Jun 02 2006
To A Reader
I liked my comment to reader Markman so much I decided it should become a post. So here it is.
Markman,
Thanks for the compliments. Every state (and region) has different issues with immigrants and different solutions. One thing is for sure, not allowing citizenship creates a permanent second class of people which can cause lots and lots of problems. The reason the Muslim population in America is not as big a threat as the one in Europe is Muslims here are Americans (or can become Americans). They do not see America as ‘them’.
Not so in Europe. Since the EU and America are largely Christian nations (at least the EU once was) Muslims come in through immigration. Since most EU states do not assimilate immigrants into citizenship the Muslim population has become a permanent underclass. They do not feel any attachment to the countries they live and work in.
Same thing happens with the language, etc. When there is a second class of citizen the wall themselves off, keep their language in their districts. I find it interesting that most of the immigrants I meet here do not intend to stay. Most want to go back home at some point. So they do not seek citizenship. But we treat everyone the same pretty much when they are here. One of the great things about America.
Yes, it is very difficult along the border regions. And one reason why is the entire immigrant society is ‘underground’. When a social fabric is built on lawlessness, then there are no boundaries (as the Coyotes demonstrate) and lawlessness spreads. First it is simple paperwork, then it can migrate into violence and human trafficing.
This is the reason the law enforcement side just won’t work. With 12 million here we would only drive them farther underground if we tried to round them up. People can get very violent when threatened. We need them up in the open for lots of reasons. Security is prime to me. We can either search out 12 million people, or we can entice 12 million people to come forward and be background checked as they become legal guest workers.
The ones who don’t come forward will be the problem group we need to deal with through deportation. Those are the ones we want under any conditions. Notice that through enticement the folks with nothing to hide separate themselves for us, leaving the bad apples and risks exposed. There are easy ways to do this and hard ways.
Besides, we do not have the police force size to identify and deport 12 million people, most of whom are doing nothing but working. If we try and use our security forces in this manner it will be as useless as frisking every airline, train and bus passenger as they get on board. It will actually expose us more to risk because we will be diverting are attention on a 12 million person problem space when we need to make sure 30-40 jihadists don’t get through our defenses. By bringing the 12 million into the open, those we need to find can be found much quicker. They will be the ones who did not participate in the guest worker program.
There are lots of reasons why the House proposal (which makes working for a living a felony if you don’t have the proper papers) is so bad. Bad for security, bad for America’s respect for humanity and bad because it is based on a desire for retribution and punishment. Not to mention it just won’t work.
My thoughts exactly, well put!
What disturbs me the most these days is how so many otherwise reasonable people seem to want an ideologically attractive failure rather than a real solution to the problem. Failure is failure, n0 matter how nice the ideology behind it sounds – and the “round ’em up and send ’em home” idea is guaranteed to fail on every level. That understanding *has* to be the beginning of any attempt to craft a real solution, which is why the enforcement only approach of the house is not only wrongheaded, but self defeating. It won’t do anything to gain control of the problem; rather it will mandate that we lose all control of the situation from now on.
Another thing that often isn’t considered in my opinion would be the expense of attempting to round up 10+ million people. We would probably have to take every other task off the ICE plate.
Would the people wanting this course of action accept a tax increase to create a temporary agency (and we know what happens with temporary government programs) to round them all up? Where would we get judges to do 10 million deportation hearings? You can’t just jerk people off the street and send them out of the country because you are going to end up snagging a few that shouldn’t be deported and they will need a chance to present their case. What about the illegals that have children in the military? Should we allow them to stay?
One important thing is that if you want to have a guest worker program to allow people to work legally, you have to make the surrounding law such that people will actually use it! You can’t say “we have this program but if you apply for it, we are going to ship you out of the country”. That is silly.
I have also noted a general bigotry against immigration of all sorts among that crowd. Look at the number of posts that wail about “Senate bill would DOUBLE legal immigration!” like that is a bad thing. Can’t let more of those filthy immigrants in here! We don’t need any of them there far’ners in here. What they don’t seem to get is that doubling the legal numbers would probably not change real immigration at all. It would most likely change the ratio of legal to illegals by making it easier to get here legally, people won’t need to do it illegally. The comments against legal immigration expose these people for what they are. They are the same people that wailed against the Irish and the Italians. They are the same people that thought it was bad to take European Jews after WWII. They are the same people that still think my uncle is a “damned kraut” because his grandmother immigrated here in the 19th century even though he (and his father before him) were born right here.
I support the President on this issue.
LOGIC has flown bye-bye with a couple of you commenters.
