"Immigration Reform"

[Ghostrider]

Does this make anyone (besides me) want to vomit?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070517/ap_on_go_co/immigration_congress_35

Key senators in both parties and the White House announced agreement Thursday on an immigration overhaul that would grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants already in the U.S.

[2000silverz28]

Why don't we just declare everybody in the world a citizen of the United States and be done with it?

[DEIMOS]

This is sickening and it saddens me. I am not at all surprised though. I am waiting for the camels back to break, but wondering if it ever will. It seems we are a free country only in name.
I pray that things will turn around, but how do we affect this change? We write our representitives, but so many of them either ignore us, or break their word. Who will draw a line in the sand? Who will stand behind that line and say 'you shall not pass'? How do we drag America the beautiful from the cesspool of socialism and terminal apathy and set her back on the shining path of freedom?

[dkd83]

I likewise am disgusted by the "immigration reforms" planned by the Congress and our President. The confluence of unfettered illegal immigration and rabid socialism/environmentalism has proven most fortuitous for those that seek the decline of our country.

I am of the opinion that without a strong nationalist outcry from the citizens of the United States we will witness an unalterable decline of US sovereignty within the next few generations. I can only echo DEIMOS' questions and lament the complete lack of effective leadership in the US.

[Len]

While I too share deep concerns about the direction of our country and the apathy of most citizens, the immigration reform proposal does not seem to me to be another sign of impending doom. Read further down the story:

The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and — after paying fees and a $5,000 fine — ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of household would have to return to their home countries first.
They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.
A new temporary guest worker program would also have to wait until those so-called "triggers" had been activated.
This seems fairly reasonable to me, considering the complexity of the issue and the practical impossibility of sealing the borders AND kicking out 20-30 million illegals. Basically we are prioviding a fine for illegal entry and then giving the opportunity for these folks to become citizens -a task that will take up to 13 years. I'm not seeing any coddling here, or over-zealous environmentalism either.

I have often noticed that many people on the extremes (both right and left) of many political issues tend to radically and overly simplify complex issues for the sake of their philosophy. (I am not implying anyone on this board is doing this, I'm just making a general statement.) If any of the problems facing our nation were simple, they'd have been fixed long ago. We can lament how we let things become the way they are, we can bash out leaders for being useless or worse, but picking up after their messes is way more complex than it seems on the surface.

Food for thought, I hope.

[Shep]

This is so stupid, why did I vote for Bush?

Run Fred, Run Fred, RUN!!!!!!

[skwashdem]

This is so stupid, why did I vote for Bush?

Run Fred, Run Fred, RUN!!!!!!



Probably the same reason most of the people who voted for him did. He was the lesser of two evils that we got to choose between. I know that's the only reason I voted for him.

[Tungsten]

And in other news....

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070518/NEWS03/705180421/-1/RSS05


Maury County raid chills immigrant community

Arrests could cause Hispanics to avoid police

By CLAY CAREY,
BRAD SCHRADE
and JANELL ROSS
Staff Writers

COLUMBIA, Tenn. — Two dozen illegal immigrants were arrested and processed for deportation this week after happening upon a mobile home where police and federal agents were investigating a case, residents of a local trailer park said Thursday.


The arrests and apparently imminent deportation of 23 males and one female in Maury County sent shockwaves through the Midstate's Hispanic community, where some feared the raid could create a rift between Hispanics and law enforcement that would be very difficult to repair.

"These types of actions send ripples of fear throughout a community," said Jessica Baba, public awareness coordinator with the Tennessee Immigrant and Refugee Rights Coalition.


"Fear causes people to stop reporting crimes and talking to police. That is a threat to public safety," Baba said. "Going after one person is one thing. We're not going to dispute that. Going after an entire community is entirely different."


Others, like Theresa Harmon, co-founder of Tennesseans for Responsible Immigration Policies, think the arrests are a step in the right direction.
"If (police) have a reasonable suspicion that I'm driving drunk, they're going to pull me over to find out. The same thing usually applies across the board to everything except illegal aliens," Harmon said.


"That's got to stop. … As long as our law enforcement agencies look the other way, that makes us a sanctuary" for illegal immigrants, Harmon said.
Many law enforcement agencies, like the Metro Police Department, have said their officers will not take part in immigration enforcement, fearing that such actions could lead immigrants to be uncooperative with police. Several attempts to call Maury County Sheriff's Department officials and federal authorities on Thursday were unsuccessful.


Details of arrests hazy

Two days after the raid, details of the arrests are hazy.

Sheriff's deputies and federal immigration agents have said they went to the Countryside Mobile Village Tuesday morning in search of a teenage boy and his mother. Police learned the two were in the United States illegally after the boy brought a gun to school.

While they were there, they took 22 more illegal Mexican immigrants into custody.

"I couldn't believe what I was seeing. They (immigration agents and officers) were everywhere," said Antonio Gonzalez, 20, a neighbor and acquaintance of several of the people arrested.

Angela Leyva, sister-in-law and aunt of two of the arrestees and a legal U.S. citizen, said the family's trailer had been surrounded by patrol cars.
Two immigration officials entered the house. People who lived nearby gathered to watch, Leyva said. Then, immigration officials began asking people in the crowd about their immigration status. Some people were followed back to their trailers, asked to produce documents, and then arrested when they could not, Leyva said.

Barbara Haskins said her fiancé, Luis Enrique Sanchez Castro, told her a similar story Tuesday night when she found him locked in the Maury County Jail. Sanchez Castro pulled up in front of a trailer a few doors down from the Leyvas' Tuesday morning. He was there to pick up a co-worker.
Something about the blue Ford must have caught law enforcement's attention. Officers headed toward the car. One occupant hopped out and ran. But Sanchez and three co-workers were arrested.

Sheriff Enoch George and his staff were unavailable to discuss the raid Thursday, but on Wednesday Capt. Nathan Johns said carloads of illegal immigrants approached them.

Angela Leyva said she heard from her nephew — the boy who brought the gun to school — on Wednesday. He said he was in a holding facility, he thought in New Jersey. Last the family heard from her sister-in-law, she was in a holding facility in Franklin, expecting to go to Texas for a hearing before being deported to Mexico.

"For (authorities) to say they can't tell us anything — that's not right," Leyva said. "(Where) they're going or how we can find out what's happening to them; they're not letting us know anything."

'Right to remain silent'

People crossing border checkpoints can be searched, questioned or detained even if there's no obvious proof that they're entering illegally, said Jerry Gonzalez, a Nashville civil rights attorney.

Once they're here, a law enforcement officer has the authority to walk up and ask them if they're here illegally — but that doesn't always mean they'll be arrested.

If an immigrant doesn't make that admission, but an officer has an "objectively reasonable suspicion" that the immigrant is a criminal, the officer can detain him for questioning, Gonzalez said.

That detention is only supposed to last as long as it takes to figure out if the crime was committed. "We're talking 20 minutes," he said.
But most immigrants who are deported convict themselves under police questioning, Gonzalez said.

"Most illegal aliens are determined to be illegal because an (immigration) agent asks them 'are you illegal' and they say 'oh, you got me. I'm illegal.' And then they take them. Generally, everybody has the right to remain silent. … Nobody can compel them to speak."

Though some police officers will take it upon themselves to question Hispanics about their immigration status, "most enlightened law enforcement agencies" frown on the practice, said Elliott Ozment, a Nashville attorney who specializes in immigration issues.

"It could expose that law enforcement agency to very serious charges of discrimination," he said.

None of that mattered much to those left behind at the Countryside Mobile Village. Leyva said she had to explain to her daughters where their cousin and their aunt had gone.

"I told them they came and got them and took them back to Mexico," Leyva said, explaining that her 6-year-old was particularly confused. "She wanted to know why. How do you explain that to a kid?"I'm frankly so pissed off about so many things in this article that I can't begin to properly articulate my thoughts. Could the Tennessean possibly paint a more anti-law, pro-illegal activity slant on the issue of illegal aliens being arrested?!?

WTF is this country coming to?!?!? :rant:

[Donnie]

Interesting.........

Are you Broadside or Tungsten????
Split personalities maybe? :cool:

edit to say, I just read the name change thread, my bad.

[Ghostrider]

While I too share deep concerns about the direction of our country and the apathy of most citizens, the immigration reform proposal does not seem to me to be another sign of impending doom. Read further down the story:
The proposed agreement would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and — after paying fees and a $5,000 fine — ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of household would have to return to their home countries first.
They could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.
A new temporary guest worker program would also have to wait until those so-called "triggers" had been activated.
This seems fairly reasonable to me, considering the complexity of the issue and the practical impossibility of sealing the borders AND kicking out 20-30 million illegals. Basically we are prioviding a fine for illegal entry and then giving the opportunity for these folks to become citizens -a task that will take up to 13 years. I'm not seeing any coddling here, or over-zealous environmentalism either.

I have often noticed that many people on the extremes (both right and left) of many political issues tend to radically and overly simplify complex issues for the sake of their philosophy. (I am not implying anyone on this board is doing this, I'm just making a general statement.) If any of the problems facing our nation were simple, they'd have been fixed long ago. We can lament how we let things become the way they are, we can bash out leaders for being useless or worse, but picking up after their messes is way more complex than it seems on the surface.

Food for thought, I hope.

I disagree - I hear a lot of people saying that we just can't kick out all of these millions of illegals. Why not?

No, not in a day, not in a week, but if we seal the borders, punish (vigorously) all of the people who employ them, and not give them free access to healthcare and other benefits, what's to stop us from kicking out criminals? (Of course, after confinement at hard labor for a number of years - crime requires punishment). BTW, this is my version of carrot and stick, remove the carrot and use the stick. :D

Whenever someone has contact with an authority, it should just be another routine question to prove your citizenship. I carry my passport about 80% of the time now, and would happily put it with my DL in my wallet if they would make it a card and laminate it.

If we had 20 million (or whatever) drunk drivers here, they'd all be punished, why not other criminals?

[Len]

Its a matter of logistics.

