Posted on 07/11/2006 6:12:14 AM PDT by Theodore R.
I notice that the provisions of his Bill went absolutely nowhere because he got no help from the WH on his Bill. Too bad because the WH missed a golden oportunity to get part of what they wanted. I'm sure the security provisions were what killed the Bill because the open borders crowd wouldn't stand for real enforcement. The arguement has now moved on, and I'm glad Tancredo went hardline against the elitists who want open borders as long as they can make a buck. Good for you Tom!
In addition to adding more border agents and facilities, the bill prohibits agents from engaging in racial profiling. However, they may consider such factors as mannerisms, appearance, language, behavior and location. In a further effort curb immigration violations, the BE REAL Act will increase the civil and criminal penalties for overstaying visas by 30 days or more, document fraud and false claims of citizenship. All visa waiver programs would be suspended until DHS certifies to Congress that an automated entry-exit system is fully implemented and functional, all ports of entry have functional biometric machine readers and all participating countries issue machine-readable, biometric passports.
In order to remove the incentives to illegal migration, Tancredo’s bill requires the Secretary of DHS to create a national mandatory electronic employment eligibility verification system and to use such verification as a defense against employer sanctions. Employers would be required to obtain either a social security number or an alien number from each new hire.
The BE REAL Act calls for a guest worker program that would replace all current H nonimmigrant visa with a single H nonimmigrant visa for immigrants coming to the United States temporarily to perform skilled or unskilled work for which no U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents are available or qualified. The guest worker program would also require that the Department of Labor create an Internet-based job posting system to which all U.S. employment agencies and businesses may acquire password-protected access so that they can post available jobs on the system. The Department of Labor would be prohibited from approving any labor certification applications in any industry and geographic region if the unemployment rate exceeds five percent and the percentage of new hires who are H non-immigrants exceeds 15 percent.
Tancredo is a hypocrite. He doesn't want any immigration reform, lest the issue go away and he be reduced to a nameless face in Congress.
The biggest problem is Mexico, who just elected the most left leaning socialist candidate of the three on the balot. So it will get worse not better. This commie jerk has been speaking out about how all Mexican citizens who have been in the U.S. for more than three years should be given immediate permanent resident status in the U.S.. And America became his country when??? I didn't hear of any U.S. citizens voting for him. To him I yell a hearty "Go thee to h**l commie pig", and finish it off with a rude gesture.
"Who's more irrational? The guy who believes in a God he can't see? Or the guy who is offended by a God he doesn't believe in?" Brad Stine
Uh, Calderon won the election. It's been in all the papers.
Obrador was the socialist.
Excellent link. Thanks for posting it.
I told the RNC just last night that I will never donate to them only to those who have demonstrated thst they deserve my support.
...And that the three Mexican Flag waving demonstrations that came within a block of my house has a lot to do with it.
Ping me when Bush decides to veto something, help reign in spending and government growth, and people can no longer easily cross our borders.
Republicans have a good change to PICK UP a seat on Mn.
When you refer to Clinton as "Bubba", you sound more like a redneck who can't articulate ideas than an educated voter whose thoughts should be considered.
Also, a Professor friend of my wife with a doctorate in Latin American Studies, who teaches a Modern Latin America class, was talking to her about this the other day and his wife is Hispanic, and he was very clear that Calderon was the most Socialistic candidate of the three.
Obrador wanted to create more welfare programs in order to keep the workers from flooding over illegally into the United States. Calderon wanted to flatly open the border and wanted to set up a coalition with the U.S. so that any Mexican illegals that were in the U.S. more then 3 years (not five like I mispoke before) would be granted immediate legal resident status. Obrador did not support that. So clearly, Calderon is the more liberal left socialistic of the three candidates, by American political standards.
Most of the rest of the world when they say "Conservative" like Calderon is referred to in Mexico, they mean "Liberal" by American standards. The third candidate (his name escapes me right now), was referred to as the "liberal" candidate, but by American standards he was a conservative and he supported more domestic jobs with better pay so Mexican's wouldn't want to enter the U.S. illegally for money.
