Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Eighteen Illegal Alien solutions that are better than any Amnesty
January 7th, 2003 | Sabertooth

Posted on 01/07/2004 8:25:32 AM PST by Sabertooth

Well, today’s the big day, if the leaks and reports coming from the Bush Administration are true. The President is supposed to announce a new direction in America’s immigration policy that would result, among other things, in some sort of legalization for millions of the Illegal Aliens currently in our country, violating our laws. This, of course, would be nothing less than Amnesty by another name.

We’re told by handwringers and the political and media elites that there is really no workable solution to the Illegal Alien problem, so we might as well legalize them so we can get track of them. Thouughtless people on both sides of the debate jawbone about silly ideas like building a wall at the Mexican border, or house to house searches, as though they were viable solutions, or the only alternatives to Amnesty ore the status quo.

It’s disappointing, frankly. There is a great disconnect when people claim that while we can put men on the moon, or win the Cold War and the War on Terror, there is no reasonable or cost effective means of solving the Illegal Alien problem without infringing on the civil liberties of all Americans.

Nonsense, this nation is plenty capable of solving any problem we decide to solve, and poll after poll shows that the American people want the problem of Illegal Aliens solved, and that Amnesty isn’t a solution to us.

Dealing with Illegals doesn't have to be the enormous burden on resources many imagine, not would it have to infringe on civil liberties.

I've posted this on a few threads, but today seems like a good day for a revised reposting of as a stand-alone thread.

This problem is no harder to solve than wanting to solve it. We can get rid of Illegals rather effectively, by rolling up our sleeves and getting the Illegals to get rid of themselves.

The first order of business, of course, is to enforce existing laws on the books against Illegals and those who employ them. Also, politicians must be held to account when they pander otherwise.

Then...

The list above is by no means comprehensive, and can be adopted piecemeal or in a single package. That said, incrementalism is probably going to be the way to go, especially politically.

These measures would provide a little carrot and lots of stick for Illegals already here to get themselves out. Some of them will need to be tested in the courts, which is another reason to adopt them piecemeal, so that an injunction against omnibus legislation can't stall the whole effort.

We ought to be looking initially at easy, politically safe legislation, like the new accounting for family reunification, Border Security/IRS cooperation, English speaking citizenship requirements, and a few others. Our politicians are a trembling, timid bunch, and need to gain a little self-confidence before they'll tackle more difficult issues.

Note a few things that aren't on my list: troops or walls on the border. I think they are a futile diversion from cost effective solutions. The best possible wall at the border is to let foreigners know that we respect our sovereignty, and they had best do the same.

Note that their are no house to house searches.

Note also that I don't call for an immigration moratorium, though others may. I think their position is within the respectable mainstream of a dialogue about immigration, and while it's possible that I might change my mind later, but I am not currently persuaded that an outright moratorium is or will be necessary.

The main problem is multimillion-strong mass of Illegals, and the secondary problem is how we currently select legal immigrants for rapid assimilation into American society. I believe my proposals adequately address both situations, but there is certainly room for debate on the back end.

Note also that I have a guest worker program that is actually honest and responsible, and not an Amnesty by another name. My program would ensure that law-abiding foreigners are background-checked before entry, rather than rewarding lawbreaking Illegals after the fact.

All of the above could be adopted while allowing politicians so-inclined to chant the "compassionate conservatism" mantra.

A few final thoughts...

My proposals will cost money and require an expansion of the federal government in certain areas. However, this expense and expansion is all well within the legitimate, Constitutional responsibilities of the federal government. There will be a greater expense initially, as we ramp up to deal with the backlog of Illegals, but a number of my proposals are at least partially self-funding. Also, success in these endeavors will eventually reduce the need for them, and as many Illegals would leave on their own. There will be future savings, it should be noted, as the population of Illegals is dwindles and their net drain on our resources is reduced.

In contrast, there would be also be an increased expense and expansion of the government if there is an Amnesty, as checking backgrounds and processing 8 to 12 million Illegals wouldn't be cheap. However, such increases and expansions would only serve to reward the lawlessness of Illegals and the cowardice of politicians, thereby encouraging more of the same in both, unless there were also enforcement proposals like mine in effect for the American Interior.