1) We don't know who these people are in most cases. Who do we kick out? Asking everyone to "prove" they are citizens is basically asking the innocent to prove they are innocent. That's not democracy in my book. That's Nazi Germany or the USSR. I certainly wouldn't mind carrying around a wallet-sized version of my passport, but most Americans don't have one. Even getting a system in place to track citizens would cost billions and take decades. Meanwhile, many of these people have been here for decades, are part of the economy, pay their taxes, have raised families of US citizens, etc.
2) There are 20-30 million illegal immigrants here today, with more coming in every day. For comparison, the population of Tennessee is about 6 million. How are we going to round up a group of people 4-5 times the size of the population in this state, spread out over the whole nation? I think if we add up all military (active duty, reserves, guard) and all LEOs in this country we have around 5 million or so. Meanwhile, we are in two wars abroad, a drug war at home, a crime war in our neighborhoods, yada. It would take at least a generation to make this happen, at a HUGE cost that would make Iraq look like a bargain.
3) Where are we going to get the money? This would cost billions and billions to do. We have a huge deficit as it is, are spending mega-bucks in Iraq and other places, etc. I would prefer not to have my taxes raised to pay for generations of inept govt. policy.
4) We'd have to seal the borders first, to stop the in-flow and make sure the ones we kick out don't come back. Counting coastlines, US land borders with Canada (two) and Mexico (one), there are literally tens of thousands of miles of US border (not even counting various islands, etc.) The sealing of the borders would take forever, cost even more billions and would have to be done BEFORE any "kick them out" policy begins.
5) None of this factors in the positive economic impact of 30 million people buying stuff, doing jobs many of us would rather not do, etc. Sure there is a HUGE negative economic impact from illegal aliens, but also a HUGE positive economic impact. The overall economic impact is unknown, therefore the impact of eliminating 20-30 million people from the US economy is unknown and would have consequences.

And this is just scratching the surface.

Does all this make me "pro-illegal immigration" and de-facto "pro-criminal?" Certainly not. If someone is here illegally, and they are found out, they should be prosecuted. But from a purely apolitical, pragmatic perspective, it is virtually impossible to kick em all out, and doing so would probably wreck havoc on our economy, our military and our law enforcement personnel.

We have absorbed huge immigration influxes before, we can do it again.

Meanwhile, if we want to deal with the CAUSES of the problem in the first place, instead of just dealing with symptoms as they occur, let's help our fellow nations get their s@&t together so their own citizens will want to stay home and not come here. Of course if our current leaders at all levels keep up their remarkable record of pure stupidty, it wont be long before no one will WANT to come here anymore, and those of us here will want to leave. I suppose what comes around, goes around.

[molonlabetn]

Len makes several good points... I agree the most with the need for steps to be taken which reduce the benefit and increase the risk of coming into this country illegally. Let's make them not want to come here because no-one can afford to hire them, and they can't drive or show themselves in public without being arrested and deported. There also needs to be an initiative to promote the idea of the Mexican people taking back their own government... so instead of them coming here to take our country, they can model their own after ours, and enjoy their freedom and prosperity with dignity. Illegal Insurgents currently have no dignity... I can't believe that doesn't bother them.

People who only thrive to take advantage of the people around them, and bring them down, deserve no honorable place in ANY society, much less one in which they are not a native.

Let's make them not want to come here... through a combination of incentives to stay in their country, and risks for entering ours.

[dkd83]

The problem with immigration that has arisen in the late 20th and now 21st is one of assimilation. In the 1920s Mexican nationals crossed the border on a daily basis to work jobs within the US. Many, returned home every evening with some others remaining for a week or so at a time before returning. Now they choose to remain as illegal immigrants. This was not always the case.

With the advent of the Great Depression and a growing belief that Eugenics represented valid science thew US decided to severely curtail cross-border comerce for reasons ranging from economic protectionism (a response to the Depression) and the belief that Mexicans represented an inferior race (Eugenics). The latter gave rise to increasing siscrimination toward Mexican-Americans who became US citizens with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848 at the conclusion of the Mexican War. This treaty basically "gave" the US our entire South West.

So, we are definitely in a tough position and we have look back 100-150 years to estsablish the root causes. In my opinion the problem is reminiscent of the influx of the Gothic peoples into the eastern Roman Empire during the late 4th century AD.
Initially the Goth's received permission to settle en masse within the empire but through exploitation by Roman citizens, bureaucrats, and a lack of assimilation on the part of the Goths increasing animosity grew between the groups culminating in a crushing defeat for the Romans at the Battle of Adrianople in AD 378. The Roman Empire lasted another 100 years but this was the beginning of the end.

If we fail to control border security and assimilate foreign nationals I foresee the failure of our great republic.

[ReefBlueCoupe]

[Mr. Garrison] Can we get rid of all the Mexicans? [/Mr. Garrison]

[The Rabbi]

It's an economic problem: limited supply of labor here at cost-effective rates. So it has an economic solution. One solution is to depress the economy here and create massive unemployment. That will stop people trying to come here since there is nothing to come for. There is already less illegal immigration since construction jobs have been declining.
The other solution is to create a means where people can come here and work, at least temporarily. If work dries up, they go back home. Or to Canada. Or whereever they can find work.
I know which solution I'd go for.

[Marswolf]

This is a pretty complex situation. Happened to see a program last night on migrant workers in North Carolina. Pretty balanced show. Usual liberal whining about mistreatment of the poor migrants, but also a realistic look at their function in North Carolina agricultural economics.

Basically, even at high (for this kind of work) hourly rates, the veggie farmers can't hire enough legal workers. About 65% of the pickers are not just Mexicans but illegal. So, the illegals work for minimum wage in really lousy conditions. State law requires one refrigerator for every 27 workers. No mattresses on the beds are required. One crapper for every 25 workers generally just in an open room with no privacy. Often those are outhouses too. Their conditions here are probably no worse than in Mexico, but no American would work under those conditions. About 10% of the 1600 NC farmers using migrant labor have decent places for the migrants to live. The other 90%.... Well...there only four labor inspectors to see that the law is being followed.

If we could somehow toss out all the illegal folks today, our veggie prices would skyrocket and shortages would look like the old days of the Soviet Union. I don't want to stand in line for an hour to buy two half-rotten onions. The Mexicans need us to provide decent jobs. We need them to keep our standard of living. It's a symbiotic relationship.

I don't like the current proposal, but it's not as far off the mark as neocons are saying.

I'd rather not have the amnesty but would clamp down in phases on those hiring illegal aliens over say 10 years. That way, the workers could apply and come back in legally, while we still get strawberries and lettuce to eat. But really, the end result twenty years down the line will be the same as under this plan.

BTW, building a border fence is a pipe dream. Total waste of huge amounts of tax money. There are other ways to get here than walking across the border from Mexico. There is no "sealing the borders." Get over it....

[The Rabbi]

BTW, building a border fence is a pipe dream. Total waste of huge amounts of tax money. There are other ways to get here than walking across the border from Mexico. There is no "sealing the borders." Get over it....

Eggsactly. There was a news item about a bunch of Nigerians who were here illegally, and had already been deported 3 times already. It is too easy to get here somehow.
China can't control its border with N.Korea, despite it being much smaller and teh Chinese less sensitive to human rights than we are.

[Ghostrider]

Obviously I'm thought to be fairly stupid.

However, it can be done. IMO that's the primary function of the National Guard.

Truth is that it appears that we as a society don't have the intestinal fortitude to PROTECT AND DEFEND our borders.

'nuff said.

[The Rabbi]

Obviously I'm thought to be fairly stupid.

However, it can be done. IMO that's the primary function of the National Guard.

Truth is that it appears that we as a society don't have the intestinal fortitude to PROTECT AND DEFEND our borders.

'nuff said.

I suppose theoretically we could build fences and have constant monitoring (weren't there just tunnels discovered underneath the border crossings, used by drug smugglers?). It is a 2000 mile border across very uninhabited and inhospitable land. We would need to mine parts of it. We would need to draft or otherwise encourage people to join the guard or the army, since much of the guard is currently being sent to the middle east.
The cost of such an enterprise would make the current Iraq War look like small change. We would share the dubious distinction of fortifying our borders with the likes of the Soviet Union.
So it would be grossly costly in and of itself, it would create labor shortages here, drive up the cost of things, increase inflation, and expose us to the odium of the rest of the world.
If you want to call that fortitude, go right ahead. I'd call it plain dumb.

[towerclimber37]

I've got a solution.

ANNEX mexico. its either that or put them to the sword when they cross the border.

look. the Dollar has been continually driven down by illegal immigration. every dollar thats printed by the treasury dept, has to be backed by the gold reserves.
When illegal immigrants siphon off that money to send to mexico they do a couple of things to us.
1. they weaken the overall standing of the dollar in the world financial market.
2. this money is NOT put back into the local economies so the local economy doesn't prosper by the influx of work.
3. because they've broken 4 laws at least to get here, they don't care about breaking more laws to stay and do what they want...so crime rate goes up.
4. They offer a venue for other countries to enter illegally into the U.S.


we don't have to watch the borders. we don't have to mine or build fences.

1st time you're caught, deportation.

2nd time you're caught, 1 year in jail at hard labor (this will help offset the cost of feeding, housing and administrative costs.)

3rd time- you're out...euthanasia by lead injection.
yes that sounds harsh...but look at the realities.


mexico isn't poor because it has no resources. It isn't poor because we "evil" americans have dominated them. It isn't poor because of trade embargoes or anything else outside of its own soil.

its poor because its citizens mismanage the government, and have no sense when it comes to economics..their government is corrupt, drugs run rampant and the government cant even control that.
Now, we're expected to let a MINIMUM of 12 MILLION of them become citizensand exercise voting rights?? not to mention the run on the border when the rest of mexico finds out....
I say no.
I don't blame them for running to america...but its a little like the califorians...who have run their state 40 billion dollars into debt..and then moving to texas, oregon or arizona.

I am NOT advocating a shoot on sight scenario..but there are tough questions that need to be dealt with.

fences are out of the question, laws apparently don't work as lawmakers in washington are ignoring even those. for those who want to live here as americans, I say work for it...like we work for the things we really want.
that way, you'll cherish it and have something to be proud of!

many people are worried about the cost of tomatoes and lettuce when the very social fabric of america is being ripped apart.
I'd be willing to pay the extra cost for a tomato..or else grow one in my own back yard..what I WILL not do is sing the national anthem in spanish or any OTHER language. I will not be sit politely by and watch america be mobbed and mugged.
I WILL vote. I will let my congress know how I feel.
after that, if they don't do the job, I'll cast my vote for a new congress.
hopefully, others will too.

the borders CAN be secured...by ordinary citizens. we just have to have the power to do it.
there are even willing participants...note the minutemen.

I realize I sound like a crackpot, but unless someone comes up with an inventive way to stop it, we're going to have to use old fashioned methods.

I like Mars' proposal..everyone wins that way! thats what we really want in the end.
a good life for those who want to come to america to be a part of it, justice for the lawbreakers and economic security for our nation.

but don't expect me to like a bunch of illegal immigrants running around waving a mexican flag going na na nah naaaa naaahh and thumbing thier noses at our way of life.

[The Rabbi]

I've got a solution.

the Dollar has been continually driven down by illegal immigration. every dollar thats printed by the treasury dept, has to be backed by the gold reserves.
When illegal immigrants siphon off that money to send to mexico they do a couple of things to us.
1. they weaken the overall standing of the dollar in the world financial market.
2. this money is NOT put back into the local economies so the local economy doesn't prosper by the influx of work.
3. because they've broken 4 laws at least to get here, they don't care about breaking more laws to stay and do what they want...so crime rate goes up.
4. They offer a venue for other countries to enter illegally into the U.S.


