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

Skip to comments.

Fixing immigration fairly
The Boston Globe ^ | April 12, 2005 | Ali Noorani

Posted on 04/12/2005 4:05:42 AM PDT by 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.

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: aliens
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300301-332 next last
To: WRhine
It's interesting how he changes his stories to suit whatever propaganda he is pushing at any given time.

LOL.....'changing stories'....playing 'the card'.......it's the only way most of the 'dirty dozen' can *attempt* to debate.

251 posted on 04/12/2005 4:26:13 PM PDT by txdoda ("Navy Brat")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
No, I introduced one and only one poll. It is a poll that you and others don't like so another poll was introduced to the thread. The logic among your crowd is that the second poll is the truth. The poll that I introduced is the truth. 60% support a guest worker plan.

You seem to have a really hard time understanding, so let me type...really...slow.

The poll you quoted was horribly flawed (that means it was a bad poll). The Free Republic administrators (whoops, big word...let's say the grownups in charge) realized that after receiving a number of complaints. Anyone with an IQ (that's how smart a person is, Benny) greater than their waist size (that means, anyone who isn't a big dummy) can recognize how flawed the original poll was. The bad poll was replaced with a new poll which was better worded and far more relevant to the debate (that means it made more sense. In other words, it wasn't stupid like that guy you see in the mirror every morning.).

That you choose the flawed and replaced poll and tried to pretend that FReepers supported a guest worker plan by a 2 to 1 margin when a more relevant, more recent poll showed that they OPPOSE a guest worker plan by an 8 to 1 margin proves that you don't know what you're talking about and that you do not hesitate to play fast a loose with the facts. I mean, if you really believe that FReepers at the time the first poll was taken actually supported a guest worker plan by 2 to 1, how do you explain the more recent poll where it showed that FReepers OPPOSED a guest worker plan by an 8 to 1 margin?

252 posted on 04/12/2005 4:26:42 PM PDT by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
We are not polling amnesty, we are polling guest worker plans.

Every guest worker plan I've seen introduced includes some sort of amnesty for criminal invaders.

253 posted on 04/12/2005 4:27:56 PM PDT by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: txdoda
The poll that I saw said that 49.3% supported sealing the border. I pointed out that it was a composite poll.

You then posted the same poll as voted on only by FR members. It showed 45.9% supported sealing the border. I pointed out that this was a 7.4% differnce between the two polls.

254 posted on 04/12/2005 4:29:14 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
We are not polling amnesty, we are polling guest worker plans.

The so-called "guest worker programs" floating around Congress and the Adminstration ARE Amnesties that include earned legalization and chain immigration.

255 posted on 04/12/2005 4:29:58 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
We are not polling amnesty, we are polling guest worker plans.

The so-called "guest worker programs" floating around Congress and the Adminstration ARE Amnesties that include earned legalization and chain immigration.

256 posted on 04/12/2005 4:30:13 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
That is exactly the point, "some sort of". Consequently, it is like comparing apples and oranges.

This difference between the various guest worker plans is what the pubs and the dems are dueling about in Congress.

257 posted on 04/12/2005 4:33:51 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
You then posted the same poll as voted on only by FR members. It showed 45.9% supported sealing the border. I pointed out that this was a 7.4% differnce between the two polls.

You left a little something out. Nice try. The poll that Txdoda referenced has 85% being in favor of either militarizing the border OR beefing up the border patrol. In either case, 85% of Freepers want MUCH better border control. Take it up with the majority of Freepers.

258 posted on 04/12/2005 4:42:39 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: WRhine
All of the guest worker plans can be placed in one of three catagories.

On the far right would be repatriation then re-entry ala Tancredo.

Slightly right of center would be the Bush Plan or Cornyn's bill. Also the the bill introduced by McCain and the Arizona delegation.

Left of center would be the compromise bills. These would include AgJobs, Daschle-Hagel, and the new bill by Kennedy and McCain that no one has seen.

259 posted on 04/12/2005 4:43:00 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: WRhine
WRhine writes: The only Wacko Fringe in this debate are those that advocate open borders and unlimited immigration

Hmmm... that sounds too much like the [majority of] membership of _both_ major political parties here in the United States, and - or so it would seem by his actions, moreso than his words - no one less than our current president.

Recall the old saying from the Nixon White House in bygone years: "don't listen to what we say, watch what we DO."