But, if we strengthened and enforced our laws consistently within our borders, then we don't need the phantom solution of Amnesty anyway.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Arizona; US: California; US: New Mexico; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; illegalaliens; illegals; immigrantlist; immigration
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last




Revised and updated for today's announcement.

Feel free to add your own!


1 posted on 01/07/2004 8:25:34 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
mega bump! you da man Saber :>
2 posted on 01/07/2004 8:28:53 AM PST by KantianBurke (Don't Tread on Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CheneyChick; vikingchick; Victoria Delsoul; WIMom; kmiller1k; mhking; rdb3; Travis McGee; Shermy; ..




FYI


3 posted on 01/07/2004 8:29:26 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: *immigrant_list; A Navy Vet; Lion Den Dan; Free the USA; Libertarianize the GOP; madfly; B4Ranch; ..
ping
5 posted on 01/07/2004 8:31:25 AM PST by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Hear, Hear!! I like the way you think.
6 posted on 01/07/2004 8:31:50 AM PST by RiflemanSharpe (An American for a more socially and fiscally conservation America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
"Mexico must open up to American investment by allowing the sale of real estate to us and guaranteeing property our rights. Getting Mexico to fix its economy is crucial. "

I always put this first. It's such a basic reciprocal item.
Heck, they'd probably have to limit immigration of Americans if we could buy land there.

7 posted on 01/07/2004 8:35:31 AM PST by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Righter-than-Rush
You may want to change your screen name to Righter-than-Genghis.
8 posted on 01/07/2004 8:37:35 AM PST by Coop (God bless our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
4: Beef up Border Security with manpower, resources, and a Volunteer Reserve, if necessary. No troops, and no messing with posse comitatus, this should be a civilian effort.

The Legislature has a Constitutional power to provide for calling forth the militia to repel invasions, per Article I Section 8, and the Federal government has a Constitutional duty to protect each of the states from invasion under Article IV Section 4.

Why does this need to be a civilian effort given these facts? It seems to me that the State of Arizona should file a suit against the US Government under Article IV Section 4.

9 posted on 01/07/2004 8:38:33 AM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Agree with your suggestions for fixing the problem -- they need to be sent to all of our Congressmen and Senators IMO. Since Congress has the final say, every Freeper should be sending these and their own comments to their Congressional people.
10 posted on 01/07/2004 8:39:02 AM PST by PhiKapMom (AOII Mom -- Support Bush-Cheney '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
If we really started cracking down I dont think there is alot of employers who would be willing to risk jail or losing their businesses. Maybe we should throw in a bounty to illegals who turn in their own employers as well.
11 posted on 01/07/2004 8:39:45 AM PST by PuNcH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Why does this need to be a civilian effort given these facts?

"Invasion" has a specific meaning in law, particularly with respect to international borders.

Unless you are saying that this is an actual invasion being conducted by the Mexican government, it's a civil law enforcement issue, and the Posse Comitatus Act forbids the use of the military for civil law enforcement.

12 posted on 01/07/2004 8:41:50 AM PST by Poohbah ("Beware the fury of a patient man" -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Karl Rove is Grima Wormtongue.
Is President Bush King Theoden?
Will Tom Tancredo accept the role of Gandalf?
Ron Paul as Aragorn?
AAARRRGGGGHHHH!!! Sauroman has poisened the RNC's tiny weak brain!!
13 posted on 01/07/2004 8:42:40 AM PST by Xthe17th ("What is the use of being elected or re-elected unless you stand for something?" - Grover Cleveland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
The Legislature has a Constitutional power to provide for calling forth the militia to repel invasions, per Article I Section 8, and the Federal government has a Constitutional duty to protect each of the states from invasion under Article IV Section 4.

Why does this need to be a civilian effort given these facts? It seems to me that the State of Arizona should file a suit against the US Government under Article IV Section 4.

Because the invasion is civilian, not military, and because we civilians are perfectly capable of accomplishing the task.