Don't take this the wrong way, but I strongly suspect your knowledge of economics is lacking.
The dollar is not falling because of illegal immigration. It is falling for complex reasons, among them the increase in inflation in the US.
The US stopped backing its dollar with gold in 1972, and stopped backing it for private individuals in 1934.
Illegals do not send every penny they earn to Mexico. They have to live here too. Further money sent back home means those receiving it are not moving here since they have no need to.
All immigrants send money home. My great-grandfather regularly sent money to his father back in Lithuania.
Illegals enter in every which way possible. That includes Canada. That includes the airports here as well. Try mining the airports.
I would state as a rule that any solution that involves ending human life is not a viable solution in any way at all.

[Ghostrider]

So then, we only do what is practical? What is cost effective? What is easy?

That seems to be your stance...

So why then, should we have any laws, any rules, any standards?

I'm sure we could use the cash "wasted" on enforcing laws to better effect somewhere else.

The US I want to live in isn't based on that. It based on principles. It's based on doing the right thing, and to hell with what the rest of the world may think.

But then again, what do I know? I'm stupid.

[towerclimber37]

Don't take this the wrong way, but I strongly suspect your knowledge of economics is lacking.
The dollar is not falling because of illegal immigration. It is falling for complex reasons, among them the increase in inflation in the US.
The US stopped backing its dollar with gold in 1972, and stopped backing it for private individuals in 1934.
Illegals do not send every penny they earn to Mexico. They have to live here too. Further money sent back home means those receiving it are not moving here since they have no need to.

I would state as a rule that any solution that involves ending human life is not a viable solution in any way at all.

I hate to embarrass ya rabbi..but even though we use the FIAT dollar, we're still marked by an index thats measured by the amount of gold we hold. If you don't believe that..go to fort Knox and tell THEM that they're holding all that gold for antiquated reasons and they should give it all to you! see how long it takes a few guys with GUNS to drive up in an Suv and take you away..
as for the economics..I said that the dollar is continually being driven down by Illegal immigration...not that its falling solely because of it.

My economic education is right on the money.

as for them spending money here? I know a guy..he manages an apartment complex down in florida.
He once evicted 11 mexicans that were NOT on the lease, and 2 that were...when he went into the apartment he found that they had turned the 2nd bedroom into a garden by putting topsoil on top of the carpet, to grow vegetables.
thats how they keep from spending so much money.
while I think its laudable that they are willing to go to such great lengths to take care of their family, out of those 13 people, guess how many were here legally? guess how many of them had a criminal record in Mexico?
and finally can you guess how many of them had drugs on them when they were caught by immigration?

I don't have a problem with immigrants. I don't have a problem with sending money home.
I have a problem with them being paid under the table and that money not taxed...draining the healthcare system, overwhelming the school systems with illiterate children that have no privisions nor any will to learn english and then thumbing their noses at people that came here with a love for freedom and worked to get here.. JUST LIKE YOUR GRANDFATHER did.
to be an american you have to care for america. they don't. they care about their families first (admirable) and then they care about MEXICO.


Force has solved more conflicts than any other means in the history of mankind.
thats sad to say, and you may not be agreeable with it...but its the only thing that both law abiding citizens AND law breakers understand.
you might want to think very carefully about my tagline rabbi.
then think about how far Israelis get with using the soft approach to the people what want to undermine their way of life.


often the best thing to do is not the easiest thing.That sucks, but hey..thats reality.

[RN MEDIC]

First, sorry to be so late getting in. No offense to anyone for those who will disagree with what I write. That's OK as NOTHING I want will happen anyway so I suppose I'm just dreaming.

One thing for sure is that we can't keep on going like we are or our nation won't survive, at least our system of freedom won't survive; not only over the issue of illegal immigration, but a lot of issues, but I digress.

On illegals, yes, the border must be controlled, and could be if only the electorate wanted it that way enough to hold the politicans accountable and truly vote out the ones who wouldn't respond to the wishes of the voters. HOW? Well, not without costs, that's for sure. I'd start in the morning with HEAVY construction of a HEAVY and HIGH wall on the southern border. I mean ALL of it all the way from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. I'd probably build it in the most heavily traveled areas first. Actually, I'd probably lay the land mines first in front of where the wall and concertina wire would be. Then the wall, light towers, machine gun towers, etc. could be added. Just a few illegals stepping on mines would kinda slow things down a bit.

Next, the materials for the wall; Well, just for example, former Arkansas Governor and presidential candidate Huckabee was and is in the pockets of the Tyson company that produces poultry in northwest Arkansas. This is easily documentable by anyone in Arkansas and astute as to his record. Now in Mexico, there are lots of billboards saying "come to Arkansas and work for Tyson" thus alluring them up here. Seems there ought to be some sort of fine for all that. Use your imagination as to the laws that could be passed to take resources from such scofflaws and buy materials for the wall; BUT..

That would still leave the labor. Actually, that's the easy pare. See, the labor to build the walls, etc would be free. Every illegal identified and every American who is a repeat offender in helping illegals (I don't have all the details worked out yet, but this is just the general idea. Remember, I said this will never happen anyway.) to get away from the border patrol etc. would ALL be taken to the forced labor camp where the current wall building project is now going on. Refuse to work on the wall, mealtime is gonna be a bit late; you get the idea.

Now if any of you guys think I'm nuts you may be right. I just see the country in much more danger than on Pearl Harbor day ; SO BAD that I'm not at all sure our country much less what freedom we still have can or will be salvaged. I'm older and in worse health than most of you younger folks so I don't know if I'll be around when the truly bad stuff REALLY gets going. But God help all of you, and especially the kids, for if the dark cloud of tryanny which looms ever closer continues with the conquest of our once great free representative republic, the consequences are too horrible to even consider.

Rather than bore you any more, I'll just stop it here. Some of you will agree with me and others won't. Oh well, my view is that we are friends first. If we see these things alike that's OK, but we won't always.

Respectfully, RN

[DEIMOS]

I like your idea RN.

I know that things will only get worse, scripture says it, and I believe it. Still, this does not stop me from being heartsick or angry. I don't like sitting by and watching the end come. I vote, I serve my country, but it seems all for naught. The people we have in power are treacherous and they are purposefully destroying this country.

If the time comes, I am willing to fight. Until then, I am doing what I can to prepare myself and my family.

[The Rabbi]

I hate to embarrass ya rabbi..but even though we use the FIAT dollar, we're still marked by an index thats measured by the amount of gold we hold. If you don't believe that..go to fort Knox and tell THEM that they're holding all that gold for antiquated reasons and they should give it all to you! see how long it takes a few guys with GUNS to drive up in an Suv and take you away..
as for the economics..I said that the dollar is continually being driven down by Illegal immigration...not that its falling solely because of it.

My economic education is right on the money.



Really? Please supply the name of this index that measures how much gold we hold and tell me its relevance to currency valuation.
Then tell me, in support of your original thesis, how this gold is being depleted by illegal aliens. Maybe they're the ones driving up and demanding gold at Ft Knox.
Please cite any evidence, any at all, that illegal immigration is responsible in any part whatsoever for the dollar's fall.
And while you're there, please explain why the dollar is almost exactly at the same value against the Euro as it was in Jan 2005, as you see here:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?D5=0&D4=1&ViewType=0&C6=2007&3=0&ShowChtBt=Refresh+Chart&Symbol=%2fEURUS&C8=2007&DateRangeForm=1&CE=0&C5=5&C7=5&ComparisonsForm=1&C9=0&DisplayForm=1&CP=0&PT=10

Or please explain why the dollar is currently at about the same level against the Yen as it was Jan 2003
http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=USD&to=JPY&amt=1&t=5y

Finally, I cannot account for all the hispanic food stores on Nolensville Rd here if all the illegals are simply growing their vegetables in spare bedrooms. I guess those are just front organizations.:rolleyes:

[The Rabbi]

So then, we only do what is practical? What is cost effective? What is easy?

That seems to be your stance...

So why then, should we have any laws, any rules, any standards?

I'm sure we could use the cash "wasted" on enforcing laws to better effect somewhere else.

The US I want to live in isn't based on that. It based on principles. It's based on doing the right thing, and to hell with what the rest of the world may think.

But then again, what do I know? I'm stupid.

It's certainly easy to distort someone's argument into nonsense and then disagree with it.
I guess your approch would be: let's pick a problem and throw as much money as we possibly we can until the problem is solved. Iraqi insurgence? Let's draft every male between 18 and 35 and send them over there. That would solve that problem.
Border control? Let's draft every male between 18 and 50 and send them down there. That would solve that problem.
Oh, those things would wreck our economy and cause massive disruption to our social and political life? So what? It's the RIGHT THING TO DO.

[Phantom6]

RN Medic wrote:
... Well, just for example, former Arkansas Governor and presidential candidate Huckabee was and is in the pockets of the Tyson company that produces poultry in northwest Arkansas.


Yeah, those darned former Arkansas governors seem to continue to get us into trouble. First its Whitewater and now White Chicken. :D

You are right. All those identifiable as PROMOTING illegal immigration as Tyson and other US Companies do should be hammered. Heavy fines to start with and possibly seizure of assets if offenses are repeated. :mad:

[towerclimber37]

Really? Please supply the name of this index that measures how much gold we hold and tell me its relevance to currency valuation.
Then tell me, in support of your original thesis, how this gold is being depleted by illegal aliens. Maybe they're the ones driving up and demanding gold at Ft Knox.
Please cite any evidence, any at all, that illegal immigration is responsible in any part whatsoever for the dollar's fall.
And while you're there, please explain why the dollar is almost exactly at the same value against the Euro as it was in Jan 2005, as you see here:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?D5=0&D4=1&ViewType=0&C6=2007&3=0&ShowChtBt=Refresh+Chart&Symbol=%2fEURUS&C8=2007&DateRangeForm=1&CE=0&C5=5&C7=5&ComparisonsForm=1&C9=0&DisplayForm=1&CP=0&PT=10

Or please explain why the dollar is currently at about the same level against the Yen as it was Jan 2003
http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?from=USD&to=JPY&amt=1&t=5y

Finally, I cannot account for all the hispanic food stores on Nolensville Rd here if all the illegals are simply growing their vegetables in spare bedrooms. I guess those are just front organizations.:rolleyes:

Rabbi, quite being antagonistic please and lets have a decent discussion.
this is a great board and here we DISCUSS and DEBATE. we do NOT insult.
while sarcasm is fun, when it starts becoming vitrolic then its time to tone it down.

now..to the discussion at hand.

