Posted on 01/23/2004 4:37:58 PM PST by Beck_isright
They can be ---- but the real problem is then the citizens of Mexico who want better lives will have to demand that of their own officials --- that is not what the ruling elites of Mexico want to do --- they don't want changes that would allow the majority to have a piece of that pie --- they like having all the wealth to themselves.
Why isn't Bush starting on that? The government housing projects are filled with illegals --- and legal immigrants who are not good productive working types --- and they just keep getting more handouts. $1 billion in the Medicare bill set aside for the free health care of foreigners who broke the laws to be here? Wasn't Medicare originally for retirees?
It's not that I'm only hurting myself. The measure is whether, or not it is a fundamental assault on individual Freedom. One way to gage a judgement is whether, or not the command of the law fits the dictates of an overprotective mama. How to dress, what to eat, what activities you can't participate in, what safety measures you must take, ect.
The seatbelt law is a perfect example of a cunning, sneaking, lying, vicious overprotective mama. First they forced the belts into everyone's vehicle, then after some time passed they made it a secondary offense, so that each time they were repremanded for one thing, they'd bitch about that too. Now that most of their children are wearing them, they use it as a primary justification to scrutinize, harass, punish and even some really nasty ones use it as an excuse to go after other people's kids to rob them on the hwys.
"However, having an immigration policy /sets of laws is reasonable."
That's right it is. Now whether any particular laws, or points of law are, is another question. That's what this thread is about. The gages to measure a law's reasonableness, fairness and whether it is at all justified is whether and how it affects Freedom and whether it fits the the govm'ts sole justification for existance, which is rights protection.
Out of all that's been said, it is clear that the present law does not differentiate between the good guys and the bad guys. The good guys are the ones that are hard workers and have a job. The others are screwups that have no decency and work ethic. They way the present law is written has that overprotective mama aspect. It places arbitrary limits on those searching for opportunity. There is no justification for doing so, other than to make an erroneous claim that those limits protect American workers.
The focus of the proposal is to have Congress create a set of laws that will in effect give LE everywhere a clear and reasonable order to deport bad guys. Those same laws can and should be structured to order business, States and locals to get with the plan.
The proposal calls for a fundamental change, the creation and implementation of a sorting mechanism and prohibition of State and local interferance with the plan. Welfare is not gainful employment.
" but the real problem is then the citizens of Mexico who want better lives will have to demand that of their own officials --- that is not what the ruling elites of Mexico want to do --- they don't want changes that would allow the majority to have a piece of that pie --- they like having all the wealth to themselves."
They are corrupt socialists that have no respect for Freedom at all. The US should do what it can to promote it there, but that's really a separate issue. The issue here is ops here in the US. The number of rats and moderate wanderers in this country that have to be dealt with are a more pressing problem that Americans need to deal with.
This proposal allows those that are good, but have no power to change MX tyrany and corruption to escape. If implemented correctly, it leaves no room for reasonable, or justifiable claims of human rights violations, or compassion for strict enforcement.
"but often that work ethic they have is kind of backward --- you can tell a Mexican to plow your field, he'll grab a shovel and get to work, you tell an American to plow your field, he'll ask where is the tractor."
That's not my observation. Work ethic is independent of any choice of tools. Tool choice depends on intelligence and amongst all groups there are varying levels. Freedom calls for allowing individuals to make their own choices, business arrangements and associations, tool use...In general to determine their own destiny in their pursuits.
He's putting the nation on notice to this very fact, and how he wants to change it.
What would you do, and how would you do it? And how would you deal with the millions already here?
Contrarily, I think God is about borders, both moral, spiritual and physical. All of these figured from Egypt to Sinai into Cannan.
God lays borders and soverignty out specifically in Deuteronomy 34. And, I believe, in His divine purpose for history, expects at least America and Israel to defend theirs toward their continued projection and promotion of goodness in the world.
Ending the guest worker program was the biggest piece, IMNHO.