Troops on the borders and walls on the borders are examples of unrealistic, unnecessary, and counterproductive rhetorical overkill. We can solve the problem of Illegals asymmetrically.

The biggest problems with border enforcement are in the interior, not at the border. Enforce the law beyond the border, and the border will become more secure, as the incentive of a safe zone for Illegals will be removed.


14 posted on 01/07/2004 8:43:42 AM PST by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Revised and updated for today's announcement. Feel free to add your own!
I don't think there is anything to add. Nice post, thanks.
15 posted on 01/07/2004 8:43:54 AM PST by wjcsux (DemocRATS, out of touch with America, out of touch with reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Thouughtless people on both sides of the debate jawbone about silly ideas like building a wall at the Mexican border, or house to house searches, as though they were viable solutions, or the only alternatives to Amnesty ore the status quo.

Exactly! Even if those ideas worked, there are much easier ways to stop this attack on our borders and our sovereignty.

This invasion of our country could have been stopped years ago, easily.

But unfortunately, the political elite in DC have no desire to implement these solutions. It' not part of their agenda, not part of their plan.

16 posted on 01/07/2004 8:44:20 AM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmith
Of course Mexico stole property from Americans
in 1934.
They nationalized all American assets in Mexico.
FDR did nothing about this, in fact he would have
nationalized American land and companies if he had
dared.
17 posted on 01/07/2004 8:44:43 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran (A little knowledge is dangerous.-- I live dangerously::))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I have one:
 
SABERTOOTH FOR PRESIDENT!!!
 

Owl_Eagle

" WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
DIVERSITY IS STRENGTH"


18 posted on 01/07/2004 8:45:32 AM PST by South Hawthorne (Fly Eagles Fly, On the Road to Victory! Fly Eagles Fly, Score a Touchdown One Two Three!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
With you all the way on this. You could append #12 by saying that no child born in this country will automatically become a citizen of the U.S. unless one of the parents is themselves a citizen. The other parent must at minimum legally able to reside here. If not, then the child reverts to the citizenship status of the non citizen parent.
19 posted on 01/07/2004 8:45:34 AM PST by SpinyNorman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Yesterday's White House press release was posted here in Illegals proposal focuses on work as reported in the Washinton Times. That thread has gotten little attention so I'll post my replies to the White House here.

Illegal immigrants who can prove they have jobs can stay in the country legally for three years.

And those who can't will just keep doing what they are doing.

In that period, they can bring family members to the United States and enjoy rights now reserved for Americans and for foreigners with permanent-resident status, including Social Security benefits.

They already bring their family members and legal status means paying taxes. This will be a step down for them.

"It will protect the rights of illegal workers who now live in the shadows and are fearful of coming out of the shadows for fear of deportation," a White House official said yesterday.

With only 130,000 deportations a year these 10 million illegals have little to fear and they don't live in the shadows.

Mr. Bush's guest-worker proposal, which Congress must approve, would be "temporary in nature. One must go home upon conclusion of the program."

Sounds like a major disincentive to sign up for the program. But wait ...

During the three-year period, the aliens would have permission to leave the country and come back as needed, and could renew their three-year involvement in the program, the official said.

I see; so they'll be permanently temporary!?!

But the official said the two programs -- temporary-work status and permanent residence -- essentially will be "two separate doors" foreign workers must walk through.

No problemo. They are already skilled at jumping fences to avoid walking through doors.

"The temporary-worker program is a way to work here legally short of the United States citizenship, under a certain set of conditions. ... And then door number two is the normal naturalization process, which includes permanent legal status. We're trying not to blur those two things together."

You're doing a bangup job of it for not trying.

While acquiring a green card can take as long as six years, the official said illegal aliens can re-enroll for the new Bush program, which means that many will be able to remain in the United States until they get permanent-resident status.

Ahh! Now I see why you say you're not blurring the line. You're obliterating it!

Illegal aliens who enroll in the program will have no fear of deportation and can come and go between the United States and their country of citizenship "as they wish," a White House official said.

They already do. I think this White House official needs to take a walk and clear his head.
May I suggest Ft. Marcy Park?