1. what you are looking at is simply the short term model of the economy.
from this I gather that you've never gotten into K wave theory, statistical modeling, and advanced economic theory.
since its been awhile for me as well, I went back and did a little bit of study...just so that if I was wrong, I could be wrong in good conscience!:D

here's a quick primer for you

http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_02/kennedy011602.html

what many people don't understand is that we may use a FIAT dollar..but GOLD is one of the primary drivers of the economy simply because it in itself is an index to wealth. Just so you won't misconstrue that statement, The price of gold is what the REST OF THE MARKET MEASURES ITSELF to.
when we speak of how much wealth that a country has...immediately on a scalar level, we look at the amount of gold that country has in reserve. this is a base measurement for the strength of their economy as well as the resources of that country.

since you were sarcastically taking my words out of context in your post to me in order to make me look as if I didn't know what I was talking about, I'll fix that and dumb it down so there can be no mistake.

I did NOT say that illegal aliens were depleting the gold. that was a misinterpretation on your part.

I said that they weaken the dollars' spending power abroad...
the more dollars OUTSIDE of the united states, the less power they have to buy. this is a simple and easy concept to understand.
while we still use a fiat dollar, the overall wealth of a nation,and the strength of its economy, is measured by how much gold that country holds as well as its GNP after its total debt. THE US IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY DOLLAR IT PRINTS. it has to back that with GOLD, when outside the US. GET IT?

Illegal immigrants send money OUTSIDE THE US! do you understand the pattern now?

as for my first post, you only decided to pick out the parts that you could attack me on and seek to make me look stupid.
how about address the WHOLE post without distorting anything..look at it rationally, and then debate...you'll get farther and perhaps you'll change my mind. Otherwise, its a waste of my time to debate anything with you,since there can be no actual communication when even one person refuses to listen, think and comment without venom. sarcasm I don't mind..but when it gets combative (I have the feeling you're about ready to call me a name) its a waste of time.
When you made your comment about the hispanic food stores, you were once again thinking locally....easy to do.
the events I described happened in Jacksonville, Fla. Why they were growing veggies in the other room was a constant source of wonderment for both myself and the apt. manager.

as for your remark about how the immigrants are killing our economy,

Low-skill immigrants pay little in taxes and receive high levels of government benefits and services. The National Academy of Sciences has estimated that each immigrant without a high school degree will cost U.S. taxpayers, on average, $89,000 over the course of his or her lifetime.[3] (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/SR9.cfm#_ftn3) This is a net cost above the value of any taxes the immi*grant will pay and does not include the cost of educating the immigrant’s children, which U.S. taxpayers would also heavily subsidize.

theres alot more where that came from...and it doesn't matter WHAT nationality the immigrants are..it just happens that most of the illegal immigrants are of spanish decent...not my fault man!!!

I could give you the link, but until you figure it out that I'm not some racist, facist type..I doubt it would do any good.

are you willing to debate without the venom? :D if you are, perhaps we can both learn something!

[towerclimber37]

Iraqi insurgence? Let's draft every male between 18 and 35 and send them over there.

we don't need to do that, as all our military are Courageous VOLUNTEERS.


Border control? Let's draft every male between 18 and 50 and send them down there. That would solve that problem.

once again not neccessary, we have minutemen that would be more than happy to do the job with a little more support from congress.
Oh, those things would wreck our economy and cause massive disruption to our social and political life? So what? It's the RIGHT THING TO DO.

I don't think it would cause that much disruption, I doubt very seriously that it would destroy our economy beyond repair...the net result would be that unemployment would go DOWN, crime would go DOWN, drug traffic would go DOWN, the only political life that would be destroyed would be spineless liberals (no Len, I'm not talking about you..don't swat me with a newspaper:p) who talk rather than ACT and have no problem being buttsurfed by other countries because they think that America is a country to be ashamed of.

as Marswolf said, once we get control of the situation we could then begin a program to allow workers to come in and LEGALLY become americans.

[molonlabetn]

The social disruption argument is moot. We did just fine before the illegals were here in such numbers, quite the opposite actually... it is a fact that they do more to drain our economy than they have ever contributed (on the order of $30 billion a year, net). I'll pay an extra buck for a head of lettuce if it means that I'm not picking up the tab for the healthcare and government assistance to these insurgents, and my insurance premium isn't inflated because of the 20+ fatal car accidents per day which are caused by reckless, drunk, uninsured, hispanics. Not to mention all of the unscreened carriers of communicable diseases which pour over the border every day... tuberculosis is on the rise, my friends, and it ain't no coincidence!

Cut the undocumented labor employment, deport them and their breeders, incarcerate the violent offenders, and enforce the border.

[Marswolf]

Here's an interesting story from about a year ago:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/5/23/210820.shtml

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The Senate voted Tuesday to fine employers who hire illegal immigrants up to $20,000 for each unauthorized worker, providing teeth to a broad immigration bill before sending it to a final vote later this week.

Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires within 18 months after money is provided to the Homeland Security Department to expand the electronic system for screening workers.

"This is probably the single most important thing we can do in terms of reducing the inflow of undocumented workers, making sure we can enforce in a systematic way rules governing who gets hired," said Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.

The amendment passed 58-40. Opponents said the verification system would take years to implement and complained that workers deemed illegal could still hold onto jobs until their appeals are exhausted.

Employers who don't use the new computerized system could be fined $200 to $600. The system would include information from the Social Security Administration, the Internal Revenue Service and Homeland Security Department.

The $20,000 fines for hiring illegal immigrants once the new screening system is in place would be double the present level. Repeated violators could be sentenced to prison terms of up to three years.

The House passed a bill in December that would impose fines on employers of undocumented workers ranging from $5,000 to $40,000. But, unlike the Senate bill, the House measure would require employers to screen all employees - an estimated 140 million people - instead of only new hires.

Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., scheduled a test vote for Wednesday that sets up the bill's final passage, likely Thursday. Its most controversial provision would put more than half of the nation's 12 million illegal immigrants on a path toward citizenship without ever having to leave the U.S.

Critics call that amnesty and Republican leaders refused to even allow it to be considered in the bill the House passed in December.

Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who heads a group of 100 conservatives in the House, said Tuesday he plans to offer a bill this week that would let employers rehire illegal workers now on their payrolls after they have returned home and applied for a new "W" visa to return.

"The solution is to set up a system that will encourage illegal workers to self-deport and come back legally as guest workers," said Pence, who earlier voted for the enforcement-only House bill.

The Senate defeated an effort Tuesday by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that would have let all illegal immigrants remain, in contrast to the Senate compromise that would require more than one-third of them to leave.

[The Rabbi]

what many people don't understand is that we may use a FIAT dollar..but GOLD is one of the primary drivers of the economy simply because it in itself is an index to wealth. Just so you won't misconstrue that statement, The price of gold is what the REST OF THE MARKET MEASURES ITSELF to.
when we speak of how much wealth that a country has...immediately on a scalar level, we look at the amount of gold that country has in reserve. this is a base measurement for the strength of their economy as well as the resources of that country.

since you were sarcastically taking my words out of context in your post to me in order to make me look as if I didn't know what I was talking about, I'll fix that and dumb it down so there can be no mistake.

I did NOT say that illegal aliens were depleting the gold. that was a misinterpretation on your part.

I said that they weaken the dollars' spending power abroad...
the more dollars OUTSIDE of the united states, the less power they have to buy. this is a simple and easy concept to understand.
while we still use a fiat dollar, the overall wealth of a nation,and the strength of its economy, is measured by how much gold that country holds as well as its GNP after its total debt. THE US IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY DOLLAR IT PRINTS. it has to back that with GOLD, when outside the US. GET IT?

Illegal immigrants send money OUTSIDE THE US! do you understand the pattern now?



Right, you have no idea what you're talking about.
The wealth of a nation is not measured in gold. If that were the case Russia and South Africa would be economic powerhouses. They arent.
You persist in saying that the US has to back its dollar with gold. Get over it. It isnt true. It has not been true since 1974. U.S. stocks of gold are trivial compared with the value of the rest of the economy..
Illegal immigrants (and legal ones too btw) send money out of the country. Multinational corporations also send money out of the country. And in far greater amounts than illlegals could imagine. Are you proposing that multinationals are responsible for weakening the economy?
The data on whether illegals help or hurt the economy are unclear. There was an announcement not too long ago from a group of Nobel Prize winners to the effect that the overall impact was positive. Arthur Laffer has said that immigants (including illegals) are the lifeblood of the economy. I tend to think this is true. People say we cant absorb all the illegals. We already have. Unemployment here is well under 5%. If we deported all the illegals many industries would face unprecedented labor shortages. We are not talking about an extra dollar a head for lettuce. We are talking about prices being 20-30% higher across the board.
If you object to illegals taking advantage of social welfare programs, then lobby to reform those programs.
And I am still waiting to hear the name of this index you referenced.

[Len]

Guys, getting just a tad off-topic here.

[Ghostrider]

It's certainly easy to distort someone's argument into nonsense and then disagree with it.
I guess your approch would be: let's pick a problem and throw as much money as we possibly we can until the problem is solved. Iraqi insurgence? Let's draft every male between 18 and 35 and send them over there. That would solve that problem.
Border control? Let's draft every male between 18 and 50 and send them down there. That would solve that problem.
Oh, those things would wreck our economy and cause massive disruption to our social and political life? So what? It's the RIGHT THING TO DO.
No, my approach is to take problems and apply common sense and the constitution of the US to fix them.

Actually, I'm a little tired of your insults and name calling. Since it's obvious you're not going to stop, I'll defuse the situation by simply ignoring your posts.

If you'd like to see more of my ignorant, stupid, dumb and generally wasteful ideas, you can look at my website.

Otherwise, I'm over listening to your ideas as the immature name calling and personal attacks completely destroys any mature discussion of issues and makes your behavior appear childish, at best.

[The Rabbi]

Guys, getting just a tad off-topic here.

Didnt think so. Someone tried making the point that illegal immigrants damage the economy by sending money back home. I dont think thats a valid argument.
People opposed to the current bill have yet to propose a workable alternative. They seem stuck in the "law enforcement" mindset that has gotten us here to begin with. It is not a law enforcement problem, it is an economic problem. Arguably it isn't a problem at all.

[Tungsten]

I don't see how you can argue that it isn't an enforcement problem when illegal aliens are, by definition, breaking Federal law by being here in the first place. Round them up, send them home! Blaming the conditions that brought them here is like arguing that a psychopathic murderer shouldn't face the death penalty because he was touched inappropriately by a priest as a child.

Crossing our borders illegally ought to be a "shoot on sight" offense. But that's just my narrow minded view on things.