Neither the President nor either political party seems intent doing ANYthing to deal with the immigration bomb, to stop it, or even to slow it down.

Remember the old song by Peggy Lee:
Is that all there is?
Is that all there is?
Well, if that's all there is,
Let's break out the booze and have a ball
If that's all...

I've come to the conclusion that there is almost nothing left that _can_ be done to save ourselves from the Immigration Bomb. Time is running out. We are fast approaching the point of "is that all there is?", and, as it will follow, the reality of "if that's all"...

Any talk of actually sending back the millions already here is met with guffaws. Who's going to send back 10 million? Yet each new arrival is (to paraphrase James Q. Wilson) "one more broken window" in our notion of borders, citizenship, and European-American culture. And each and every new arrival sends a signal to the millions more waiting to come in, that they can get away with it, so, go for it!

For the record, I'm for sending every illegal that can be identified and proven as such _back_. Every one. If that means I have to pay more taxes to get rid of them, so be it. I (and you) are certainly going to be paying far more to support them.

Any talk of building a security barrier to protect our Southern Border from the illegal onslaught is, too, met with guffaws. No one here doubts the effectiveness of the Israeli security fence as to protecting their own borders, in their case, against the infiltration of Palestinian terrorists. If a security fence around [nearly] the entire country of Israel can protect them against intrusion, why wouldn't a security barrier on our southern border protect _us_?

For the record, I advocated building a wall from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico back in the early 90's, before Pat Buchanan was even considering such notions. I've been to the Berlin wall (when it was in existence), seen it from _both_ sides, passed through Checkpoint Charlie. For what purpose it was intended, the Berlin Wall worked.

The lie that the border cannot be sealed and properly policed is currently being laid to rest by the few hundred "Minutemen" patrolling in Arizona - for even in their small numbers, they seem to be having a surprising effect!

But real deportations en masse aren't going to happen (I know that). And a security barrier isn't going to be built (I know that too). So what's left to be done?

Well, when you stop to think about it.... nothing. Because, nothing else is going to work at keeping the hordes of illegals out. We won't stop them from coming in, and once here, we won't send them back.

Thus, "is that all there is?"

So, better get used to it. Since we are unwilling to take the hard steps to STOP the illegal invasion, might as well fill you glass with whatever you like, hoist it high, and drink a hearty toast our fading civilization.

Because as the song says, "that's all"....

Cheers!
- John

260 posted on 04/12/2005 4:52:12 PM PDT by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
By defintion, Amnesty is the non-enforcement of a law without changing the law. For example, in a tax amnesty people who are violating tax law are not penalized for late payment if they finally pay within the next 30 days. But the tax law is never changed.

In contrast, if a law is changed so that what was illegal is no longer unlawful, then by definition, that is not amnesty.

For example, it used to be illegal for slaves to runaway. Many abolitionists refused to obey the law and harbored the runaway slaves. Then the law was changed so that there was no slavery. The runaway slaves were no longer in violation of the law even though they had broken the law. The abolitionists who had broken the law by harboring runaway slaves were no longer in violation even though they had broken the law. That was not amnesty. That was a change in law.

What Bush and other immigration sympathizers propose is by definition not amnesty. It is a change in the law that would make, be definition, illegals legal.

One inherent illogical and unsupportable argument of some (but not all) immigration critics is the whole thing about "illegal". A law can be passed to make it legal and voila, the illegal argument evaporates. That leaves those immigration critics stammering in embarrassment and rage because they had a bogus foundation for their argument.

Some (but not all) of those immigration critics who base their argument on "illegal" don't want to admit it. But they are really anti-Hispanic. I've worked in offices where there are illegal Indian immigrant IT workers and illegal Mexican cleaning crew. There is always more antagonism to the cleaning crew than to the IT workers. The terrorists came accross the Canadian border. Fact. My Canadian (non-terrorist) relatives illegally cross into the US all the time without even thinking about it. But the Minutemen are on the Mexican border.

There definitely are some immigration problems. Bush is not properly addressing some of those problems. But the current anti-immigrant rhetoric is dominated, not by the legitimate issues, but by illogic and non-facts that lose the immigration critics credibility.

261 posted on 04/12/2005 4:53:34 PM PDT by spintreebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: B58Hustler; Czar; Spiff
"You have found the Mother lode! You are to be congratulated! Geesh! You do such good work!

