Posted on 04/20/2006 3:01:32 PM PDT by Spiff
The Gospel of McPain: thugs, murderers, and terrorists doing the jobs Americans just won't do!)
You should see the dirt being dished about McNoodle on the thread
Excellent work.
This valuable information needs its own thread.
Ringknockers covering each others butts while forsaking honor and country for the sake of power. By gosh, the Manchurian candidate doesn't vary much from the current ruling dynasty.
No matter how you perceive him (tortured unto gibbering, heroically stoic until pushed past the limits of tolerance or just deciding one day to give up his fellow servicemen), we can NOT elect a man who, having been there himself, actively worked to stop attempts to find POWs and/or information as to their fate.
People who do things like that belong in prison or a mental institution...not repeatedly elected to the Senate.
Spiff - so sorry so many mistook you for the female writer. Is that anything like that "not so fresh" feeling they talk about in the commercials? Just pulling your leg, of course ;^ ) Seriously, her gumption is an inspiration and a goad to start sticking it to these weasels whenever possible in public forums.
I've become close to believing that a politician doesn't continue a career in the Senate without being able to prove to the mafia there that they are equally willing to "play ball"/cut deals/screw their constituents in order to get ahead in the favor-trading game.
When I chanced to speak to Tancredo privately for twenty minutes I asked why he didn't take Nighthorse-Campbell's seat when he easily could have done so. He winced before saying that he could get what he wants done in the House more honorably. When I cited that the likes of Kennedy run roughshod without someone like him in the Senate to counter him he just smiled and said he felt he was on the path that God leads him to (or something close to that...it was late).
In retrospect I think he was saying he knew the mostly bought-off Senate would emasculate him and use him as a court jester. He truly HAS picked up an impressive number of fellow reps and a national following right where he is.
"Why are employer sanctions ineffectual?"
Any regulation that is based on "throwing their ass in jail" for not doing what is clearly the responsibility of the feds is bad government. With every quarterly report, employers furnish the feds with an updated list of every bogus SS # being used by the illegals. There is no need to force employers to enforce the law. Let the feds create a enforcement division to detect these bogus ss# that responds with a letter to the employer to fire the employee using that number. If the employee doesn't like it, he can plead his case to the feds. We could even put Lord Sensenbrenner and his Joker Tancredo in charge of such a program. Maybe you want the job? You got plenty of lawyers to back you up?
Any immigration reform that doesn't realistically address the labor supply and/or relies solely on enforcement is destined for failure. Had congress been doing this thru the years by allowing the quotas on legal immigration and guest workers to rise and fall with the changing economic conditions, there would be no, or few, illegals present in this country. But they didn't.
In justifying the need for amnesty, he cited that the dictionary defined amnesty as "forgiveness" that required allowing them to remain in the US, dismissing any disagrement with the one-liner "Then you're reading a different dictionary than I am."
OTOH, there are numerous, much more credible, sources that contradict your sources. When I say "more credible", I mean credible in the eyes of the final arbiter of credibility, the judiciary.
Any policy or legislation based on a source such as CIS, VDARE, etc would not withstand a legal challenge because the court would not recognize the source.
The Federal Reserve Bank or the Labor Dept has more credibility than CIS.
Wow... I bet that wild-hair of his was a 'twitchin pretty good after that!
Most definitely a 'Bump'!
clap clap clap clap
Amazing! Thank you! And God Bless you!
susie
I gather self-serving means to you anything that disagrees with your contentions. Of course people provide data and information that support their position. Hopefully, one's position is formed after reading the studies and not the other way around.
OTOH, there are numerous, much more credible, sources that contradict your sources. When I say "more credible", I mean credible in the eyes of the final arbiter of credibility, the judiciary.
That remains to be seen. It is a sad commentary that the judiciary should be the final arbiter on such an important and far ranging subject as immigration reform. I would prefer the legislators, who are accountable to the people on a regular basis, be the final arbiters.
Any policy or legislation based on a source such as CIS, VDARE, etc would not withstand a legal challenge because the court would not recognize the source.
Now that's downright silly. The court could care less about the source or outside support of any legislation. The legislation stands by itself and will be judged on its own merits. SCOTUS does allow amicus curiae briefs to be filed, which would present various groups to present their opinions on the legislation.
The Federal Reserve Bank or the Labor Dept has more credibility than CIS.
That's up to the legislators and the executive branch to decide, and if the legislation is passed and signed by the President, the courts. Most of the CIS studies are heavily based on USG data.
We really don't have reliable data on illegal immigration. There are all kinds of numbers being tossed around without any real certainty. Estimates from 11 million million to 20 million. We do know, based on the census, that the number of foreign born residents in the US is now over 11.5%, and that the Census Bureau estimates that there is a net increase of 500,000 illegal immigrants annually. Since 1970, more than 30 million legal and illegal immigrants have settled in the U.S., representing more than one-third of all people ever to come to America's shores. We have a problem with controlling our borders, of that there is no dispute.
Another source on estimated numbers and the underground economy: Bear Stearns: The Underground Labor Force Is Rising To The Surface
No one has suggested that. Attrition amounts to voluntary departure, but it can't and will never result in everyone leaving.
The primary concern, even if you have successfully removed most all work opportunities is that you will create a permanent underclass of essentially invisible people without identities nor visible or legal means of support.
We already have a permanent underclass who live in the shadows and are exploited by their employers. The US taxpayer helps pay for their social and medical costs. Many of them support our burgeoning underground economy, which pays no taxes to the government.
I'm afraid the simple statement that they will return to Mexico is not valid because Mexico is not their home either and may well become the greater of the two evils when family support or at least several million people are willingly giving shelter and sustenance. The other option is crime. The law would then become totally unworkable and would be repealed under great amounts of political pressure.
Tell that to the 500,000 in LA who were marching through the streets waving Mexican flags. Immigrants, legal and illegal, send $17 billion a year back to Mexico. This is the largest source of foreign revenue for Mexico, larger than the amount they receive from the sale of oil to the US. They are also not assimilating like previous immigrant groups. Spanish is rapidly becoming the second offical language of the US. They are however, procreating in numbers higher than the US general population. These anchor babies will keep them in the US regardless.
Not all illegal immigrants are coming to work in the US. Many are involved in crime, especially drugs. One third of California's penal system is filled with illegal immigrants and one fifth of the federal system.
I don't quite understand your rationale that crime would force a repeal of the law. If the number of murders increase, do we repeal or reword the law against murder. If they start committing crimes, they will be arrested and deported.
Twenty years ago, in 1986, we offered what amounted to an amnesty. Three times as many applied than estimated. This was supposed to solve the problem, i.e., make the illegals legal. USG estimates now range from 9 to 11 million illegal immigrants. McCain-Kennedy uses a similar template. It won't solve the problem either. In 20 years we will be discussing it again, only the numbers will be 25 to 30 million.
We need to get something started to curb the flow now, and even if it is not perfect and it never will be, we need to get started, or this issue will fester for another 20 years with nothing but mistakes masquerading as policy.
The first thing to do is secure our Southern border. Then we can deal with who remains.
Its not just governmental organizations versus an NGO such as CIS. NGOs such as Pew, Americas Policy, CATO, Heritage, etc will always carry more weight than CIS because they are developing the data, not just drawing conclusions. As you aptly pointed out, CIS is relegated to re-interpretating(cherry-picking) work done by others.
Weight with whom? CIS is drawing on data from the Bureau of the Census. Here is an example:Where Immigrants Live: An Examination of State Residency of the Foreign Born by Country of Origin in 1990 and 2000
GREAT STUFF - Thanks! :)
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.