek]

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

Immigration by the numbers

More amazing numbers that will blow you away.

He uses some of the classic methods described in the book, How to Lie With Statistics. (The actual purpose of the book is How to Keep From Being Deceived by Statistics.) I'm not saying that there is no problem, but he is exaggerating, misrepresenting and overstating the statistics.

He cuts the bottom off the graph - 200,000,000 looks like zero. This exaggerates the size of any change.

He uses solid coloring of what should be a line graph, another technique which exaggerates changes.

Just those two methods make the problem appear 5 to 10 times bigger than the numbers he presents.

He picks two points of information to extrapolate into a straight-line trend - using 1973 and 1993 as two points to create the top line (filled with red). If he had used 1973 and 1995 (for example), the red area would have been much smaller. The US Census already has released information that is newer than 1993 - and the line began to curve down - but why does he ignore the more-recent facts?

He uses a different method for his baseline (green area). That line curves in the future, so it must be based on a different type of projection.

The gumballs are a creative version of "cutting the bottom off of the graph" and using the "fill-in-the-area" method. If that is a 5-gallon jar of gumballs representing the world population, there should be ~42 ounces of gumballs already in the US container. That would require a much larger brandy snifter.

Those are just the deceptions I recognize, after having read the book (How to Lie With Statistics) long ago, as assigned in college.


In addition to his misrepresentation of statistics, there is some other sly deception going on.

Some second- and third-generation US-born citizens are included in the "red zone" of his graph. (If we move his concept back in time, so the present day is at the end of the graph, someone born in 1978, whose grandparents or great-grandparents or great-great-grandparents immigrated after WWI, would count in the red.)

He says we've "...had to build twice as many schools..." as if we have had to double the number of schools. More accurate would be "twice as many additional schools".

After presenting his conjecture, subjective interpretation of numbers and a prediction for the future, he says, "This is not conjecture, this is not subjective, this is not what might be, this is what will be...." He should apply his skills to mutual funds, since they always wimp out by saying that past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

He says that a tight labor market was what gave us a middle-class society. Yet his "Golden Era" includes The Depression (with the loosest labor market I know of) and WWII (with the tightest labor market and no gain in middle class).

If a tight labor market is good for the middle class, and welfare programs remove people from the labor market, is welfare good for the middle class?

The growth of the middle class happened during the post-WWII era, an era of high taxes and huge government spending on domestic projects. This was also an era when we had a Guest Worker program that allowed workers from Mexico to legally enter the US for seasonal work. That was when the middle class grew.

He is careful to keep the "...if..." disclaimers on his statements, so a full transcript will show that he is not outright lying. He is exaggerating in order to get people to act, but I suspect he may have a specific set of recommendations ready-to-go, to take advantage of any knee-jerk reaction created by his hype. And I wonder what might be hidden in his recommendations....

So, my recommendation is to examine any plan that is offered, and to be careful about the details. (We've already seen that gun dealers are somehow related to illegal immigration law.) Do we need more laws? Do we need to increase the penalties in laws that already do not work? Do we need to repeal some existing laws? I do not have pat answers.

[wkmac]

Senior,
No argument that people do stretch things to make their points and some do more than others. We've adapted in public life what lawyers do in court (watching to many lawyer shows on TV I guess ) and that is to sell the evidence that promotes their position and so then sit or suppress the evidence that does the opposite. How many folks have been found innocent because a prosecutor sat on hard evidence (Duke players come to mind) he/she knew would prove the innocence of the condemned and there are defense lawyers who knew their client was guilty but they got them off anyway. It happens all the time. How many of us here (all of us) post something knowing good and well there's an equally good opposing point or idea that is contary to what we are suggesting? We just happen to like one side of the argument more than the other and that's just human nature. What do people generally want to do when they have a neighbor who's a real pain and won't stop stepping over into your yard? Build a fence, a big one if possible because "I like my world and don't want you in it!" The secure border idea if the fence for the yard just on a grander scale. Human nature again.

The point and this should be the focus no matter what is that there is a problem and in some areas it's worse and harder on local infrastructure than in others. Those are the facts. The real question is where do we go from here and what is the solution that would be fair, equitible to all and still maintain the spirit of freedom and liberty to all?