20 posted on 01/07/2004 8:47:47 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
By the way, what time is the announcement scheduled for?
21 posted on 01/07/2004 8:49:51 AM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I agree wholeheartedly with your list of ideas. Good combination of carrots and sticks. However, #12 may be a bit tricky as I think it might require a Constitutional Amendment. Please correct me if I am wrong on the Constitutional description of a "native born" citizen.
22 posted on 01/07/2004 8:57:29 AM PST by RebelBanker (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Vanity or not, many of these suggestions are common sense approaches to dealing with the "immigration problem."
23 posted on 01/07/2004 9:03:01 AM PST by capitan_refugio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
You missed the most overlooked one:

REFORM WELFARE!

24 posted on 01/07/2004 9:04:36 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
8: Seize the assets of businesses knowingly hiring Illegals under the RICO Act, as they are ongoing criminal enterprises. Prosecute executives who knowingly hire Illegals.

That measure alone would probably send 90% of them home if seriously enforced. Good job Saber!

25 posted on 01/07/2004 9:07:56 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Vanity or not, many of these suggestions are common sense approaches to dealing with the "immigration problem."

The issue of "anchor babies" can be solved by allowing offspring of illegals born in the US (or, for that matter, of legal non-citizens) to claim their citizenship "upon attainment of their majority" (i.e. when they become adults).

26 posted on 01/07/2004 9:08:48 AM PST by capitan_refugio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Thanks for the ping.
27 posted on 01/07/2004 9:10:23 AM PST by CounterCounterCulture (My karma ran over my dogma)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
El Rushbo just said that it is scheduled for 2:45 EST.
28 posted on 01/07/2004 9:10:34 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Thanks. I wont miss it.
29 posted on 01/07/2004 9:12:06 AM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I'm not sure about outlawing the matricular consular. ID is ID and at various times banks have to accept foreign IDs, as do our government officials on occasion. As long as we have legal visitors those visitors might want to do some banking and might get speeding tickets and these are valid times to present whatever ID their government is providing and each bank or government agency is going to have to decide if that's good enough for them. Unless a particular kind of ID is useless for identification purposes (like the old AZ drivers licenses that looked like cheap school yard forgeries) there's no reason to set a blanket policy.
30 posted on 01/07/2004 9:13:59 AM PST by discostu (stay alert, trust no one, keep your laser handy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
You bet. The big question is why didn't they implement these simple solutions and other solutions years ago?

The answer to that question is the root of this corrupt lunacy.
31 posted on 01/07/2004 9:14:29 AM PST by Joe Hadenuf (I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Lots of good ideas. Nothing has prevented us from doing them for the last few decades. If we wanted to do so, we could have. Why do you think we haven't? What has changed to make you think we are now willing to deal with the massive illegal immigration into this country?

I think effective enforcement of existing immigration laws would resolve the problem of illegal immigration, and the massive illegal alien population. Obviously, that hasn't been happening for some decades. I think there is a lack of will, or desire, on the part of Americans to resolve the illegal immigration problem by enforcing the existing laws. As Ridge has suggested, if that is the case, let's revisit the laws to reflect what we really want to enforce. If not, that makes the case for stepping up enforcement of existing law.

There are two problems: ongoing illegal immigration and the massive existing population of illegal aliens.

The existing illegal alien population must be dealt with in some way, such as an amnesty, or deported. However you deal with this problem, it does not resolve the problem of ongoing illegal immigration.

Ongoing illegal immigration is the problem that must be resolved first.

I look forward to hearing what President Bush has to offer in the way of resolving the problem of ongoing illegal immigration.
32 posted on 01/07/2004 9:18:36 AM PST by TheDon (Have a Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
13: Outlaw bilingual ballots, and resume the English-speaking requirements for citizenship. 14: Establish English skills as a prerequisite for future immigrants. Let's start admitting folks who will hit the ground running toward assimilation.

Good gosh, this all makes too much sense, but these 2 in particular... gold! If we could get over ourselves, and over political correctness, we'd realize how good that would be for EVERYONE concerned!