Suppose a law were enacted forbidding you from obtaining gainful employment.
You now have two options:
1. Starve
2. Break the law
Which one would YOU pick?
Guest workers usually took their money and went back home to their families at the end of the season.
The problem is that, without a guest-worker program, each border crossing is made illegally and thus has an element of risk.
To minimize this risk, the illegal alien has to cross once and stay. That changes the dynamic considerably. In addition, the illegal alien now brings his family--and so, instead of one guest worker coming and going, we now have 2-5 illegal immigrants here on a permanent basis.
Frankly, I offer links to my own essays on the subject, rather than take up bandwith by posting them, as a consideration both to the Forum and to other posters. It would take you only a couple of seconds to click on the links below, to read my proposals on Immigration--which incidentally are consistent with my support for the McCarran-Walter Immigration Act from my Freshman year in College, on. The following essay, simply brings the argument for an origins conscious policy--the traditional Conservative approach--up to date:
Immigration & The American Future.
If you want to debate ideas on immigration, by all means do so. But do not just rely on the argument that at least the Administration has a proposal, as a reason to accept that proposal.
William Flax
Deuteronomy 34:5 "And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said."
God does not reign over the dead, but the living. The only important borders are between Heaven, Earth and Hell. In the same way Moses is not dead, He also crossed over into the promised land.
You can obfuscate the matter, by bearing false witness against all of them for the crimes of some, but how does that fit in with "LibertyAndJusticeForAll". What Liberty and Justice are you asking to provide to all the hard working decent folks that came here seeking opportunity.
He's been in offfice for three years but hasn't enforced the law, why is he just now getting around to putting us on notice? That's the whole point, if he's been unwilling to enforce the law in the past there's no reason to believe he'll do so in the future.
What would you do, and how would you do it? And how would you deal with the millions already here?
Simple, I'd enforce the law, primarily through employer sanctions and cutting off all benefits. Many would self-deport on their own. The illegal Pakistanis proved that's what would happen when the government finally made a half-hearted attempt at enforcing the law against them. They voluntarily left by the thousands.
The CLEAR Act in Congress is another important piece of legislation I support. It would utilize the resources of the police by encouraging them to turn over all illegals they come into contact with to BICE.
As Eisenhower proved in 1954, enforcement works. As the amnesty of 1986 demonstrated, rewarding them does not.
The driving force was a quest for Freedom and opportunity. Those are concepts that existed long before America became the destination of those seeking the above. It was the folks that loved Freedom and opportunity that gave us that gift with Independence and a Constitution that honored it. They broke the friggin' law to do that. Moreover, they were originally able to stay, because the native Americans didn't have the combat power to enforce their immigration laws.
Your comment said Bush was right, they're doing work American's won't do. THe implication is clear.
"America was founded by LEGAL IMMIGRANTS"
The native Americans disagreed. They were just short on combat power.
" The descendants of these legal immigrants and slaves are being burdened by the illegal mass invasion from the south. "
Since when are hard working gainfully employed folks a burden? Have you been paying attn here, the proposal calls for correction and fix?
" Those who cannot enter this country legally should strive for a better opportunity at home."
Some do, but I certainly can't find any evil in some others that come here for a better life. Others don't either and that's a significant reason the present situation exists. The proposal calls for eliminating that as a stumbling block to effective LE.
"Allegiance by American citizens to their own country."
You're not trying to advocate an America right, or wrong sort of obedience are you? Liberty and Justice are concepts that require understanding and judgement. Perhaps you can explain how there is more justice in maintaining the present situation, even if enforcement approaches zero tolerance, than there is in creating an implementation of the proposal?
Precisely why I believe the preservation of "man-made" sovereignty of America, Israel and Britain are the only means whereby Judeo-Christian civilization makes it possible to promote goodness in the world. Whereas, without the US (say, it were suddenly wiped-out by a meteorite), the world world would immediately descend into chaos.
I believe this outlook reflects our God-given mission. Our reason for being as a nation.
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.