As a classic liberal if you will I happen to believe that all borders are wrong and that people should be free to move about and come and go as they see fit as long as they don't violate the life, liberty or property of another human being. Now that said however, in our world I have tax dollars taken from me by deadly force (yes deadly force because if I refuse to pay, that option is left open to the gov't to collect if need be) and that money then is supposed to be used to help our fellow citizens in varying degrees under so called public policy. On top of that, we have a gov't refusing fiscal constraints on it's spending placing even more pressure on taxpayers and even threatening the very people those tax dollars had gone to in the past to help so IMO both ends of the spectrum will and are suffering. If given the choice of my tax dollars going to pay for federal aid to an illegal alien or to help pay for someone in New Orleans who is a citizen to rebuild, New Orleans wins in my book going away and I'm totally opposed to both ideas in the first place because I don't believe this is what a federal gov't should do and in my perfect world it wouldn't exist. Don't worry, I'm the only moron who exists in "my perfect world" so don't get in a twist.

Yes, we have a problem and yes there will be folks who step up and profit from it's manipulation on bothsides of the issue but the question remains, what is the root reason they come here in the first place and what has the gov't done to help change that mind set? I personally believe and I think a lot of people feel the same that the reasons and the solution to the problem lie in Mexico and further south with the political and economic conditions and not so much the cure being a wall along the Rio Grande.

JMO

Brazen,
On the issue of race, I tend to agree on principle but in reality in the last 40 years African Americans have accelerated with great speed into the American Middle class and even the upper middle class and as such both black and white have forged more and more into it's own culture having adopted from each to form a hybrid if you will. As a result a level of comfort has also entered the mix and folks are pretty happy overall at where they are at. Right or wrong, both now see a new presense on the rise that accept for small cases have maintained itself seperate and unique to it's culture and social beliefs. Now they fear having this new pressure on the scene could effect and threaten that level of comfort they've worked long and hard for and so now you see these 2 sides coming together to address the believed threat. Having grown up as a kid seeing segregation and the divide that once existed just sticks out so big as we've come so far from what we once were and it's just ironic the issue that is bringing us more and more together.

My neighbor who is a police officer was telling me about the dramatic increase in gang activity and most of it is hispanic gangs marking new turf. What is shocking if not almost humorous is the fact that a number of African American gangs who've controlled the local turfs for years are calling the police with hot tips to get the hispanic gangs busted so the weirdness of the situation is that the African American gangbangers are becoming the eyes and ears of the police to an extent because in their own way they see this as a threat. I've also heard in the prisons where there is a hispanic gang presense that instead of it being the black/white thing it's black/hispanic and in some cases the whites have sided with the blacks. If it wasn't so sad all the way around it just might be comical.

[brazenbrown]

Boy, you guys have loonnnggggg posts!!

I'm more of a to the point kinda guy.

Senior:

You attack the person rather than the issue...He did this, he did that, he's a professional liar, yada, yada, yada. I'd have to consider that an ad hominem attack, attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

The fact is we have a problem and discrediting reality in your way does not do our crisis any justice!!

Mac:

You made some points regarding people stretching things, and people making their own points of view knowing there is another opposite and equally compelling argument..

You made an even better point in my opinion by saying:

"The point and this should be the focus no matter what is that there is a problem and in some areas it's worse and harder on local infrastructure than in others. Those are the facts. The real question is where do we go from here and what is the solution that would be fair, equitible to all and still maintain the spirit of freedom and liberty to all?"

This is true but in my opinion but needs to be stepped up a few levels in intensity.

We need a fence because this isn't the 1950's any longer. Illegals are coming over the border and so are the terrorist. We fight the war in Iraq and other places in the world and leave our own borders wide open. It does not make sense in the most backward of ways. Especially with a people that want us dead no matter what they need to do to achieve it.

It is important for those brave souls in other countries to move forward making their own countries a better place to live, giving them hope and prosperity in their own land.

As you saw...we can take a million or rather millions of immigrants every year and it won't really make a difference for their countries relief but it will damn sure ruin ours!! JMHO

[SeniorGeek]

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

...
Senior:

You attack the person rather than the issue...