33 posted on 01/07/2004 9:20:17 AM PST by brownsfan (I didn't leave the democratic party, the democratic party left me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Hadenuf
"No controlling legal authority?" or is it "No indwelling ethical principles?"
34 posted on 01/07/2004 9:20:53 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Can we start a fund to hire some lawyers to file suit against businesses that hire illegals?
35 posted on 01/07/2004 9:21:37 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
The existing illegal alien population must be dealt with in some way, such as an amnesty, or deported.

I like Sabertooth's solutions better since neither of these two will work.

36 posted on 01/07/2004 9:23:37 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: discostu
If they are in the country legally, they have no need for a Matricula Consular as a form of photo identification. They can use their passport, their foreign drivers' license or ID card, etc.
37 posted on 01/07/2004 9:23:44 AM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Gosh, even one of them would be a help. All 18 would likely fix the problem. Walls--well, they can be climbed or broken through. The thing is, the main reason we can't keep them out right now is that there is too much in it for them to keep coming in. Amnesty will release torrents we can't even imagine, and it's bad enough now.
38 posted on 01/07/2004 9:25:08 AM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Don't know how politically viable it all is, but it sounds more like what I want to do than whatever we're likely to see anytime soon.
39 posted on 01/07/2004 9:26:09 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

The vast majority of American's do not support amnesty for illegal aliens. Immigration laws should be followed and border security should be strengthened and enforced. Many foreigners have waited years to enter America legally and eventually become American citizens. People who follow the legal process should be given priority. It's an injustice and frankly, it's immoral to reward people with citizenship, who have entered the US illegally. Illegal aliens should be prosecuted, fined, deported and if necessary imprisoned.

Bottom line, amnesty and open borders aren't the answer to solve the problem of illegal immigration.

40 posted on 01/07/2004 9:28:13 AM PST by Reagan Man (The few, the proud, the conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
Maybe, but there's no garauntee that someone with a MC is here illegally.
41 posted on 01/07/2004 9:29:32 AM PST by discostu (stay alert, trust no one, keep your laser handy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: rintense; Sabretooth
"Reform welfare"

If I were writing the laws, there would be no benefits for illegals. Even schools should demand proof of citizenship before admitting them.

42 posted on 01/07/2004 9:31:19 AM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Can we start a fund to hire some lawyers to file suit against businesses that hire illegals?

I don't know. Would a civil suit go very far with this? The plaintiffs would have to show demonstrable harm done and I think that would be difficult.

How about a grassroots initiative to identify and publicize these employers?

43 posted on 01/07/2004 9:31:42 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
The politicians and corporate lobbyists who bring the cheap labor in will attempt to compromise by throwing out western culture (i.e., of European descent) immigrants who are in on family visas--those who have spent thousands of dollars and several years trying to do it right. ...happens every time.

What gets me is that it's not about money. It's about vanity. Mexican immigrants in western US cities brag about getting $14 per hour as concrete construction laborers. There are millions of Anglo men in the US who are more than willing to do the same. ...corporates who lobby for easier, cheaper work visas just don't like back-talk when things get mob-like.
44 posted on 01/07/2004 9:32:38 AM PST by familyop (Essayons - motto of good, stable psychotics with a purpose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Perhaps you are confusing the problem of ongoing illegal immigration with that of existing illegal aliens? The solutions suggested would certainly resolve the latter, but not the former.
45 posted on 01/07/2004 9:34:19 AM PST by TheDon (Have a Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Picket WalMart with signs saying they hire illegals?
46 posted on 01/07/2004 9:37:04 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Talk to people living on the borders. A lot of them can show "demonstrable harm" already, as the thousands of illegals cross over their farms and ranches, taking what they want, vandalizing a good deal of it, and generally making life a nightmare.
47 posted on 01/07/2004 9:38:21 AM PST by MizSterious (First, the journalists, THEN the lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
I am not confusing the two and the solutions offered would most certainly solve them both. The fact is you are creating a false duality. Those who are here were once there. Those who are there (and coming) will be here. Take away the reasons for being here and both those who are here and those thinking of coming here will opt for being there.
48 posted on 01/07/2004 9:41:33 AM PST by TigersEye (Regime change in the courts. - Impeach activist judges!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
"Because the invasion is civilian, not military, and because we civilians are perfectly capable of accomplishing the task."