Thanks a bunch for those kind comments, but I have to be truthful here and disclose that all I did was to collect and format these "finds" which were origninally posted by Czar and Spiff.

"If I had that formatted the way you do, I would be tempted to post it to his first reply on every Border Thread! Nah, I would not be tempted - I would do it.

Then I would encourage you to do so. It would be a public service to all patriots that care about American sovereignty and the rule of law. It is very simple to make your own copy for posting, here's how you do it...

  1. Go here.
  2. On the menu bar, click [View] [Source]
  3. On the menu bar, click [Edit] [Find] and insert the words: "Harrowup in his own words" in the "Find what:" box and then click on the "Find Next" button. This will give you a text selection in the Source file.
  4. Above the text selection, find the html tag <center>. Using your mouse, select and copy that tag down through and including </tbody> </table> </center> <p> (found about one page below your first selection)
  5. Open your Notepad text editor and paste your selection into Notepad.
  6. Save your new Notepad file as "harrowup.txt" or whatever other name you like.
  7. When posting, just drag-n-drop the contents of harrowup.txt into your FR reply box.
Piece of cake!

Again, kudos to Czar and Spiff for originally posting the information on harrowup!

--Boot Hill

262 posted on 04/12/2005 5:01:08 PM PDT by Boot Hill ("...and Josuha went unto him and said: art thou for us, or for our adversaries?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
The poll that I introduced is the truth. 60% support a guest worker plan.

The *truth* from YOUR poll.....

I would approve of a guest worker program if it requires illegals to go home first and apply for entry 27.0% 944

I would not approve of a guest worker program of any kind 20.5% 719

I would approve of a guest worker plan similar to Tancredo's 15.2% 531 ( Doesn't TT's plan include applying from origin county ??)

I approve of the president's guest worker plan as is or with minor changes 8.8% 308

I might approve of a compromise guest worker program with some of Tancredo's ideas incorporated 8.5% 299 (again, TT wants GW's to apply from origin country.)

I don't like the wording of this poll and decline to participate 7.6% 267

Immigration from Mexico should not be allowed under any circumstances 7.5% 264

Undecided, other, pass 4.8% 167

99.9% 3,499 http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/poll?poll=77;results

(still seems to me that fifty percent (of the sixty you claim) want illegals to GO HOME..... before any GW program)

263 posted on 04/12/2005 5:04:41 PM PDT by txdoda ("Navy Brat")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
That is exactly the point, "some sort of". Consequently, it is like comparing apples and oranges. This difference between the various guest worker plans is what the pubs and the dems are dueling about in Congress.

No, "some sort of" amnesty is like saying you have "some sort of" terminal cancer. Rewarding lawbreakers and criminal invaders is not an option. Never!

You want to know what, I actually support a "guest worker" plan. Not one that I've seen introduced, but a "guest worker" plan anyway. The plan I would support would be one that:

a.)puts a deadline on anyone here illegally to get out.
b.)anyone caught here illegally after that deadline will NEVER be eligible for guest worker status and will be criminally charged and deported. After that date any employer caught hiring an illegal alien will face extremely stiff penalties. Repeat offenses will result in asset seizure. The illegal aliens will deport themselves before the deadline.
c.)any guest worker applicant whose record shows that they have EVER been intercepted by Border Patrol crossing the border illegally or to have committed a single crime while in the U.S. illegally is automatically put at the back of the line
d.)any employer within the city limits of a "sanctuary city" is ineligible from participating in the guest worker program. Nor are they eligible for any sort of federal grants, assistance, or contracts.
e.)the border will be adequately secured so that future crossers can only cross at legal crossing points.
f.)all potential guest workers must apply within their country of origin and have a thorough background check by the U.S. Embassy there before entering the United States. A thorough medical examination must also take place to prevent the importation of disease.
g.)any guest workers are here for a very specific amount of time, they must have a sponsor who is legally and financially responsible for any crimes committed, unpaid health care, uninsured vehicle accidents, etc.
h.)employers must pay the going American market rate and offer the same benefits given to American employees. Wages and benefits must not be reduced to exploit the guest worker.
i.)jobs must be offered to Americans first and can only be offered to guest workers if it is proven that no qualified Americans wanted the position.

j.)all income taxes (state and federal) is automatically withheld from the guest worker's pay and Social Security and FICA must also be paid for each.