By your apparent definition, you are making an ad hominem attack upon me.

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

He did this, he did that, he's a professional liar, yada, yada, yada. I'd have to consider that an ad hominem attack, attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.

I thought I limited my critique to his words and actions. "He does this", describing an action I see, "he says this" describing words I hear.

I thought I edited out all the "yadas", too.

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

The fact is we have a problem and discrediting reality in your way does not do our crisis any justice!!

Do you find your own method of discrediting reality acceptable?

Yes, we have a problem. Better control of our borders will help. But it is short sighted to think that will be the solution.

[brazenbrown]

Originally Posted by SeniorGeek

By your apparent definition, you are making an ad hominem attack upon me. I thought I limited my critique to his words and actions. "He does this", describing an action I see, "he says this" describing words I hear.

I thought I edited out all the "yadas", too.

Do you find your own method of discrediting reality acceptable?

Yes, we have a problem. Better control of our borders will help. But it is short sighted to think that will be the solution.

You're right, reality is subjective and my yada, yada was sarcastic. After reading my post again today it is evident to me that I posted out of frustration and even used the ad hominem attack on you. I apologize and will stick to better debate tactics in the future.

[SeniorGeek]

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

You're right, reality is subjective and my yada, yada was sarcastic. After reading my post again today it is evident to me that I posted out of frustration and even used the ad hominem attack on you. I apologize and will stick to better debate tactics in the future.

I did not see your words as an ad hominem attack upon me, just as my words were not an ad hominem attack on Roy Beck.

I don't mind sarcasm. My posts would be awfully short without it. If I can dish it out, I had better be ready to take some back....

[brazenbrown]

Immigration Bill Suffers a Big Setback

Let's hope we come up with something better!!

Why don't we secure the border first then decide how everything else will work.

Just a thought.

[moreluck]

Because that would be putting the horse before the cart.........oh wait a minute......that's how it's suppose to be.

Horse first, cart second.

[brazenbrown]

This website gives you all kinds of information about immigration.

It makes it easy for you to get involved with electronic faxes and phone numbers at your fingertips. It also lets you know when important votes are coming up and the results of each Senator's vote.

You can actually be part of the solution and not get swept away like sheep.

The number of citizens contacting their representatives through this website was a factor when amnesty was voted down just yesterday.

NUMBERS USA

[tonyexpress]

[youtube]90SDkhwnEIo[/youtube]

[big_arrow_up]

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

Immigration Bill Suffers a Big Setback

Let's hope we come up with something better!!

Why don't we secure the border first then decide how everything else will work.

Just a thought.

I agree that the border should be tightened first. Anything else won't work until that is done. I refuse to call the proposal "Amnesty". Amnesty is gettting away with a crime without any type of punishment. These illegals will have to pay (literally) for their immigration status to be changed and it will costs thousands of dollars. And that doesn't include the fines which are also thousands of dollars. They will probably have to return to their countrys before recieving their documentation that states that their status has been changed from illegal to legal. Even if they end up not having to return to the countrys they came from they will still be paying out thousands of dollars. That doesn't sound like Amnesty to me.

I'm feeling the affects as if I was an illegal alien because my wife is one. We are currently in the process of changing her status so we've already handed over a couple thousand dollars to the INS and an immigration lawyer for her case and we aren't even close to being done. I'm more than happy to pay because I'm helping my wife but it is a pain. She'll have to return to her home country before she can come back and later call this country her home. Whether this Immigration Bill goes through or not is not important to me because either way the whole process is costing us allot of heart ache. Financially and emotionally. Amnesty? LOL. Not even close.

[brazenbrown]

Originally Posted by big_arrow_up

I agree that the border should be tightened first. Anything else won't work until that is done. I refuse to call the proposal "Amnesty". Amnesty is gettting away with a crime without any type of punishment. These illegals will have to pay (literally) for their immigration status to be changed and it will costs thousands of dollars. And that doesn't include the fines which are also thousands of dollars. They will probably have to return to their countrys before recieving their documentation that states that their status has been changed from illegal to legal. Even if they end up not having to return to the countrys they came from they will still be paying out thousands of dollars. That doesn't sound like Amnesty to me.