Hmmm. A few months, a year, or so, ago, Fox and other Mexican government officials encouraged Mexican citizens to get into the USA. They also push for getting rid of all barriers to labor immigration. They want the money to come back to their country from the US. Our employers simply want to be lords without responsibilities.

I am way conservative on social issues and very much against socialism. But then many of our employers (not all) are trying to bring socialism in by a different route--participating in the planned destruction of the family. For the most part, singles don't vote Republican.
49 posted on 01/07/2004 9:45:01 AM PST by familyop (Essayons - motto of good, stable psychotics with a purpose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
We are caught between a rock and a hard place on this issue...imo

Many operators of large corporate farms and processing plants say they cant stay in business without guest workers/illegal aliens...around here-(Wi.) these same places seem to do just fine a few years go using local part time/seasonal workers..college and high school kids..(Lots of college kids worked in the canneries and food processing plants in Stevens Point, Wi area until it was filled with Mexicans...who are now causing real headaches for law enforcement in the area...)

So if the illegals have to stay...its really because they are more reliable and cheaper help...

They also don't complain about low wages (they are happy to get half of what the locals get in pay and benefits)
They live communally to save money to send home to Mexico
They show up ..work hard...and don't file workman's comp or unemployment claims..they don't sue if they get hurt or feel discriminated against..

As their numbers increase they are more visible in the local farming communities..many of the ones I see are acting more and more like gang members...they intimidate and threaten...(not long ago in Stevens Point some of these guest workers tried to break into Co-Ed housing and fired a gun shot though one of the girls windows- they were chased away by local cops..no one was arrested)...There seems to be an increasing amount of violent encounters between the Mexicans and the locals..with the police seeming to favor the Mexicans over the locals..as not many of them seem to get arrested charged or jailed..as locals

One of my 'favorite' guest workers in my area likes to wear a T-Shirt with the image of Che Guevara on it.....a mean looking young man with a perpetual frown...he brought his wife and several children with him this past year..one of many new faces in our area..they seem to be increasing exponentially...Wi has very liberal welafare..educational and medical services for illegals..we are already a real magnet for them..

According to Wi. crime reports...these same guest workers are also dealing and importing Mexican "red" Methamphetamine

Sabertooth's suggestions have merit...but not sealing the borders with troops is not prudent..

Unless the civilians have the power to arrest and detain...and cant be sued by pro immigrant or anti American groups like the ACLU or La Raza

The govt must also act to deport and prosecute such illegal aliens imo...of course to deport simply means they will be back in a few months showing up in other states...

One solution is biometrics..but much money will have to be put into scanners and other high tech expensive technology..of course the bonus is that these things can then be used on US citizens later on...as can troops in violation of Posse Commitatus..

Perhaps this was the plan from the git...

My native Texan bro-in-law owned a construction company in southeast Texas...he and I dont share the same views on immigration/invasion...back when he was running his company he swore that he could not make it without the use of 'cheap foreign labor'..and was very close to the ones he hired..

I worked with Mexicans on the railroad back in the early 70s and no one works harder or more efficiently..so I could see his point...

If these guest workers are perceived as taking jobs from Americans who cannot compete with them in their own country...(cant work as cheaply or without health benefits) I think there will be some real trouble around here...

As long as there is a surplus of jobs no one wants..then its a good deal to have them among us..

However once they obtain some sort of equal status...how will we get rid of them..if push comes to shove..The employers certainly wont..and the locals wont take too kindly to not getting work when foreigners receive aid from their taxes and have preference over them in hiring..

The truth is we have neglected to form a policy and stick to it...and now at least Pres Bush is trying to..perhaps with enough feedback from his constituency he will become a little more conservative in his policies..which for my money he needs be...

IMO

50 posted on 01/07/2004 9:45:06 AM PST by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-171 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson