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

I in no way agree with any of his assumptions, but I think the point is well taken about reducing the number of relatives foreigners can bring into the US, and favoring instead skilled, educated workers.
1 posted on 07/04/2010 6:48:44 AM PDT by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: La Lydia

Everything these days are all words, no action - on both sides of the aisle.


2 posted on 07/04/2010 6:58:08 AM PDT by Riodacat (Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: La Lydia

The Kenyan’s only goal in the speech was to score political points with Hispanics favoring amnesty. If there weren’t for a perceived political advantage for himself, the Kenyan wouldn’t care at all. The Kenyan came off as a weak whiner, again.

I think the right can run successfully on securing the borders and sending illegals home.


4 posted on 07/04/2010 7:04:17 AM PDT by y6162
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: La Lydia

One of the problems with having large numbers of higher level skilled workers come in is that they actually do compete with Americans for well-paying jobs, more so than laborers.

We probably need unskilled workers, too, at any rate when our construction industry is functioning. But there should be a special short-term visa for them so that they can come for projects or for limited periods of time and then go home again. This would probably affect Latin Americans primarily, since they are the ones who live close enough to come and go easily and they have a large number of young male workers who are generally the type required for construction work, clean up work, etc. in places where there isn’t much domestic labor. And the great majority of them actually want to go back home after they have made enough money, but the way our law is now, it actually encourages them to hide out here and stay because they aren’t sure they’ll be able to return for a future job.

Something like that would also cut into the people smuggling business, which, while it smuggles in druggies and non-Latin foreigners from all over the world, smuggles in a lot of basic laborers from Latin America.

I agree about the family member stuff, and I have never understood why one person who arrives here has the right to bring all of his extended family with him (which he can apparently do whether he can support them or not). That’s a real abuse.

That said, I doubt that any of these ideas will even be discussed, because I don’t think Obama intends to deal with this through the legislature. I expect to see him have the agencies enact various regulatory things that will achieve his goals.

And the problem is that his goals are not the economic or political well-being of the United States, which is, as the author says, the thing that should be the foundation of our immigration policy.


5 posted on 07/04/2010 7:05:36 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3pools; 3rdcanyon; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; ..

Ping!


12 posted on 07/04/2010 12:34:03 PM PDT by HiJinx (Why govern when you can golf?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: La Lydia

I was reading the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution this morning, looking for references to God-given rights and I came across this segment in the Declaration. Does Obama think that he is King George?

________________________________

He (King George) has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

__________________________

That is exactly what Obama is doing in regard to the Arizona immigration law. The following segment might necessarily apply as well:

....it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

It came to my attention during the Kagan hearings that Kagan does not believe in inalienable, God given rights. If there are no God-given rights, the state(federal government) becomes the highest arbiter of those rights and the government will do anything to consolidate and reinforce their control of power, including obliviating the natural rights of the citizens.


14 posted on 07/04/2010 12:54:13 PM PDT by Eva (Aand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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