I'm feeling the affects as if I was an illegal alien because my wife is one. We are currently in the process of changing her status so we've already handed over a couple thousand dollars to the INS and an immigration lawyer for her case and we aren't even close to being done. I'm more than happy to pay because I'm helping my wife but it is a pain. She'll have to return to her home country before she can come back and later call this country her home. Whether this Immigration Bill goes through or not is not important to me because either way the whole process is costing us allot of heart ache. Financially and emotionally. Amnesty? LOL. Not even close.

Ok, call it what you want! Had this bill passed just how many of the illegals do you think would be getting in line to pay and follow the rules?

Remember they've already broken the law at least once to get here. So let's be nice and say that 50% of them would act responsible, which would still leave several million here granted AMNESTY (paid no fines and did not return to his country) because they have not done what was required of them.

Oh, and by the way if that bill had passed, as soon as G.W. signed it the illegals become legal, typically you pay before you get out of jail in this case your status changes and you're relied upon to act like a responsible legal citizen.

How about all the immigrants waiting to become citizens LEGALLY?? Play by the rules and get screwed!! What does that tell future immigrants??

How about:

ATTRITION THROUGH ENFORCEMENT

Here's something about your friend Fred

Thompson's candidacy appears to present the most challenges for McCain. One of only three senators to endorse his candidacy when the lawmaker from Arizona sought the presidency in 2000, Thompson has been basking in media attention even as McCain has been the subject of attacks from the party base on the compromise immigration legislation he helped shape. Though the two shared remarkably similar voting records in the Senate, Thompson has assailed the immigration bill, which many Republicans dislike. He has also worked hard to convince social conservatives, who remain suspicious of McCain, that he is strongly against abortion.

For the whole story

Defections to Fred Thompson Pose a Major threat to McCain

I do feel for you and your illegal wife and that must be a real challenge. Good luck!! However I'm also passionate about this topic and the future of our Country.

[wkmac]

Brazen,
I understand on the one hand about putting up a fence to keep the illegals from getting in and there are pros and cons to whether it would work. If you come home and a waterline is burst and the house flooded, you shutoff the water to stop the flow and then you bail out the water. Simplistic but it's a point none the less.

What does bother me about the wall/fence harkens back to the cold war years when this President we had during the period made a speech and had the gonads to tell the leader of another empire to "Tear Down This Wall!" That wall was built to actually keep people in and prevent them from escaping to what they considered a terrible life that they were being forced by law to live. In time, the wall did come down with great joy and happiness from peoples everywhere.

Yes a wall could stop certain people from entering this country but it can also be used to prevent people from leaving as well. History has proven so many times in the past that people on a whim are stupid enough to not think things through and then in the future elect someone who becomes their worse nightmare. We think we are to smart and better than that but so did many of those other folks too who made the tragic history we read of today.

We stand and tell the world via another empire to tear down the wall and then we go and build one ourselves. What does that say about us?

[big_arrow_up]

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

Ok, call it what you want! Had this bill passed just how many of the illegals do you think would be getting in line to pay and follow the rules?

Based on the conversations my wife and I have had with many of them I feel comfortable in saying that most of them will come forward. The ones that won't are the minority that have been commiting crimes, in addition to crossing the border, such as theft, drunk driving, murder, etc.. So in a way...the bill would weed out the serious criminals from the the ones that just came here to work. There will also be a few here and there will not come foward due to mistrust of the govt. Some feel that they are being tricked into "comming out of the shadows" just so that INS can deport them.

Remember they've already broken the law at least once to get here. So let's be nice and say that 50% of them would act responsible, which would still leave several million here granted AMNESTY (paid no fines and did not return to his country) because they have not done what was required of them.

Yes, everyone knows they broke the law to get here but over 90% did so to work. We are not talking bout an army people that are just here to cause trouble. So, I must say that that 50% assumption is way off. And what ever the small percentage ends up being, and it will be very small, they will not have amnesty. It's not amnesty if they aren't legalized. They will still be subject to deportation if caught. And it's like I said above. Those that don't come forward will be mostly the "bad apples" and it will be easier to catch and deport them as long as people such as the ACLU stay out of the way.