It is also a misconception that the majority of Mexican illegals are from one of the several Mexican Provinces along the U.S./Mexico border. This is not the case, the majority come from the southern provinces of Mexico where they are extremely poor and the Mexican government is not providing them any kind of assistance. Furthermore, our Professor friends wife is from one of those southern provinces, and they strongly oppose Fox's party, who has now put up Calderon, but they're the minority, so they didn't get a less socialistic candidate, they got the full monty. The media has done a poor job of accurately explaining how the Mexican election went. Calderon winning is the worst thing for America when it comes to the Mexican election. Americans should be as upset at Calderon's election in Mexico, as France and Germany were upset that Bush was elected twice.
So any conservatives who are sitting out this election to spite Bush because of his weak immigration policy, I question their committment to conservative values and more than anything else, doing whatever it takes to keep democrats from regaining control. There is NO excuse for this kind of childish apathy which will have only one result. Liberals call the shots again. Does any real conservative REALLY want to spite Bush that much and do that to the country? The Supreme Court, as well as other things, are at risk here. If Democrats win, you can kiss goodbye any hope of having conservative constructionist nominee to replace a liberal Supreme Court retirement.
"Who's more irrational? The guy who believes in a God he can't see? Or the guy who is offended by a God he doesn't believe in?" Brad Stine
Since I didn't see the BBC article, I can't judge if your characterization of it is correct. I suspect it is not.
You seem to think that creating welfare programs is less socialistic than creating jobs and encouraging trade with the United States.
What, exactly, is a socalist, in your view?
DUH! It's a thread about what's wrong with the stupid party. Wonder why everyone is stuck on ILLEGAL immigration? You're so transparent. Blackbird.
Of course, nothing would satisfy the malcontents, Buchanan Forkers or Libertarians.
And my reference to the BBC article was not my "characterization", it's fact. Do a Google search for "2006 Mexican Presidential Candiates" and then scan for a BBC article dated around the 6th of July or a couple days earlier.
Also, you are inferring that I'm lying somehow. It's a statement of fact that Obrador is less socialistic than Claderon, who belongs to Fox's party. That's based on years of their political statements and positions. Obrador is still a political liberal, by American standards, but he is less socialistic than Calderon, that's just fact.
It's also pretty astounding that you assume to suggest that a Professer with a Doctorate in Latin American Studies, who teaches Modern Latin American classes at a major university, who has a wife who is a Mexican-American who grew up in Mexico and is well aware of the politics in Mexico, that they are just wrong, and somehow you are right, with no evidence to support your position. The third candidate would have been the best option for America. Not withstanding him, Obrador would have been the lesser of the two reamining evils. Calderon is the established most socialistic of the three major candidates. And when it comes to the choice between a Mexican President that will create wellfare programs to keep Mexicans in Mexico, or a Mexican President that will call for all illegals in America be granted immediate permanent legal resident status, I'll choose the former EVERYTIME!!! Besides, according to democrats, wellfare is good for America, who why wouldn't it be good for Mexico? If it keeps their citizens in their country and out of the United States, then bring on wellfare! Go do a search for those candidates.
And I'd be happy, seriously, to give you Professor Perry's phone number and you can call and tell him and his Mexican wife that they don't know what they're talking about. Unless you're a Professor in his field with a spouse also very knowledgable about Mexico because he/she is Mexican, I don't see how you're able to just curtly say what I said is wrong. Please remain civil. I was simply and politely telling you you were mistaken when you tried correcting me earlier and I provided evidence to support my statement. There's no need to get hostile. I was just informing you of an incorrect perception you have. Maybe it's just me, but when I'm wrong about something, I want to know it. Not continue in my ignorance.
"Who's more irrational? The guy who believes in a God he can't see? Or the guy who is offended by a God he doesn't believe in?" Brad Stine
How is my supporting local conservative candidates hurting the national GOP? I live in a very blue metro area, and if my candidate picks up a US Senate seat over a liberal (D), the GOP (and America) wins. Seems to me that my money will be much better spent locally for national success.
Then why did Chavez endorse Obrador?
You and your professor friend have a different definition of socialism than I do.
Obrador advocates more and more involvement of the government in the lives of Mexicans, whereas Calderon supports free market reforms to improve their lives.
Obrador is clearly the socialist, and Calderon is a man the United States can do business with.
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.