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 ...
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.
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...
Again, kudos to Czar and Spiff for originally posting the information on harrowup!
--Boot Hill
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)
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Good plan. I buy it.
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.
If we all agree that we want a guest worker plan, then all we have to do is agree to which particular one.
Agreed
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.
Or maybe you're just hallucinating about this.
Fantasizing, more likely...an ACLU democrat would be pretty much irresistible to the Beast (I can see her fluttering her eyelashes now at harrowup).
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.
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.
< 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.
"And there are a lot of self-styled "conservatives" who don't love American families." Perhaps, but I don't know any.
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.