k.)like someone on probation, the guest worker must check in with an immigration officer on a regular basis and must provide at all times their place of TEMPORARY residence, their employer, copies of their pay stubs, etc.

l.)the guest worker cannot bring any family members unless they too are employed and have met all the requirements of the guest worker process. If children are allowed, and since the temporary guest worker does not pay property taxes to fund schools, the guest worker must pay all tuition and other costs associated with educating their children whether enrolled in a public or private school.

m.)all guest workers must pass an english competency test. If they cannot, they or their employer must pay for english language classes. They must pass the english competency test within a certain time period or they will be ineligible from further participation in the guest worker program and must return home.

n.)no children born to any guest workers while temporarily in the United States are automatically eligible for citizenship unless one of the parents is a citizen.

o.)if the guest worker doesn't like the plan, tough crap. This is our country, our jobs, our society, our culture, our prosperity, etc.

That's a guest worker program that I can accept. It does not reward lawbreakers, it does not provide amnesty, it makes someone responsible for the guest worker while they're here, it makes the guest worker pay their own way and not rely upon taxpayer-paid benefits. It is a "compassionate" conservative guest worker plan. There is no such thing as a conservative guest worker plan as the costs and bureaucracy involved with a guest worker plan that does not screw Americans is pretty darned high.
264 posted on 04/12/2005 5:09:27 PM PDT by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob
Good post Let me make some additions

When Bush entered office, immigration reform was on his agenda. Congress agreed to work on it.

Because of 9-11, they took it off the table.

As they got the pressing issues of terrorism and the war squared away, work on immigration reform began.

In late 2003, Agjobs was introduced. In Jan and Feb of 04 much more happened. McCains bill was introduced, Then Cornyns, then the Bush Plan, then Daschle-Hagel, and finally Kennedy-Gutierrez.

Now, over a year later, that is where we still set.

There are two problems. The republicans are split and no one has enough votes to pass anything. Second, the immigration crowd is stirring up dust and many Congressmen are worried about getting re-elected.

265 posted on 04/12/2005 5:14:02 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: txdoda

Your are right. But it is still a guest worker plan because those illegals that left the country would re-enter as a guest worker.


266 posted on 04/12/2005 5:18:05 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Second, the immigration crowd is stirring up dust and many Congressmen are worried about getting re-elected.

As they should be.

- 9/11 happened and we must realize we live in a post-9/11 world where terrorists still want to attack us.
- Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution is not negotiable.
- America is for American citizens. American jobs are for American citizens. American prosperity is for American citizens.

Any Congresscritter who does realize these things needs to go find another job.

267 posted on 04/12/2005 5:19:08 PM PDT by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
Your are right. But it is still a guest worker plan because those illegals that left the country would re-enter as a guest worker.

The guest worker plan I proposed is also a "guest worker" plan. Do I now get added to your false statistic that says most FReepers support guest worker plans?

268 posted on 04/12/2005 5:20:58 PM PDT by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: Spiff

Good plan. I buy it.


269 posted on 04/12/2005 5:33:08 PM PDT by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Spiff
There can be only so many reform bills introduced. You and everybody else has an opinion as to what you think would be the "best" reform bill. Amongst the bills that have been introduced, you have to find the particular bill that is closest to what you think is best and support it. Just in case the bill that you support turns out to be un-passable, it is also advisable to pick a second bill that may not want to support but you will support just to keep a far worse bill from passing.

Far example:

It appears to me that a Tancredo type bill would be the closest to what you want and you should support it. However, if it appears that the Tancredo bill will not pass and AgJobs will, you should throw your support behind the Bush Plan to prevent AgJobs from passing.

I know you don't like the Bush Plan but it is a hell of a lot better than AgJobs.

270 posted on 04/12/2005 5:36:58 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: Spiff

If we all agree that we want a guest worker plan, then all we have to do is agree to which particular one.


271 posted on 04/12/2005 5:41:03 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: WRhine

Agreed


272 posted on 04/12/2005 5:51:12 PM PDT by wardaddy ("Finally!, A Man Worth Killing!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
If anyone inherits the earth, it will be the muslims.

Ultimately, the inevitable clash is between Christianity and Islam. Perhaps the long-term play of open borders is a combined US/Mexico with a population over 400m to stand as a bulwark against failing Europe and provide the last defense of Western Civ.