Oh, and by the way if that bill had passed, as soon as G.W. signed it the illegals become legal, typically you pay before you get out of jail in this case your status changes and you're relied upon to act like a responsible legal citizen.

It's highly unreasonable to send them home or to jail just so we can say that they were punished properly. Especially since most came here to work. It's funny to me because everyone is so passionate about getting rid of these people because they broke the law just to be able to work, yet, no one seems to have a problem with all the welfare scum we have here in the country already. What's there excuse?! My wife risked her life by crossing a desert and dealing with "Coyotes" that rape their "cargo" and sometimes kill them, not to mention worrying about the crooked Mexican Army, just to be able to get here to work and we have people that live within walking distance of jobs, yet, they supposedly can't find a job? LOL.

How about all the immigrants waiting to become citizens LEGALLY?? Play by the rules and get screwed!! What does that tell future immigrants??

They got screwed in 1986 too. The problem I have with the immigration system is that it obviously doesn't allow for enough lower tier laborers to come in. I say obviously because that's what most of the illegals are doing. My wife could get screwed. We are trying to fix her status without waiting on the current immigration bill to pass. If it was to pass while she is in Mexico waiting to come back then that would be a little frustrating. It's hard to decide whether ot not to wait ot press ahead on our own. The old schoolway. LOL.

I do feel for you and your illegal wife and that must be a real challenge. Good luck!! However I'm also passionate about this topic and the future of our Country.

I must say I agree but I don't think that allowing the ones that are already here to stay and work is going to destroy this country. I belive that the border must be secured to keep more from comming in. Workers or not there will be too many if they continue to stream across. Plus, you never know who is piggy back riding in with them. Terrorists? I honestly believe that the true threat to this country, as far as immigrants are concerned, are the legal immigrants. Our govt. let's too many people in here legally that seem to have an agenda against this country. Terrorists that come here legally and over stay their visas, therefore being illegal, are the ones that concern me.

[tieguy]

Originally Posted by wkmac

OK, whether real or imagine, just forget that for the moment because here's the reality. The ultra rightees boy Bush is in reality a change agent and is working for the other side. Proof? Well Ted Kennedy's agenda in front and center in the legislation (this schitt happens all the time to fool the masses)and whose out here selling the whole thing with all his might? None other than Captain Wonderful from Texas himself and he's has his storebought conservative spokesman Tony Snow all week hitting the talk shows that service the repub. base trying his might to get the masses to drink the coolaid.

I really don't think its all that odd. Bush has always been more of a middle of the road guy then a right wing neo con. Bush is running his agenda not Kennedys.

As for the democrats well what can I say they have always lead the troops from the rear.

[brazenbrown]

Berlin Wall / Border fence

Cold War / War on Terror

Communism / Islomofacism

Anti Jew / Anti American and western world


WWII,Nazi Germany& The Japanese/ Afghanistan's Taliban & Iraq's Sadam, Al Qaeda


The names have changed but as we already know, history has a way of repeating itself.

Unfortunately others make it so we have to secure our borders, it's not the only solution but it's a start.

How many more 911's can we afford??

What does it say about us if we don't protect us??

As I've quoted before:

"The courageous heroes on the world scene are not those men and women in poor countries who have the energy, the intelligence, and the skills to escape to a rich country but rather those remaining with their people. Rather than focus on improving conditions for themselves and their families by emigrating, they strive to raise the conditions for whole communities." by Roy Beck

If this were common place the need for a fence/wall may not be necessary.

[brazenbrown]

Originally Posted by big_arrow_up

I must say I agree but I don't think that allowing the ones that are already here to stay and work is going to destroy this country. I belive that the border must be secured to keep more from comming in. Workers or not there will be too many if they continue to stream across. Plus, you never know who is piggy back riding in with them. Terrorists? I honestly believe that the true threat to this country, as far as immigrants are concerned, are the legal immigrants. Our govt. let's too many people in here legally that seem to have an agenda against this country. Terrorists that come here legally and over stay their visas, therefore being illegal, are the ones that concern me.

You're right!! I don't think it will destroy the Country either until the next 12 million sneak in and want the same treatment. Don't you see that we're setting a bad precedent here? We're condoning the breaking of the law. Whether they claim they're here for work or whatever.

What if you had a fake ID and got by the guard shack at a UPS facility, made into a center that was down drivers that day because of sick calls? You find a sup and in his moment of weakness he says to take this package car over here and he'll give you $30 to go deliver 70 stops.

You get my point? Boy would the union have a field day with this one!

Again, we're putting the cart before the horse. First we secure the border, stop the inflow now!! We must invoke severe penalties for company's hiring illegal immigrants and make them hire legal citizens.

The legal ones are not the problem. Yes, there were problems prior to 911 and yes some over stayed their visas and even learned to fly planes. However, Homeland Security and the FBI and other government agencies have really put a stop to that. The proof...we have not had another attack. It's not like they haven't tried either, but in most cases they've been identified prior to blowing us up.

If a terrorist attack is going to happen again on American soil it will be from someone already here or from someone that can just waltz across the border when he feels like it.

The terrorist element is not the only reason to put an end to illegals crossing the border. For people to assimilate into a society it needs to be done in a way that shows respect for that soceity and in a controlled and measured way with legal immigration rules.

[UPS Lifer]

A friend talked to me about the parallel of a bird feeder to immigration.
I just recently noticed this similarity.

When I moved to Sedona I had to cut some trees down, so to get the birds back I added a bird feeder. The birds came back. Originally the food lasted about a week. Then it got down to 2 days. So to keep from filling it up so often I added another feeder. Same scenario...1 week down to 2 days.

In the past 2 years I have added 3 more feeders and a 25 lb block that sits on the ground. I went from a 10 lb bag of feed replacing once a month to a 50 lb bag every 3 weeks. We have 25 to fifty birds at any given time. I also added a bird bath. Along with the birds came the crap!!!!!

I finally had to stop feeding the birds, there were too many....and guess what - they all went away. None of them stayed!!!

Do you see where I am going with this?

It is real simple....stop the services - finger print the illegals and create a step ladder fine process that will equate to confinement for the illegals and thier employers. If we deport them...deport them to the furthest point from our country. They will stop coming. None of our other laws need to be changed and we probably won't have to add a fence. It won't be needed!

[hoser]

Originally Posted by brazenbrown

You see, it's not a racist thing or a I hate immigrant's thing. It's a number's thing (too many people, too fast) and when you come to this Country Illegally, break the law and feel entitled to have anchor babies, smuggle drugs, clog up our emergency rooms, create over crowding problems in our schools, don't pay your fair share of taxes and send home billions of American dollars, and then have the nerve to hold up a Mexican flag like this is freaking Mexico.. that's just not cool in fact it's loco!!

If we don't control the way this is going then we will just end up another poor third world country... Then maybe we'll have to migrate somewhere else if there's any place left.

USA is a Mosaik IMO. They say Canada is, and I don't see much difference between the integration of immigrants in these cultures.

The Mosaik needs some time to get it's crap together (too many people Illegal and Legal too fast) so it can remain a beautiful and desirable Country for many years to come.

hey, i never said you were anti-immigrant, xenophobic, etc. as the grandson of a Belorussian refugee, you can't find anyone more pro-immigration than I. I just believe the best solution for (legal) immigration is to do nothing. They'll take care of themselves. Saying that they should speak english is absurd; it's in their best interest to speak english. The reason why you have some groups of immigrants having issues integrating is because of the good ol' USA standard of suburbanization. Guaranteed that if LA wasn't as suburbanized, many of the issues would go away (just like how the 911 terrorists hid so well because they lived in private gated suburbs--ironically designed for security).

Of course, the whole illegal thing just skews things more. Everyone seems so shocked by the underground economy number (that 40% of people work without paying taxes), and that number is misleading due to the spin "primarily due to illegals". You pay granny cash for her to make a quilt, she's apart of that stat. Just as much as you pay the kid mowing the lawn cash or the 4th generation Californian cash to build your deck on the weekend. Not to mention that tracing the underground economy is f'n difficult if not impossible.

I hate seeing these illegal Mexicans used as a scapegoat for all of these problems. The USA is a strong nation that has done well under any difficulty (yes, including the century-long tradition of illegal Mexican immigration!) Regardless what happens, not much will change, despite what Wolf Blizer or Lou Dobbs may decry.