Fixing immigration fairly

The Boston Globe ^ | April 12, 2005 | Ali Noorani

[Boston Blackie]

Invoking symbols ranging from the Revolutionary War to Martin Luther King Jr., armed vigilantes are patrolling a segment of the Arizona-Mexico border and taking the enforcement of immigration law into their own hands. While they claim only to offer support to the Border Patrol, the Mexican government is on edge, human rights activists have flooded the area, and President Bush has distanced himself from the effort.

[txdoda]

This one is more appropriately worded for the subject at hand.


http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=79;results=1

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

LOL, BF wouldn't link to that poll......;o)

It doesn't 'support' the *claim* he's trying to make.

"Some form of guest worker program".....(ONLY)... 10.8%

[skeeter]

You called me racist for no good reason and I think you should apologize.

Good luck with that, Dan.

If some folks weren't constantly shouting 'racist' they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

[WRhine]

According to the FR poll, there are no freepers that support open borders and unlimited immigration.

George Bush's Amnesty is Open Borders and near unlimited immigration by definition. Under his Employer/Employee Matching provision there is no limit to how many Mexicans can be included in his plan unless Congress sets one.

Bush has already gone on record as saying he wants the legal immigration annual limit that currently stands at roughly 1 million to be raised at a multiple of what it is. Is it 2 million, 5 million, 20 million? Aside from putting up millions of American Jobs for sale on the world market Who Knows?

With Amnesty limits set at such an exceeding high level, for all intents and purposes, it is an open border, unlimited immigration policy. Those that support Bush’s Amnesty and others like it are either unaware its provisions (or lack of them) or are indeed advocates of open borders like you.

The ploy you in the CAL are trying to perpetrate is that if the annual immigration limit is say 10 million (1 billion?) per year you can always say that “technically” there is a restricting limit in place, therefore it's not an Open Borders policy. When for all practical proposes it is.

[Dan Evans]

Read all the posts in that thread. Who believes she is sincere?

[WRhine]

This is a link to a very useful ACLU card; read it and hit the next link to download the .pdf...two copies...FRee.

No Thanks. I wouldn't trust any link you provide.

[WRhine]

DIP

[jmc813]

Thanks for the link. Upon a quick scan, I didn't see anyone on that thread praising the Beast, though. Were there a few freepers I was missing?

[jmc813]

No Thanks. I wouldn't trust any link you provide.

I've seen that card before, and it does contain valuable information that should be memorized in case you get arrested. There is a small handful of good things about the ACLU, such as Bob Barr, but as I mentioned, until they wake up on 2nd Amendment issues, they are a waste.

[lemura]

Boy, you guys just can't let go of this, can you? The irony is, many on this board gloated over the fact that the libs couldn't get over Kerry's loss last Nov. Now with the shoe on the other foot (so to speak), the MM and others won't wake up and face the facts: it's all over except for the crying.

Fact: the 10m illegals already here will NEVER be deported
Fact: the border will NEVER be militarized
Fact: Hispanics represent a huge voting block that will make/break elections as they grow in power

Notice that there isn't any mention of principles; at some point, losers have to recognize that holding bitter feelings is a waste of time. It's time to move on and figure out a way to take advantage of reality.

[WRhine]

LOL, BF wouldn't link to that poll......;o)

Don't show that poll that Ben, he might faint.

[R. Scott]

If the illegals register and become legal, they are no longer illegal.
It seems that you are in favor of worker exploitation. You favor workers held in virtual bondage as slave labor in sweatshops and houses of prostitution.
Such an humanitarian.

[WRhine]

"to" also works well in there.......

[R. Scott]

My biggest problem with the illegals is that they have demonstrated their contempt for US law. After they get here they continue to break the law by working for under the table wages – no taxes paid. Every time a person breaks a law, it becomes easier for them to break other laws.

[Ben Ficklin]

My position on this should be well known by now, but I also have a position on all the issues.

The problem is that FR is becoming a single issue website, immigration, and as more and more bail out it becomes more so.

As it becomes tilted, its value as a conservative news index lessens and the lurkers leave.

FR played a major role in the impeachment. Since then, many have tried to harness that to promote their agenda. They all failed.

The immigration crowd has succeded.

[WRhine]

Notice that there isn't any mention of principles; at some point, losers have to recognize that holding bitter feelings is a waste of time. It's time to move on and figure out a way to take advantage of reality.

Vicente Fox loves such weak appeassing sentiment from "ahem" Americans. Wave the White Flag to Mexico yourself. You do not speak for the majority of Americans. A Mexico controlled American Bananna Republic is not any kind of reality the American People want.

[Plutarch]

DP

I've looked in the Freeper lexicon, but I don't find what DP is. Pray tell.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

RE: "FR is a far right website and functions as an internet center of the anti immigrant crowd."

Cute.

It's anti-ILLEGAL immigrants and it's been stated over and over by myself and many others.

Such taunts are silly if that was your intent. You have valid arguments on your side.

For example, on the substantive side you state that "support of guest worker plans amongst the general population would be at 5, 6, or 7 to 1."

I disagree. My informal polling among people I meet reveals that a majority are aware of the costs (health care, crime, and education and even greater terrorists threats) of ILLEGAL immigration.

Maybe the majority would accept a guest worker plan if those costs could be covered without passing them on to taxpayers. Crime and terrorists threats of course would have to stopped, period.

Naturally, if employers paid for the subsidized "cheap" labor the taxpayer would still be paying the costs through higher prices but we'd have a choice to not pay that price and do without. You don't have that choice with taxes.

[skeeter]

It's time to move on and figure out a way to take advantage of reality.

Good advise, why don't you do that. Meanwhile those of us without quite so defeatist an attitude will continue to practice our constitutionally guaranteed rights of free expression & self rule thru our duly elected representatives, at least while we still possess those rights.

[spodefly]

A recent poll of FR members show support of guest worker plans at over 2 to 1. 60% for and 28% opposed.

Your interpretation of this poll is tortured, at best.

Composite Opinion
I would approve of a guest worker program if it requires illegals to go home first and apply for entry	26.3%		1,247
I would not approve of a guest worker program of any kind	21.6%		1,023
I would approve of a guest worker plan similar to Tancredo's	14.5%		688
Immigration from Mexico should not be allowed under any circumstances	9.8%		465
I approve of the president's guest worker plan as is or with minor changes	8.7%		412
I might approve of a compromise guest worker program with some of Tancredo's ideas incorporated	8.0%		378
I don't like the wording of this poll and decline to participate	7.3%		348
Undecided, other, pass	3.9%		183
	100.1%		4,744

[Ben Ficklin]

You can ignore reality if you want. You can spin til you are dizzy.

Given the option between mass deportations and enrolling the illegals, the vast majority will choose the guest worker program.

There will be no round-ups.
There will be no mass deportations.
Prop 200 will not cause a mass exodus.
MMP will accompish nothing.