273 posted on 04/12/2005 5:54:09 PM PDT by lemura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Hmm, where's the immigration heroine to some on FR, hillary?

Or maybe you're just hallucinating about this.

274 posted on 04/12/2005 5:58:29 PM PDT by judgeandjury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #275 Removed by Moderator

To: judgeandjury

Fantasizing, more likely...an ACLU democrat would be pretty much irresistible to the Beast (I can see her fluttering her eyelashes now at harrowup).


276 posted on 04/12/2005 6:04:27 PM PDT by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
There is a surprisingly large number here who don't like hispanic citizens in this country.

Look at some of the statements that have been made about Gonzales, Garza, and Martinez.

And out comes Ben Ficklin's Race Card!

By the way, have you noticed some of the statements made about Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, and Robert Byrd? I guess that means there is a surprisingly large number here who don't like white people in this country.

277 posted on 04/12/2005 6:08:24 PM PDT by judgeandjury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Czar; WRhine
I would suspect, though, that the majority of such "Republicans" are GOP "Big Tent" RINOs/liberals/moderates rather than conservatives.

I think you're right. There's also the libertarian contingient. Among them we'd probably find the Log Cabin types, as well. But the old Democratic accusation that Wall Street has the RNC in its back pocket is hard to shake at a time like this. Wall Street loves cheap, desperate labor.

I think "conservative" and "liberal" are labels that aren't always very helpful when it really matters. There's common sense and a love for freedom. There's a love for American families. I think quite a few "liberals" claim to love freedom, but don't. And there are a lot of self-styled "conservatives" who don't love American families.

278 posted on 04/12/2005 6:09:04 PM PDT by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
If we all agree that we want a guest worker plan, then all we have to do is agree to which particular one.

< Any guest worker plan that rewards lawbreakers and criminal invaders or one that screws Americans is totally unacceptable no matter who supports it. I prefer NO guest worker plan if the ones offered are intolerable.

279 posted on 04/12/2005 6:14:37 PM PDT by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: risk; WRhine
"I think "conservative" and "liberal" are labels that aren't always very helpful..." Not perfect, no label can be, but it works much better than "Republican" and "Democrat".

"And there are a lot of self-styled "conservatives" who don't love American families." Perhaps, but I don't know any.

280 posted on 04/12/2005 6:22:28 PM PDT by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

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

Got any proof to back up this statement or is this just your opinion? And please, don't reference any FR polls because you've already said that these polls are basically insignificant and meaningless.

281 posted on 04/12/2005 6:23:38 PM PDT by judgeandjury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Spiff

If you prefer no immigration reform to an immigration reform bill that you see as undesirable, that would make you a FROBL.


282 posted on 04/12/2005 6:23:58 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Czar
Perhaps, but I don't know any.

There are a lot of people who claim that totally free trade and unlimited immigration is good for America, and they do this on the basis of conservative economics. Some of these people happen to be conservative on issues like gun control and abortion, as well. The charge that they don't really care about American life is very sticky.

I don't think they really love American families. I believe in fair competition, but not with slave labor, government-subsidized factories, and workers trained in free universities and desperate for the chance to work at any rate.

We can compete if we take care of our own people. If we fail that, we'll compete with no one soon.

283 posted on 04/12/2005 6:29:45 PM PDT by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob
Some (but not all) of those immigration critics who base their argument on "illegal" don't want to admit it. But they are really anti-Hispanic.

Maybe they are not anti-Hispanic, per se.

Maybe they are just anti wave-after-wave-after-wave of Hispanics whose first inclination is to ignore the laws of this country.

Maybe they hear the rhetoric of the Reconquista Klan, and they see Hispanic politicians talking about "the last gasp of white America" and the hear other Hispanic politicians standing by their 'El Plan de Aztlan' and their comments about the "brutal gringo invasion", and they know that if any white politician had utter anything similar they would have been hounded perpetually (and rightfully) as a racist, but the Hispanic politicians get a pass.

Maybe they recognize "Brown Supremacists" as being as dangerous as any skinhead, and they see the millions of illegals as, if not a direct part of that plan of Reconquista, certainly as an enabler of it.

284 posted on 04/12/2005 6:33:26 PM PDT by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob
RE: "What Bush and other immigration sympathizers propose is by definition not amnesty. It is a change in the law that would make, be definition, illegals legal."

What about the bogus and stolen documents used by them when they were ILLEGAL? Shouldn't citizens' felony document fraud also be dismissed? The 14th Amendment equal protection thingy.

I note that you've reached for the "race" card in another part of your reply. Why is being against ILLEGAL immigration "racist?" There are many Irish ILLEGAL immigrants as exposed by New York state's crack down on drivers licenses. Many went home. Their government attempted to intervene to save the licenses of those ILLEGALs who remain. We take umbrage at that also.

Perhaps the Mexican clearners v. Indian professionals is just a matter of "caste."

285 posted on 04/12/2005 6:39:34 PM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (MSM Fraudcasters are skid marks on journalism's clean shorts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: spodefly
I'm pro-English. English is our language. It's our culture. You can put as much hotsauce on your fajitas as you like, but if you talk about changing our language to Spanish, or replacing English, or dividing our attention with Spanish language in our schools, I've got a problem with that. Keep your Hispanic culture if you like - that's fine with me. It's already gone way too far here in California. From the radio and TV waves to the hallways of our schools and the halls government, it's now "press #1 for English." I call it Hispania.

English: learn it, love it, or salga de los Estados Unidos de América. (Leave the USA.)

286 posted on 04/12/2005 6:39:42 PM PDT by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin; lemura
The mexican birth rate is falling.

Not here.

But Hispanic teens -- especially Mexicans and Puerto Ricans -- are maintaining relatively high pregnancy and birthrates, said Child Trends researcher Suzanne Ryan, co-author of a recent paper on Hispanic teens

287 posted on 04/12/2005 6:44:03 PM PDT by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: risk

Atta boy!


288 posted on 04/12/2005 6:46:25 PM PDT by Czar (StillFedUptotheTeeth@Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: Boston Blackie
[ Thank you minutemen! ]

Yes! I thank the Minutemen too....
You can bet your pencil thin mustache.. on that too..
the Boston Blackie kind..

289 posted on 04/12/2005 6:46:52 PM PDT by hosepipe (This Propaganda has been edited to include not a small amount of Hyperbole..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Yes, I've seen that and it looks accurate to me.

I was actually talking a couple of different things. 35,40, 50 years ago, mexican women had 18-20 babies. Today they have 7. Now 7 is relatively high compared to the US, but that rate will continue to fall.

Mexicans that enter the US still have relatively large families. Their kids have fewer and the second generation bithrate is comparable to the average US birthrate. This is true of all immigrants that come from nations with relatively high birthrates.

290 posted on 04/12/2005 7:01:58 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob

One day you will wake up and will be living in an area that is full of illegals overcrowding your schools, not paying income taxes, and receiving government benefits.

Your kids will not be getting a quality education because most of the school is focused on bilingual education and your district has made it clear that bilingual will be the main focus of the district.

When you drive to the store you see businesses flying the Mexican flag out front, or alternating US and Mexican flags.

When your kids want to get summer jobs but have a hard time getting hired since they do not speak Spanish OR there are no jobs available since they are filled with illegals.

I could go on but you can't really get it from a post, you will have to experience it. And you will, it is only a matter of time.


291 posted on 04/12/2005 7:12:17 PM PDT by shattered
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob
What Bush and other immigration sympathizers propose is by definition not amnesty. It is a change in the law that would make, be definition, illegals legal.

Actually no.

You might what to actually learn some immigration law and then take a close look at Bush's proposal. Its amnesty, it's not changing the law.

292 posted on 04/12/2005 7:59:07 PM PDT by Marine Inspector (Customs & Border Protection Officer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
On the far right would be repatriation then re-entry ala Tancredo.

Slightly right of center would be the Bush Plan or Cornyn's bill. Also the the bill introduced by McCain and the Arizona delegation.

Left of center would be the compromise bills. These would include AgJobs, Daschle-Hagel, and the new bill by Kennedy and McCain that no one has seen.

You seem to love spinning facts and truths into a mish mash of half-truths and outright lies. When confronted with the truth you jump to another line of propaganda.

Let's clear the air shall we? With the possible exception of Tancredo's plan, all the guest worker programs mentioned are Sham Amnesties for Illegal Aliens.

There is no "right of center" in the Bush, McCain and Cornyn's Shamnesties. Right of center in American politics is NO Amnesties, NO Amnesties disguised as Guest Worker plans. And Bush's Amnesty is probably the worst of the lot given that the sky is the limit as to how many Illegals could be covered.

These plans have the same common elements and effects. They reward Illegal Aliens for breaking our laws, carry legalization clauses, allow chain immigration and only aggravate the illegal immigration crisis.

So your support of guest worker amnesties makes perfect sense.

293 posted on 04/12/2005 8:44:24 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies]

To: lemura
Perhaps the long-term play of open borders is a combined US/Mexico with a population over 400m to stand as a bulwark against failing Europe and provide the last defense of Western Civ.

It wouldn't have anything to do with the money associated with illegal labor, the government’s eternal desire for a new compliant underclass, unions that see the dollars of more membership, money associated with the open border trafficking in drugs, illegals, fill in the blank, Mexico's corrupt elite relieving themselves of their pesky demanding peasants, businesses profiting by having more warm bodies in the country, real estate firms that cash in on the population explosion and urban flight, banks that umm just cash in.

Nah. Too Obvious.

You give our government and the powers behind it WAY too much credit in being able to take their eyes off the dollar signs long enough to be concerned about world changing developments. Much less cobble together some twisted master plan for the future clash of civilizations. They can hardly keep up with the money flowing into their coffers to care much about anything other than money and power in the here and now.

294 posted on 04/12/2005 9:11:18 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies]

To: risk
I think "conservative" and "liberal" are labels that aren't always very helpful when it really matters. There's common sense and a love for freedom. There's a love for American families.

Excellent insight. Political labels, especially party labels are not very good guide posts when it concerns addressing the truly critical matters that confront this country.

There are allies and enemies in each political camp. What's needed is a new consensus forged by grassroot populism that creates bi-partisian and 3rd party support to force the PTB to take on the issue(s) or lose their seat in power. It worked for Teddy R.

295 posted on 04/12/2005 9:38:35 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
If you prefer no immigration reform to an immigration reform bill that you see as undesirable, that would make you a FROBL

LOL. Immigration "reform" being the latest in Beltway Speak for Amnesties for Illegals, open borders and even higher rates of illegal immigration. Remember the "Campaign Finance Reform" bill? It is anything BUT reform. Want to sell something that the American People don’t want? Slap the “Reform” label on in.

You can put whatever lipstick you want on the Amnesty Pig. It's still Amnesty and it’s still a Pig.

296 posted on 04/12/2005 9:57:25 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: Fishrrman
I've come to the conclusion that there is almost nothing left that _can_ be done to save ourselves from the Immigration Bomb. Time is running out. We are fast approaching the point of "is that all there is?", and, as it will follow, the reality of "if that's all"...

Very well written essay Fishrrman. I'm a Fisherman too btw.

All I can say is I hope you are wrong. The warning signs are all there though.

I leaves me wondering just how many young Americans in the future would be willing to put their life on the line in the defense of a non-sovereign, borderless country (trading region actually) that stands for nothing but a short term buck and where citizenship is a meaningless concept.

297 posted on 04/12/2005 10:23:01 PM PDT by WRhine (Is anything Treasonous these days?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse; txdoda; WRhine; jmc813; Travis McGee

>"But before you go renaming FR, you may wanna bring the issue up with Jim. He is after all the owner."<


- Speaking of renaming things:
That poster you are all addressing here, is great at renaming things. Even to the point of renaming article titles in links.

Take a look at this link he posted to me, which he titled:

"Entitlement programs financed by hispanics for the benefit of whites"

Now...click on the link, and see what the title actually is.
BTW, the article is from a left-wing socialist site, with its offices at the U.N headquarters:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1313658/replies?c=66

.Bookmark it. show others.
Regards.


298 posted on 04/13/2005 12:27:51 AM PDT by FBD ( "A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." ~Bertrand de Jouvenel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Boot Hill

bump to your post. please bookmark the CBG quotes I pinged you to as well, thanks!

regards


299 posted on 04/13/2005 12:35:02 AM PDT by FBD ( "A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves." ~Bertrand de Jouvenel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: FBD
"please bookmark the CBG quotes"

If you like CBG quotes, wait till you see this...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1382557/posts?page=92#92

--Boot Hill

300 posted on 04/13/2005 2:36:02 AM PDT by Boot Hill ("...and Josuha went unto him and said: art thou for us, or for our adversaries?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300301-332 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