[The Rabbi]

No, my approach is to take problems and apply common sense and the constitution of the US to fix them.

Actually, I'm a little tired of your insults and name calling. Since it's obvious you're not going to stop, I'll defuse the situation by simply ignoring your posts.

If you'd like to see more of my ignorant, stupid, dumb and generally wasteful ideas, you can look at my website.

Otherwise, I'm over listening to your ideas as the immature name calling and personal attacks completely destroys any mature discussion of issues and makes your behavior appear childish, at best.

The only person I see name calling here is you. My posts have been directed at your arguments.
I don't see where it is common sense to say we should round up 10-12 million people and send them elsewhere. I also dont see where that will actually solve any problems. I am unaware of a population movement of that scale in the name of law and order.
You are the one who claimed that you want to live in a country based on principles, counterposing that to my argument that we need to be realistic and aim for solutions that are achievable, both physically and politically.
You are also the one who keeps referring to himself as stupid. I certainly never called you that.
I also do not see where the US Constitution comes into play here. Please explain where there is any Constitutional issue here at all.

[The Rabbi]

I don't see how you can argue that it isn't an enforcement problem when illegal aliens are, by definition, breaking Federal law by being here in the first place. Round them up, send them home! Blaming the conditions that brought them here is like arguing that a psychopathic murderer shouldn't face the death penalty because he was touched inappropriately by a priest as a child.

Crossing our borders illegally ought to be a "shoot on sight" offense. But that's just my narrow minded view on things.

It isn;t an enforcement problem because enforcement hasn't worked, despite over 20 years of effort and billions of dollars. In 1993 the Border Patrol's budget was $419M. In the 2007 budget that figure is $7.8 Billion. Why does anyone think adding another $100M or $1B or $100B is going to suddenly make a difference?
But if it is their illegal act that bothers you, it is simple to change the law to allow them to come and go.
Looking at causes is a prelude to looking at solutions. And the solution is not militarizing our borders or imposing a police state. And both of those is where the anti-illegal crowd is headed.

[Tungsten]

But if it is their illegal act that bothers you, it is simple to change the law to allow them to come and go.

Let's legalize marijuana and pedophilia while we're at it then. Because by your logic, making an illegal act "legal" would help me feel better about it.

Awesome! :up:


Looking at causes is a prelude to looking at solutions. And the solution is not militarizing our borders or imposing a police state. And both of those is where the anti-illegal crowd is headed.I think the anti-illegal crowd has it's head screwed on straight, then. Where's yours? ;)






PS: I mean no offense. Mike said you're the guy with the rapier wit so I figured I'd play a little.

[The Rabbi]

Let's legalize marijuana and pedophilia while we're at it then. Because by your logic, making an illegal act "legal" would help me feel better about it.

Awesome! :up:

I think the anti-illegal crowd has it's head screwed on straight, then. Where's yours? ;)


As you well know there is a strong move to legalize marijuana on exactly the grounds I have laid out for immigration: spending increasingly large amounts of money on enforcement has resulted in a worse problem, not a better one.
It is obvious you think the anti crowd is right. But when I challenge people on some fairly basic ideas they get huffy about it and call themselves stupid. I wouldnt think anyone who consistently refers to himself as stupid has his head screwed on right.
So tell me why you think adding $X billion dollars more to enforcement is going to do anything. Tell me what you think the problem is in the first place.

[Ghostrider]

...The cost of such an enterprise would make the current Iraq War look like small change. We would share the dubious distinction of fortifying our borders with the likes of the Soviet Union.
So it would be grossly costly in and of itself, it would create labor shortages here, drive up the cost of things, increase inflation, and expose us to the odium of the rest of the world.
If you want to call that fortitude, go right ahead. I'd call it plain dumb.

Oh, those things would wreck our economy and cause massive disruption to our social and political life? So what? It's the RIGHT THING TO DO.
No, you didn't call me stupid, actually you referred to someone else as stupid. Bolding in your quotes above is mine.

Spin it as you like, I'm out, you're on ignore.

[dkd83]

I have one question that any one may answer: Why is it that people who espouse ideas that at best appear extremely liberal are the first to bring up economics as a justification for their ideas?

The real "immigrant issue" boils down to how the US is going to implement wealth redistribution in the 21st century. Our previous attempts at this type of practice have failed miserably (Great Society). We must realize that if we support this kind of sweeping redistribution we become socialists at a minimum.

Open borders do not help our economy, as a whole. Cheap produce at the grocery store does justify the flouting of our republic's laws and sovereignty. The strains placed on our social services infrastructure alone far out weigh the gains made from cheap available labor.

Throwing money at our borders will not solve our problems. We must get control of the illegal immigrant situation not for the political reasons, nor the economic reasons, but for the protection of the US as an independent entity. Assimilation and personal responsibility are a necessity for the immigrants: learn English, pay taxes, minimize reliance on public assistance, and BECOME Americans.

[The Rabbi]

I have one question that any one may answer: Why is it that people who espouse ideas that at best appear extremely liberal are the first to bring up economics as a justification for their ideas?

The real "immigrant issue" boils down to how the US is going to implement wealth redistribution in the 21st century. Our previous attempts at this type of practice have failed miserably (Great Society). We must realize that if we support this kind of sweeping redistribution we become socialists at a minimum.

Open borders do not help our economy, as a whole. Cheap produce at the grocery store does justify the flouting of our republic's laws and sovereignty. The strains placed on our social services infrastructure alone far out weigh the gains made from cheap available labor.

Throwing money at our borders will not solve our problems. We must get control of the illegal immigrant situation not for the political reasons, nor the economic reasons, but for the protection of the US as an independent entity. Assimilation and personal responsibility are a necessity for the immigrants: learn English, pay taxes, minimize reliance on public assistance, and BECOME Americans.

No one who espouses "extremely liberal" ideas uses economics as a justification first. Liberalism is usually antithetical to economics, not complementary.
But this issue is about more than economics, although it is certainly about that. There is an issue of freedom here, a freedom to move freely and pursue opportunities regardless of borders. Freedom is not a liberal issue, it is the original conservative issue.
People bring up the overburdening of public services. It is a legitimate issue. But the solution is to revamp or eliminate those public services, not cut down on immigration.
I do not understand your reference to "wealth distribution." No one is proposing wealth distribution, unless it is from the unproductive to the productive through their own labor. And I hope you don't oppose that.

[towerclimber37]

Right, you have no idea what you're talking about.
The wealth of a nation is not measured in gold. If that were the case Russia and South Africa would be economic powerhouses. They arent.
You persist in saying that the US has to back its dollar with gold. Get over it. It isnt true. It has not been true since 1974. U.S. stocks of gold are trivial compared with the value of the rest of the economy..
Illegal immigrants (and legal ones too btw) send money out of the country. Multinational corporations also send money out of the country. And in far greater amounts than illlegals could imagine. Are you proposing that multinationals are responsible for weakening the economy?
The data on whether illegals help or hurt the economy are unclear. There was an announcement not too long ago from a group of Nobel Prize winners to the effect that the overall impact was positive. Arthur Laffer has said that immigants (including illegals) are the lifeblood of the economy. I tend to think this is true. People say we cant absorb all the illegals. We already have. Unemployment here is well under 5%. If we deported all the illegals many industries would face unprecedented labor shortages. We are not talking about an extra dollar a head for lettuce. We are talking about prices being 20-30% higher across the board.
If you object to illegals taking advantage of social welfare programs, then lobby to reform those programs.
And I am still waiting to hear the name of this index you referenced.


Once again, you pick apart my post and apply your immense sarcasm and wit to ONE sentence.

check this out...legally and economically, CORPORATIONS are pretty much considered countries unto themselves economically speaking.
they are taxed by OUR country.

since you wont let it go, I'll call that one yours..ok fine. gold is not the standard that drives all other markets.

you asked me to give proof that illegal immigrants have damaged our economy.
apparently I "don't know what I'm talking about"...because according to the heritage foundation, we pay right at 89,000 dollars per illegal immigrant...OVER AND ABOVE WHAT THEY EARN.

They send money home. they do NOT build homes here, they do NOT add appreciably to their local economy, except in non durable goods business. TELL ME HOW THIS HELPS OUR SOCIETY? Since you say it doesn't hurt it, how about you tell me how it helps our communities and our economy?
Illegal immigrants add quite appreciably to crime here. and you want to make them a citizen?
You say that the immigration laws are not working. I say that they're not vigorously enforced. you can't say that isn't true because if it weren't there wouldn't be citizens like the minutemen.

So, you think we should also legalize marijuana huh?
that doesn't suprise me.
I'm amazed that you even advocate carrying firearms for personal protection! your arguements have no common sense attached to them and less logic. "lets just ignore the laws that don't work and hey...since these people broke those laws while they were in place..lets just pardon them"
This sort of socialist thinking is the reason that will destroy us as a country. You make your assumptions based on the idea that we can't get a handle on illegal immigration. Your solutions to the problems we face are based on the idea that we are a failure as a country...

I just want to know, what sort of childhood did YOU have? You operate in a world where you dispair. thats pretty sad man.
then again, since you advocate the legalization of pot, I can understand why you fail often. perhaps you should take a good old fashioned look at your life and figure out if you're living in Lithuania still or if you're ameriCAN.:D
its ok you can say it.."I'm an AmeriCAN, I can win if I want to".

Its just my opinion, but I think Samuel Adams was talking to you and people JUST LIKE you when he made the quote in my tagline. the only problem is that these days, your ilk are too lazy to move, too inane to build your own country and seem to think that if you shout loud enough, and insult enough people, you can get your own way regardless of right and wrong and when you fail, you're happy to blame someone else. To that I will happily reply "go to hell".
throw your tantrums elsewhere and let the grownups at this table continue their discussion.

[The Rabbi]

It is difficult to sort out all the arguments in this post.
Thank you for admitting you were mistaken that illegals devalue the dollar by sending money home. That's a start anyway.
Corporations are not "countries unto themselves" in any way shape or form. Corporations are considered, here in the US, like private individuals. They are taxed here and their subsidiaries are taxed abroad. They do not raise armies, issue currency, tax people, or engage in any of the functions of a state. Sorry.
Do you have a link to the Heritage study that shows this. I'd be interested how they put that number together.
Immigrants, legal and illegal, generally take jobs that virtually everyone else is overqualified for. If they did not, you would have large underemployment, where overqualified people were picking lettuce etc. That is inherently wasteful.
Further, they tend to live somewhere and pay rent. That rent in turn pays property taxes. They buy things and pay tax on the purchases. Since illegals frequently use "borrowed" social security numbers, all the money they have deducted from paychecks for social security will never get claimed. Do they use more in social services than they provide in taxes and other kinds of consumption? I don't know. I dont think there is consensus on the issue.
Moreover, many industries would be in serious trouble if they had to pay higher wages. It is not that lettuce would cost 50 cents more. It is that lettuce would be grown in Mexico and shipped here instead of being grown here altogether. Already much of the produce you see is grown in So.America because labor costs are low enough that it makes sense just to ship here instead of growing here. That costs us jobs.
I never said we should legalize marijuana. I said there was a strong body of opinion that held we should for all the same reasons.
How individual freedom and measures to support that could possibly be considered "socialist" is beyond me. You'll have to explain that one in some detail. Unless "socialist" means "anything I consider bad."

[towerclimber37]

They buy things and pay tax on the purchases. Since illegals frequently use "borrowed" social security numbers, all the money they have deducted from paychecks for social security will never get claimed. "


these are NOT the people we want as citizens! saying "they didn't mean it" doesn't make a crime less than a crime!

so now, you have 12 MILLION people willing to break 4 laws that you want to make citizens.
now these laws are not minor laws...its not like you're getting a speeding ticket.

on top of that, when they get one of their social security cards, they break at least ONE more law..a federal law and commit Identity theft.

but hey..whats one more law?

and YOU advocate making them a citizen.

nice

[The Rabbi]

If you want them not to break laws, make it possible for them to come here and work without having to. As it is, the process for getting a green card takes years. Who wants to wait years to be able to come here and work? That doesnt serve any purpose.

[Tungsten]

If you want them not to break laws, make it possible for them to come here and work without having to. As it is, the process for getting a green card takes years. Who wants to wait years to be able to come here and work? That doesnt serve any purpose.
Ever heard the adage that says "if it's worth doing, it is worth doing right" ? Right hasn't always been synonymous with quick and easy.

[Tungsten]

As you well know there is a strong move to legalize marijuana on exactly the grounds I have laid out for immigration: spending increasingly large amounts of money on enforcement has resulted in a worse problem, not a better one.

Press Announcement From The U.S. Attorney General

For years, the United States Government has held the position that pedophilia is an abhorrent crime against children deserving the utmost of punishment against those whom engage in such despicable acts. We have waged this war with mixed results, catching and imprisoning far fewer pedophiles than have slipped through the nets.

Countless millions of dollars have been spent in our war against crimes on children, the toll of which is starting to weigh heavily upon the government and taxpayers alike. Regretfully we must admit that our best efforts have not been good enough and that the time has come to admit defeat.

Therefore, we are instead embracing those who were previously law breakers and through a sweeping change in legislation, are proud to state that these felons are now upstanding members of society, engaging in sexual congress with minor children under the full blessing of the United States government. Effective today, pedophilia is no longer a crime but a legitimate physical expression of love between an adult and a minor.

Parents, we appreciate your cooperation in facilitating this ground breaking change. Just think of the common good and the millions of taxpayer dollars that you are saving!

[towerclimber37]

If you want them not to break laws, make it possible for them to come here and work without having to. As it is, the process for getting a green card takes years. Who wants to wait years to be able to come here and work? That doesnt serve any purpose.


that is total crap. a person will respect the rule of law or they won't.

and they CAN come and work here...its called a work visa. it can be done legally, but they choose not to.

[The Rabbi]

that is total crap. a person will respect the rule of law or they won't.

and they CAN come and work here...its called a work visa. it can be done legally, but they choose not to.

Again, those take years to get. WHo wants to wait years?
Even the H1B visas, given to skilled workers, are subject to caps. IIRC, the cap was reached this year sometime in February.
And I thought you were ignoring me.

[dkd83]

Rabbi,

In your last post responding to me you wrote, "freedom is not a liberal issue, it is the original conservative issue." This is patently false. Conservativism, as a political ideology within Western Civilization, arose in the aftermath of the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars.

Conservatives sought to return Europe to the pre-French Revolution status quo. Men like Metternich (Austria) sought to role back the liberal reforms and ideas of Nationalism spread by Napoleon. In fact, in 1815 the Congress of Vienna met specifically to accomplish these goals.

Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Thomas Malthus, John Stuart Mill, and Adam Smith were some of the most influential liberal thinkers in the Western tradition. All of these men believed strongly in personal liberty, minimal government intrusion, and personal responsibility. In the mid-nineteenth century, we had Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who penned The Communist Manifesto, which was another permutation of liberal ideology.

I used "extremely liberal" in my last post to appear diplomatic. Because we have chosen to refer to our present 2-party system in the US by using conservative and liberal as synonyms for Republican and Democrat we have diluted the meaning of the words. Both Republicans and Democrats are by definition liberals. Each party can trace its origins back to the liberal political traditions formulated primarily during the European Enlightenment.

I used "redistribution of wealth" to refer to your comments that suggested open borders and to previous comments in this thread, by you and others, that intimated the US should/could "fix" the problems in Mexico or other countries that prompt people to come here illegally.

Liberalism as a political ideology casts a long shadow. We need to understand this and speak accordingly.

[towerclimber37]

Again, those take years to get. WHo wants to wait years?
Even the H1B visas, given to skilled workers, are subject to caps. IIRC, the cap was reached this year sometime in February.
And I thought you were ignoring me.

as long as you don't post acerbic posts, I'll reply to your posts. I have no idea how you arrived at the convoluted notion that MORE crime, MORE taxes and Less control over who comes into and goes out of our country is a good thing.

so whats wrong with having caps on work visas? have you stopped to think that if we actually deport those who are here illegally then perhaps those visa caps would go up?

and I reiterate, you are operating on an assumption that we've been defeated already and that we can't control this. In my opinion, that is the dumb idea. No one can succeed at anything if they start from a point of belief that they've already failed.

we CAN control our borders, we can get a handle on it..but it will require consistent enforcement of the current laws.

[Phantom6]

HEY,

http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f303/MicroFx/Email%20Photos/01_illegal_immigration.gif

Ok. I was going to stay out of this fray but I must say that I find the legalization of marijuana being compared to the Illegal Alien problem to be approaching lunacy. The only way that a parallel can be drawn between the Illegal Alien problem and the breaking of any law is the fact that if you are going to operate contra to the law you must be prepared to accept the consequences of your actions whether it is speeding, drugs, over boozed or carrying a gun into an establishment where it is prohibited. This apparently is not something that the Illegal Alien population in this country is prepared to do if the "rallies" are any indication.

Currently 1 in 32 Americans either are or have been in jail for something. Quite a large percentage of these Americans are incarcerated for what in the over all scheme of things are rather minor offences- possession and use of illegal drugs in particular. The legalization of marijuana or at the very least the relaxation of some of the drug laws would help ease some of the pressure on our society due to prison over crowding, medical costs which must be absorbed by the respective local, state and federal governments regarding prisoner care, housing, security etc. There are some that would say legalize it all putting most of the drug dealers out of business, tax it, make users register and sign DNR's so that when they OD they are not a burden on society. I'm not so sure that would be such a bad idea considering our experience with the 18th Amendment to the Constitution and the passage of the Volstead Act which of course enabled the federal enforcement of the prohibition of alcohol. God bless the 21st Amendment's ratification in Dec. of '33.

Until the laws of this country are changed then those that use, traffic in and are caught with what are presently illegal drugs should expect to be incarcerated and punished under the law. Until the laws of this country are changed then those that come to this country outside of the law should be rounded up and booted as the law requires.

The legalization of marijuana would eliminate an American problem. Yes, a problem with world wide ramifications but an american problem none the less. After 9-11 several guys I know had a saying that went something like "Don't fund terrorism- Smoke home grown". Hey, I don't smoke it any more but it makes perfect sense to me. On the other hand Julio, Hajji, Viktor, Fritz, Charlie Chan and all the other's scrambling across our borders are an external problem that must be dealt with.

In a perfect world Mexico and other nations around the globe would not have the problems that drive their citizens to break US imigration laws. In a somewhat less than perfect world we should build a wall from sea to shining sea on both land borders and all illegal aliens should be run to ground, snatched up and booted out of the country. In a far from perfect world, guard the border physically, electronically and however else we may, register the illegals, charge 'em all 5k (USD), require that they learn the language and hold a job and offer 'em an opportunity to become legal. If they follow the rules let em join the club. If not, boot their sorry asses.

Whatever happens, until the law is changed, enforce the freakin' law!

OK, my rant is over:rant:


My :2cents:

[towerclimber37]

and it was an eloquent rant! :)

[The Rabbi]

Rabbi,

In your last post responding to me you wrote, "freedom is not a liberal issue, it is the original conservative issue." This is patently false. Conservativism, as a political ideology within Western Civilization, arose in the aftermath of the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars.

Conservatives sought to return Europe to the pre-French Revolution status quo. Men like Metternich (Austria) sought to role back the liberal reforms and ideas of Nationalism spread by Napoleon. In fact, in 1815 the Congress of Vienna met specifically to accomplish these goals.

Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Thomas Malthus, John Stuart Mill, and Adam Smith were some of the most influential liberal thinkers in the Western tradition. All of these men believed strongly in personal liberty, minimal government intrusion, and personal responsibility. In the mid-nineteenth century, we had Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels who penned The Communist Manifesto, which was another permutation of liberal ideology.

I used "extremely liberal" in my last post to appear diplomatic. Because we have chosen to refer to our present 2-party system in the US by using conservative and liberal as synonyms for Republican and Democrat we have diluted the meaning of the words. Both Republicans and Democrats are by definition liberals. Each party can trace its origins back to the liberal political traditions formulated primarily during the European Enlightenment.

I used "redistribution of wealth" to refer to your comments that suggested open borders and to previous comments in this thread, by you and others, that intimated the US should/could "fix" the problems in Mexico or other countries that prompt people to come here illegally.

Liberalism as a political ideology casts a long shadow. We need to understand this and speak accordingly.

You make a good point but misplaced here.
THe terminology of things has changed. What is called a conservative today in America is really more a classical Liberal. What is called a liberal is really closer to socialist. I use the terms as they are commonly understood today.
As to redistribution of wealth, I dont understand, still, how opening borders will result in redistribution of wealth, except from the unproductive to the productive through their own enterprise. And that seems like an admirable redistribution.
As for fixing the problems in Mexico and So.America, it is probably beyond our ability. But that wont stop us from trying, and a good thing too. Bringing transparancy to markets and rule of law will do more to help people in those countries than a thousand aid programs and World Banks. Would be lots cheaper too.
And if we ignore those countries, they will turn to Chavez-style socialism and eventually become a threat to us.

[Len]

Well, now you all have got me thinking about the merits of medicinal pot...

Oh well, once more I wade into the fray...
I find it odd (not surprising, but odd) that a group of staunch pro-2A gun owners would be opposed to the legalization of pot for medicinal uses. Virtually ALL the arguments that we make in defense of the 2A apply to medical pot use. (No proof the law works, no proof the product is bad for you, criminalization only puts the product in the hands of criminals, the product was valuable and necessary in colonial life, many other states allow use of the product, so why not us, etc.)

I say decriminalize, tax the heck out of it, then use the $ to help secure the borders. Kill two proverbial birds (remember, I'm not a hunter, so I don't kill real birds) with one with one big stone made from the finest Mary Jane Mexico has to offer.

Ah the irony, taxing a product often made south of the border to help secure our borders. The symmetry is almost poetic! But then I suppose the WTO would sanction us for import tariffs...

[The Rabbi]

My issue with legalizng marijuana is that if you "tax the hell out of it" you create enormous incentives to cheat. NYC found this out when they taxed the hell out of cigarettes. Enterprising people got vans, drove to NC, loaded up with cartons of cigarettes and drove back to NYC. They sell them there for something like $4 a pack while the "official" price is over $6. It is so bad cops dont even issue tickets for it.
And lets face it, marijuana is a lot easier to grow, process, and distribute than Marlboros.
But otherwise you make good points about deciding policy: is current policy effective? Is the thing itself inherently harmful? What incentives do you create one way or another?

[molonlabetn]

Hypothetical situation...

You own a business, and have a summer job opening to fill, there are 2 candidates, both freshly graduated from high-school:

One is an admitted marijuana-user, the other is clean and would pass a drug test. Otherwise they are equal.

Which one would YOU hire? Would you stake the productivity of your business on someone with an addictive behavior, by choice? I'll buy that there may be no permanent, proven, harmful physical effects of the drug... but that doesn't mean that there are no effects at all.

I agree that there are similar arguments for the freedom to use drugs, alcohol, firearms, etc... All can be used improperly to the detriment of the user, or those around him/her. People should be judged by the choices that they make, and the responsibility which they bear for them.

I should be free to drive 120mph... but if I cause an accident and loss of life or property by doing so, I should be held 100% accountable for that... and should lose the right to drive again.

I should be free to own any type of weapon I choose, and can afford... but if I use it negligently or destructively without cause, I should be held 100% responsible, and lose the right to have access to such weapons again.

Same arguments for anything else one can think of, including drugs, which I personally have no desire to partake in... Alcohol perhaps... But whatever I choose to do cannot be pre-judged and restricted from me without some cause to believe that I am disposed to abusing it.

Illegal alien insurgents are a different matter, they are nationals of another country, and bear no respect for us. The whole purpose for IMMIGRATION is to allow people to become a part of this country, and start a new, prosperous life. These people do not wish to identify themselves as American, that is clear. Why should we give them a pass to break our laws, thumb their nose at our country, and use us like a cheap whore to satisfy their temporary needs until they choose to return with their ill-gotten gains to their home-country? Their existence is not beneficial in any way to any other Americans, in the long run, when they have made no commitment to using their labor to forward the prosperity of this country. This illegal insurgency has become a festering sore upon our society, creating a sub-class amogst us which is no better than slavery. I have no problem with any human bettering themselves, but to allow an entire culture to subvert themselves in this manner is evil. There is a right way to become a part of American society, and there is a right way to temporarily work in this country which does not rob the rest of us. If the proper order had been followed, there would be more room for those who want to do so. As it is, the immigrants who try to come in the right way are delayed, while those who have skipped the line, out of disrespect for us and their own countrymen who have the dignity to follow our laws, are working (literally) against all of us.

[The Rabbi]

So you are opposed to all temporary workers in this country, including Indian and Pakistani engineers working for Microsoft, etc?

They are obviously contributing by working here. That is evident from the fact that they hold jobs. Whether they want to be "Americans" or not is largely irrelevant.
But you bring up another point: we had fewer problems when the borders were even more porous than they are now. In older days, workers could come across and then when they were done could go back home. When crossing became much harder, there was a huge disincentive to return and so they were forced in a sense to settle here.
My solution is to issue anyone who wants to come here a Z visa. The visa should have definite individual identification connected to it, such as fingerprints or other biometric data. The visa should cost at most $100. It should be issuable immediately on application. Anyone holding it could be hired for any job he wants but subject to all the normal taxation. The visa would also allow free passage back to the country of origin (but no other place). Anyone committing a serious crime has his visa revoked and is ineligible for another, in addition to being deported of course.

[dkd83]

Very well stated, molonlabetn. The rule of law has been the premiere hallmark of Western society from the Greco-Roman period. Why would we abandon it now?

In ancient Athens resident aliens could become powerful and productive members of Athenian society but they or their children could NEVER become citizens and Athens was a true democracy.

The problems faced by the later Roman Empire only became more aggravated with the expansion of citizenship to all those living in the confines of the empire. Ironically the Romans did this to increase tax revenues.

If we look to history we can find very similar situations to our current one and if we study these situations we find that devaluation of law and citizenship have only exacerbated the problems.

[molonlabetn]

I never said that I oppose all temporary foreign-national workers.


"There is a right way to become a part of American society, and there is a right way to temporarily work in this country which does not rob the rest of us..."


America is still one of the easiest countries to enter and work in, but there simply needs to be a way to avoid importing dangerous criminals, who are a large portion of those who come here illegally. And, cut off their access to free health-care and other public benefits paid by taxpayers.

[dkd83]

Rabbi,

Why should a Z visa cost less than a US citizen's passport?

I believe molon is opposed to illegal "temporary/permanent workers" not those who went through our system to come here and prosper.

[The Rabbi]

America is a very difficult country to enter, much less work in. I found this out trying to get a visa for a German friend of mine. He had to go to Canada first.
By contrast, if you live in any EU country, you have the ability to move freely to any other country and get a job there. So Germans (with an unemployment rate over 10%) go to Denmark where jobs are much easier to get. And no one complains about loss of national sovereignty either.

As to why a Z-visa should cost less than a US passport, why should it cost more than a US passport? What does the cost of a US passport, a drivers license or a pack of cigarettes have anything to do with it. The cost needs to be low so that people can afford to pay for it easily enough. Otherwise you encourage cheating.

[molonlabetn]

I don't think that becoming a citizen should require any amount of money, other than the cost of getting here, and being self-sufficient. Setting a price simply encourages those who cannot afford it to cheat. I agree with that.

All I want is some accountability with those who come here, they should be screened for communicable diseases, they should have a background/criminal check performed. If those are clear, come on in, work, pay your taxes, and go home when your Visa expires! I have no problem with that.

It is the folks who side-step that process, and unnecessarily endanger those around them to come here to take advantage of the benefits which everyone else has the decency to PAY FOR... and they don't go home, they stay here and breed, raising a new generation of people who have no respect for the people around them. And they have the gall to promote their citizenship of the country which they were so quick to leave, and so reluctant to return to! I don't want to pay for the health-care, unemployment, incarceration, and higher insurance premiums caused by such scum. If they are so determined to remain Mexican citizens, but refuse to support their own country's economy (since we do it for them), I have no pity for them.

[The Rabbi]

Then I dont think we fundamentally disagree.

[dkd83]

I cannot for any reason see why the US would want to model itself after the EU. In a real sense it is the EU that has modeled itself after the US.

We have an immigration process in place that our government and citizens have chosen to ignore until we now have the present problems. Instead of changing a system that has only failed because of a failure to enforce; we should have full enforement of the law as it stands and only then make changes if necessary.

[The Rabbi]

As I pointed out above, we have spent billions of dollars on enforcement and the problem is worse, not better. The defintion of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result this time.
The only way to solve the problem through enforcement alone is to issue national ID cards with biometric info since it is impossible to tell who is legal and who isnt just by looking at them. Couple that with random checks ("papers, please!") at work and other places and voila, effective enforcement.

But I dont want to live in a country like that. I doubt anyone else here does either.

[molonlabetn]

You could say the same thing about any other form of law-enforcement. We spend billions on police, prisons, court systems, etc... But crime still occurs! The solution is not to give up on enforcement, the solution is to untie the hands of those who dispense justice, so they can do more than just haul repeat offenders before a judge, or across a border, with no way to prevent the cycle from repeating.

As long as the crime is worthwhile, there will be those who will risk it.

The solution is to escalate the cost of committing crime above the level which the average criminal can tolerate.

[The Rabbi]

Deterrence depends on two things: how likely is the perpetrator to get caught; and what is likely to happen to him if he does. Drunk driving incidents went way down once states started to step up enforcement and give out serious sentences. It still happens, of course, but less I suspect.
Coming here illegally a person is almost guaranteed NOT to get caught, unless he runs afoul of the system in some way. And if he does get caught, he will merely be deported and will likely start all over again.
So how do you increase the likelihood of his getting caught? I think you can't without subjecting every citizen in this country to unacceptable searches or other infringements on civil liberties.

[dpeneguy]

An Immigration Shipwreck in Sight
by Newt Gingrich



http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20815

[molonlabetn]

Deterrence depends on two things: how likely is the perpetrator to get caught; and what is likely to happen to him if he does. Drunk driving incidents went way down once states started to step up enforcement and give out serious sentences. It still happens, of course, but less I suspect.
Coming here illegally a person is almost guaranteed NOT to get caught, unless he runs afoul of the system in some way. And if he does get caught, he will merely be deported and will likely start all over again.
So how do you increase the likelihood of his getting caught? I think you can't without subjecting every citizen in this country to unacceptable searches or other infringements on civil liberties.

All I ask is that the authorities quit this 'catch and release' program of refusing to deal with the hassle of processing many of the illegals which they come across. Unless ICE is actually involved in an operation, the local LEOs more often than not simply let them back out onto the street if they are arrested for some reason. I want to see there be some incentive for every type and position LEO to round these illegals up wherever they turn up. They won't have to do door to door searches, it's simply a matter of actually taking them to jail when caught drunk driving, causing an accident, selling drugs, etc... just like you or I would if we engaged in the same activities. The number of illegals engaged in crime (other than being here) is huge, part because they don't know our laws, and part because they obviously don't care. But, again, all I ask is that once one of these low-life scum makes his/her way into the 'system', that they not, under any circumstances, be released back into American society... whether that means a long period of time in a prison, or immidiate deportation. I'd love to hear about trucking home a few bus-loads every day from each major city. That would be a step in the right direction.

These people already cost the American people several tens of billions of dollars, net, per year... if we spent that on border control and enforcement for a few years instead, it would pay begin to pay off. Simply cut off all social benefits to non-legal residents, and enforce the prevention of employers hiring them. Get sick? Can't work? Tough S**t! ...GO HOME! I WANT it to be bad for them to be here... maybe then they'd get the picture. Obviously appealing to their reason has been futile, so far. :rolleyes: go figure...

[jackdog]

The new legislation is 100% BS.
Example. Once an illegal requests is visa the government will have 24 hrs to run a background check.(Hey thats quicker than a carry permit).
They will not be required to pay back taxes, but they will be qualified federal tax benefits.
This is 1986 all over again.

Oh and Rabbi your wrong about enforcement. From 1986 on we have gradually stopped any real enforcement in this country. Guess thats why we have 20 + illegals running around.
The way to end this crap is simple.
No free health care
no section 8 housing
no food stamps
and jail and fine the crap out of employers who give these people jobs.

[jackdog]

for any who are interested.

May 23, 2007
Rewarding Illegal Aliens: Senate Bill Undermines The Rule of Law
by Kris W. Kobach, D.Phil., J.D. and Matthew Spalding, Ph.D. (http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/MatthewSpalding.cfm)
WebMemo #1468
The most controversial component of the Senate's Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 is Title VI, euphemistically entitled "Nonimmigrants in the United States Previously in Unlawful Status." It would create a new "Z" visa exclusively for illegal aliens. This title would change the status of those who are here illegally to legal, essentially granting amnesty to those "previously in unlawful status." This seriously flawed proposal would undermine the rule of law by granting massive benefits to those who have willfully violated U.S. laws, while denying those benefits to those who have played by the rules and sometimes even to U.S. citizens.
Flawed Provisions
The following are ten of the worst provisions—by no means an exhaustive list—of Title VI of the bill:

A Massive Amnesty: Title VI of the bill grants amnesty to virtually all of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the country today. This amnesty would dwarf the amnesty that the United States granted—with disastrous consequences—in 1986 to 2.7 million illegal aliens. It is also a larger amnesty than that proposed in last year's ill-fated Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act. Indeed, the Senate's bill imposes no cap on the total number of individuals who could receive Z-visa status.
To initially qualify for a Z visa, an illegal alien need only have a job (or be the parent, spouse, or child of someone with a job) and provide two documents suggesting that he or she was in the country before January 1, 2007, and has remained in the country since then. A bank statement, pay stub, or similarly forgeable record will do. Also acceptable under the legislation is a sworn affidavit from a non-relative (see Section 601(i)(2)).
The price of a Z visa is $3,000 for individuals—only slightly more than the going rate to hire a coyote to smuggle a person across the border. A family of five could purchase visas for the bargain price of $5,000—some $20,000 short of the net cost that household is likely to impose on local, state, and federal government each year, according to Heritage Foundation calculations.

Expect a mass influx unlike anything this country has ever seen once the 12-month period for accepting Z visa applications begins. These provisions are an open invitation for those intent on U.S. residence to sneak in and present two fraudulent pieces of paper indicating that they were here before the beginning of the year.

That is precisely what happened in the 1986 amnesty, during which Immigration and Naturalization Services discovered 398,000 cases of fraud. Expect the number of fraudulent applications to be at least four times larger this time, given the much larger applicant pool.

The Permanent "Temporary" Visa: Supporters of the bill call the Z visa a "temporary" visa. However, they neglect to mention that it can be renewed every four years until the visa holder dies, according to Section 601(k)(2) of the legislation. This would be the country's first permanent temporary visa. On top of that, it is a "super-visa," allowing the holder to work, attend college, or travel abroad and reenter. These permissible uses are found in Section 602(m).

A law-abiding alien with a normal nonimmigrant visa would surely desire this privileged status. Unfortunately for him, only illegal aliens can qualify, according Section 601(c)(1).

And contrary to popular misconception, illegal aliens need not return to their home countries to apply for the Z visa. That's only necessary if and when an alien decides to adjust from Z visa status to lawful permanent resident ("green card") status under Section 602(a)(1). And even then, it's not really the country of origin; any consulate outside the United States can take applications at its discretion or the direction of the Secretary of State.
Hobbled Background Checks: The bill would make it extremely difficult for the federal government to prevent criminals and terrorists from obtaining legal status. Under Section 601(h)(1), the bill would allow the government only one business day to conduct a background check to determine whether an applicant is a criminal or terrorist. Unless the government can find a reason not to grant it by the end of the next business day after the alien applies, the alien receives a probationary Z visa (good from the time of approval until six months after the date Z visas begin to be approved, however long that may be) that lets him roam throughout the country and seek employment legally.

The problem is that there is no single, readily searchable database of all of the dangerous people in the world. While the federal government does have computer databases of known criminals and terrorists, these databases are far from comprehensive. Much of this kind of information exists in paper records that cannot be searched within 24 hours. Other information is maintained by foreign governments.

The need for effective background checks is real. During the 1986 amnesty, the United States granted legal status to Mahmoud "The Red" Abouhalima, who fraudulently sought and obtained the amnesty intended for seasonal agricultural workers (even though he was actually employed as a cab driver in New York City). But his real work was in the field of terrorism. He went on to become a ringleader in the 1993 terrorist attacks against the World Trade Center. Using his new legal status after the amnesty, he was able to travel abroad for terrorist training.
Amnesty for "Absconders": Title VI's amnesty extends even to fugitives who have been ordered deported by an immigration judge but chose to ignore their removal orders. More than 636,000 absconders are now present in the country, having defied the law twice: once when they broke U.S. immigration laws and again when they ignored the orders of the immigration courts.

The Senate's bill allows the government to grant Z visas to absconders. Though the bill appears to deny the visa to absconders in Section 601(d)(1)(B), Section 601(d)(1)(I) allows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials to give an absconder the Z visa anyway if the absconder can demonstrate that departure from the United States "would result in extreme hardship to the alien or the alien's spouse, parent or child."

This is a massive loophole because so many things can be construed to constitute "extreme hardship." This might include removing a child from an American school and placing him in a school in an impoverished country, or deporting a person with any chronic illness. Attorneys representing aliens would also argue that if any member of an absconder's family is a U.S. citizen, then the other members must remain in the United States, because the separation of family members would constitute extreme hardship.

This would also be a reward to those who have defied U.S. immigration courts. Those who have successfully fled justice could receive the most generous visa ever created, but those who complied with the law and have waited years to enter legally would have to wait longer still. (Indeed, the massive bureaucratic load caused by processing Z visas would undoubtedly mean longer waits for those who have played by the rules.) Further, those who have obeyed the law and complied with deportation orders would not be eligible for Z visas.

The effect of this provision may already be felt today. Why would an illegal alien obey a deportation order while this bill is even pending in Congress? If the alien ignores the deportation order, he may be able to qualify for the amnesty; but if he obeys the order, he has no possibility of gaining the amnesty.
Reverse Justice: The bill would effectively shut down the immigration court system. Under Section 601(h)(6), if an alien in the removal process is "prima facie eligible" for the Z visa, an immigration judge must close any proceedings against the alien and offer the alien an opportunity to apply for amnesty.
Enforcement of Amnesty, Not Laws: The bill would transform Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from a law enforcement agency into an amnesty distribution center. Under Sections 601(h)(1, 5) if an ICE agent apprehends aliens who appear to be eligible for the Z visa (in other words, just about any illegal alien), the agent cannot detain them. Instead, ICE must provide them a reasonable opportunity to apply for the Z visa. Instead of initiating removal proceedings, ICE will be initiating amnesty applications. This is the equivalent of turning the Drug Enforcement Agency into a needle-distribution network.
Amnesty for Gang Members: Under Section 602(g)(2) of the bill, gang members would be eligible to receive amnesty. This comes at a time when violent international gangs, such as Mara Salvatrucha 13 (or "MS-13"), have brought mayhem to U.S. cities. More than 30,000 illegal-alien gang members operate in 33 states, trafficking in drugs, arms, and people. Deporting illegal-alien gang members has been a top ICE priority. The Senate bill would end that. To qualify for amnesty, all a gang member would need to do is note his gang membership and sign a "renunciation of gang affiliation."
Tuition Subsidies for Illegal Aliens: The Senate bill incorporates the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM Act). The DREAM Act effectively repeals a 1996 federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1623) that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. Ten states are currently defying this federal law. Section 616 would allow these and all other states to offer in-state tuition rates to any illegal alien who obtains the Z visa and attends college.

The injustice of this provision is obvious. Illegal aliens would receive a taxpayer subsidy worth tens of thousands of dollars and would be treated better than U.S. citizens from out of state, who must pay three to four times as much to attend college. In an era of limited educational resources and rising tuitions, U.S. citizens, not aliens openly violating federal law, should be first in line to receive education subsidies.

Further, legal aliens who possess an appropriate F, J, or M student visa would not receive this valuable benefit. Nor would they be eligible for the federal student loans that illegal aliens could obtain by this provision.
Taxpayer-Funded Lawyers for Illegal Aliens: The Senate's bill would force taxpayers to foot the bill for many illegal aliens' lawyers. Under current law, illegal aliens are not eligible for federally funded legal services. Section 622(m) of the bill would allow millions of illegal aliens who work in agriculture to receive free legal services. Every illegal alien working in the agricultural sector would have access to an immigration attorney to argue his case through the immigration courts and federal courts of appeals—all at taxpayer expense. This provision alone could cost hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
Amnesty Before Enforcement Triggers. Proponents of the Senate approach have consistently claimed that it would allow delayed amnesty only after certain law enforcement goals are met. The text of the bill, however, tells a different story. Section 1(a) allows provisional Z visas to be issued immediately after enactment, and Section 601(f)(2) prohibits the federal government from waiting more than 180 days after enactment to begin issuing provisional Z visas.

These provisional Z visas could be valid for years, depending on when the government begins issuing non-provisional Z visas, according to Section 601(h)(4). Moreover, the "provisional" designation means little. These visas are nearly as good as non-provisional Z visas, giving the alien immediate lawful status, protection from deportation, authorization to work, and the ability to exit and reenter the country (with advance permission). These privileges are listed in Section 601(h)(1).Conclusion
What becomes unmistakably clear from the details of the Senate's bill is that it is not a "compromise" in any meaningful sense. Indeed, the sweeping amnesty provisions of Title VI cripple law enforcement and undermine the rule of law.
Kris W. Kobach, D.Phil, J.D., professor of law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, served as counsel to the U.S. Attorney General in 2001-2003 and was the attorney general's chief adviser on immigration law. Matthew Spalding, Ph.D. (http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/MatthewSpalding.cfm), is the director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at The Heritage Foundation.





Heritage In Focus

Cost of Low-Skilled Immigrants


View Larger Version


http://www.heritage.org/ui/redesign/images/RHDottedSeparator.jpg Recent Heritage Studies

Rewarding Illegal Aliens: Senate Bill Undermines The Rule of Law (http://www.heritage.org/Research/Immigration/wm1468.cfm) by Kris W. Kobach, D.Phil., J.D. and Matthew Spalding, Ph.D. (http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/MatthewSpalding.cfm)
May 23, 2007
The Fis