Every state (and region) has different issues with immigrants and different solutions. One thing is for sure, not allowing citizenship creates a permanent second class of people
AND your proof of this is? Not allowing citizenship for people that don’t deserve it creates a permanent second class? How? Shouldn’t the word “illegal” be just in front of the word immigrants? I know of no one that has problems with legal immigrants.
Yes, it is very difficult along the border regions. And one reason why is the entire immigrant society is ‘underground’. When a social fabric is built on lawlessness, then there are no boundaries (as the Coyotes demonstrate) and lawlessness spreads. First it is simple paperwork, then it can migrate into violence and human trafficing.
AGAIN, illegal goes in front of immigrant. The words illegal immigrants should be in front of “social fabric”
“This is the reason the law enforcement side just won’t work. With 12 million here we would only drive them farther underground if we tried to round them up. ”
I still am trying to find out who it is that is advocating “rounding up” anyone. I’ve asked this question repeatedly of AJ, TERRYE, AND CROSSPATCH, all of whom use the phrase repeatedly, and I haven’t had an answer yet. No one commenting advocates it, and no other bloggers that I know of advocate it. So please if ANYONE knows who “THEY” are, please let us know.
” We can either search out 12 million people, or we can entice 12 million people to come forward and be background checked as they become legal guest workers.
The ones who don’t come forward will be the problem group we need to deal with through deportation. Those are the ones we want under any conditions. Notice that through enticement the folks with nothing to hide separate themselves for us, leaving the bad apples and risks exposed. There are easy ways to do this and hard ways.”
Let me get this straight, As soon as my sides stop splitting from laughing so hard. Ohh lordy, that is the hilarious statement of the day. Now again, the ones that don’t come forward are gonna call and leave us their name, address, and phone number and we will just notify them that they have been identified as the “bad people” and we would like for them to go ahead and leave the country,(I’m quite sure they were planning to anyway)
BUT, I’m quite sure at that point they would be willing to sign a statement swearing that they aren’t really bad people, that our enticements just weren’t quite good enough to get them to sign up, but if we’ll bow and scrape a little more and sweeten the pot a little more, they’ll promise to be real good and go sign up to be “Legal” and of course we’ll promise to kiss their butt and let them go.
“Besides, we do not have the police force size to identify and deport 12 million people, ”
BUT: we do have plenty of people to spend years trying to entice everyone to come in out of the shadows so that we’ll know for sure they just want to be good family people.
“By bringing the 12 million into the open, those we need to find can be found much quicker. ”
NOOO PROBLEM: remember by then those we need to find have called us up and given us their name and phone number.
They will be the ones who did not participate in the guest worker program.
REMEMBER: as a rule of thumb, the criminal elements and terrorists may not be signing up for the guest worker program, They are too busy planning their next big crime.
“There are lots of reasons why the House proposal (which makes working for a living a felony if you don’t have the proper papers)”
AHHH, here again, we forgot the words “illegal immigrants” there in front of the words “working for a living”
See, when you put the right words in the right place, as Bill O’Reilly would say, “the spin stops here”
NOW for WWS
“What disturbs me the most these days is how so many otherwise reasonable people seem to want an ideologically attractive failure rather than a real solution to the problem. ”
SOOOO!! if we don’t buy the “Amnesty for All” thing we’re the “otherwise reasonable people” that for some reason just don’t get it. “we” want “an ideologically attractive failure” But I’m gonna just try once more to get through, WE DON’T want failure, we want the border secured and we want immigration to be controlled. The senate “Amnesty for All” bill does NEITHER of these two thing.
I don’t want one dime spent on rounding up anyone that wouldn’t already be caught if they are committing a crime. Everyone that is in the country would be treated in accordance with present laws already in place. THAT IS IT. Quit trying to abscribe motives to us that we don’t have.
“Failure is failure, n0 matter how nice the ideology behind it sounds – and the “round ‘em up and send ‘em home†idea is guaranteed to fail on every level. ”
I’m gonna challenge you WWS as I did the others above, Who is advocating “round ‘em up and send ‘em home†? I don’t believe you can or will provide a link to anyone saying this.
“That understanding *has* to be the beginning of any attempt to craft a real solution, which is why the enforcement only approach of the house is not only wrongheaded, but self defeating. It won’t do anything to gain control of the problem; rather it will mandate that we lose all control of the situation from now on.”
AND AGAIN? THAT UNDERSTANDING IS? I interpret what you’re saying is that we just throw up our hands, declare we’ve been wrong, we don’t need border enforcement, please forgive us for offending you illegal immigrants. We’re truly sorry and if you don’t think we’re not worthy of you, would you kindly accept this here American Citizenship. If that offer is not good enough, what if we say pretty please?
I’ve been a natural born citizen of this country for 65 years and I’ve always thought American Citizenship was the most valuable citizenship in the world. Now you want us to pay illegal immigrants to accept it. Were you, by any chance, hanging out around Haight -Ashbury back in the sixties?
CROSSPATCH, I DIDN’T OVERLOOK YOUR DAILY BABBLE.
“Another thing that often isn’t considered in my opinion would be the expense of attempting to round up 10+ million people. We would probably have to take every other task off the ICE plate.
I’m getting tired of asking who is advocating this. I think you’re pulling it out of your A*s.
“Would the people wanting this course of action accept a tax increase”
NO ONE ADVOCATE THIS!!!
“One important thing is that if you want to have a guest worker program to allow people to work legally, you have to make the surrounding law such that people will actually use it! You can’t say “we have this program but if you apply for it, we are going to ship you out of the countryâ€. That is silly.”
That is silly
WHAT AN UNDERSTATEMENT. We’re trying to give them Amnesty with this Senate bill and we’re now worried they might not sign up for the Amnesty because we “might ship” them out of the country, Well then By God, Let’s sweeten the pot. Let’s be real sure they don’t get offended. You’ve been living in my house free for 5 years now, by golly, that’s long enough, you’re now part of the family. You need to sleep with my wife or anything? My Daughter?
Would you kindly accept title to my house? But please don’t leave!
“I have also noted a general bigotry against immigration of all sorts among that crowd. ”
YES, YES, YES you’ve caught us, now the secret is out, we’re all bigots. everyone wanting the border secure is a bigot. If we don’t buy unbridled Amnesty for All, we are BIGOTS. Oh Lord would you please stop the “unidentified Bigots” from calling all us “identified Bigots” Bigots. Again, you left out the word “illegal” in front of the word immigration. The spin Stops here
“Look at the number of posts that wail about “Senate bill would DOUBLE legal immigration!†like that is a bad thing. ”
YOU inadvertantly spelled “illegal” as “legal” No, it wouldn’t double “illegal” immigration, It would go from about 12 million to about 66 million, that’s just a shade over doubling. We can of course get around that, just open the border and tell them if they can get across it(we’ll send buses, if necessary) we’ll try to offer them enough so they will graciously accept citizenship.
“Can’t let more of those filthy immigrants in here! ”
Whoops, left out the word “illegal” again, substitute it for filthy.
“The comments against legal immigration expose these people for what they are. ”
WHOA there pardner, you’re gonna have to point of some of them there comments against “legal” immigration.
Must be them there ‘Bigots’ again.
I support the President on this issue.
AND of course you expose yourself completely here with, “I haven’t given this one honest minutes thought and “I support the President on this issue.”
This is a little long, but I can’t just keep reading all these “totally honest” people that just can’t understand how us otherwise reasonable people can’t swallow this Senate “Amnesty for All? bill hook line and sinker. I’m gonna give you a clue.
it’s because WE UNDERSTAND WHAT IS IN IT.
“Let me get this straight, As soon as my sides stop splitting from laughing so hard. Ohh lordy, that is the hilarious statement of the day. Now again, the ones that don’t come forward are gonna call and leave us their name, address, and phone number…..”
For Enforcement:
This is why we keep repeating that all elements of a workable plan must be adopted at once. The carrot is the biometric, database linked, ID card which entitles the holder to guest worker status and in some cases eventual citizenship. The stick is no card , better employer cooperation due to easier status verification and increased employer sanctions.
This greatly winnows the pool of “illegals” to the real undesirables and new illegals. Enforcement then becomes more manageable because “no card, no job.”
About 3/4 of illegals pay SS taxes ( Stephen Goss, SS chief actuary). This goes into an “earnings suspense file.” Why not properly include them in the system and take fair advantage of this demographic”
Lets all get behind a law that makes everyone a winner. I, too, support the President and hope other conservatives will hear us out.
I don’t doubt that you THINK you understand but I see a lot of jumping to conclusions, distortions, and outright fibs coming from that side of the issue.
Oh really? Look on many of the right blogs for a thread whining about how the Senate bill increases legal immigration. Here is one example.
That is hilarious. What lawless immigrants are you talking about? 99.9% of them are honest, hard working, church going people.
Yeah, there are a lot of immigrants here illegally. We need to change that. We need to make them legal. Punishing them might make you feel better but it won’t help the country. I am willing to forgive them of that sin and get on with life. Punishing them would cost billions.
Do you have any evidence that an illegal immigrant has been involved with terrorist activity? Every single one of the 9/11 hijackers, for example, entered legally. You are attempting to make a connection between illegal immigrants and terrorism and crime. There is no evidence of terrorism and only a very tiny instance of crime. It’s not illegal immigrants that shot 28 people in Milwaukee last weekend or killed 7 in Indianapolis last night. Words such as yours above are designed to create fear in the minds of people and make connections between the immigrants and criminal activity that doesn’t actually exist.
So far the only known terrorists entering on a ground border came from Canada (entering legally at checkpoints) and I don’t see people hollering about a fence on the Northern border. Canada has a larger militant islamist population than Mexico. Canadians donate more to terrorist organizations than Mexicans do. I don’t see you all worked up about people sneaking in from British Columbia or Ontario though the evidence so far says that is what you should be worried about.
Again I hear a lot of hype and no substance. It will only help us to legalize the ones that are already here AND end catch/release (already done, one checkpoint in the California desert caught and detained almost 100 the night before last and seized over a dozen vehicles) AND increase border surveillance to result in more caught (also underway. California National Guard is on the way to the border to operate UAVs and report crossings to the BP as I type this).
But people need to understand that uncovering and punishing all the illegals already here is never going to happen. It is too expensive and provides no benefit other than some emotional soothing some seem to get from punishing somebody.
So far what I hear is people being emotional and making up catastrophe scenarios with no basis in reality while waiving their arms, foaming at the mount, and yelling about the evil “illegals” as if they robbed a bank or something.
Correction, there have been two foreign muslims caught in this country that came in through Mexico. Neither of them committed a terrorist act in the US nor is there any evidence they were planning one. One was charged with donating money to Hezbollah, which confines its actions to Israel and Lebanon, and the other was only charged with immigration violations but is suspected of having ties to a group who confines their actions to Ethiopia. In other words, neither appeared to be linked to groups that have engaged in attacking US interests outside of their home turf.
On the other hand, individuals entering from Canada have been either in the process of attacking the US or directly linked to groups that have attacked US interests globally.
Crosspatch, Oh really?
“Look on many of the right blogs for a thread whining about how the Senate bill increases legal immigration. Here is one example”
the link you supplied me did, in fact, say that the bill would double legal immigration, but you screwed up on your example, at no point does he say that it is a bad thing. You referred to his “whining” I guess I miss how making a statement, and not saying if it is good or bad is “whining”.
“That is hilarious. What lawless immigrants are you talking about? 99.9% of them are honest, hard working, church going people. ”
And that makes them “Legal”?
And I don’t think 99.9% of the illegals are going to church weekly, if they are, nobody who have to “bring them out of the shadows”
“Punishing them might make you feel better but it won’t help the country.”
What a dumb F**k statement, just who in the h^ll has said anything about “punishing them”
“I am willing to forgive them of that sin and get on with life”
And what sin is that? Breaking the law is not a sin.
“Every single one of the 9/11 hijackers, for example, entered legally.”
BUT by the time of the crime, most of them were , now hold your breath, drum roll,, “illegal”
“only a very tiny instance of crime. ”
Now you really didn’t check that one out, did you? 25% of criminals, guilty of violent crimes, in our prisons are, hold your breath again,, drum roll. “illegals”
I think, by definition, that number may be slightly more than “tiny”
“Words such as yours above are designed to create fear in the minds of people”
Wrong again, they are designed to state what they did, that illegal immigrants that are here for reasons other than what you consider righteous “making an honest living, etc” are not gonna voluntarily sign up for the “Amnesty for All” bill. As you seem to think they will.
“I don’t see you all worked up about people sneaking in from British Columbia or Ontario”
And you do see me all worked up over what? All I said is, if you read my post, Secure borders ( I didn’t exclude the Canadian border, did I) and enforce laws on books. See you are so busy attibuting thoughts and motives, that you haven’t taken the time to even think about what I actually said
“(already done, one checkpoint in the California desert caught and detained almost 100 the night before last and seized over a dozen vehicles) AND increase border surveillance to result in more caught (also underway. California National Guard is on the way to the border to operate UAVs and report crossings to the BP as I type this).”
All this will have no influence, they’ll just come across 10 miles down the road an hour later. That’s not my definition of SECURE.
“But people need to understand that uncovering and punishing all the illegals already here is never going to happen. It is too expensive and provides no benefit other than some emotional soothing some seem to get from punishing somebody”.
Again, where have I mentioned “punishing” anyone?
“So far what I hear is people being emotional and making up catastrophe scenarios with no basis in reality catastrophe scenarios
Where is this “catastrophe scenarios” I have made up? Do you even read anything that you respond to?
“waiving their arms, foaming at the mount, and yelling about the evil “illegals†as if they robbed a bank or something. ”
Where did this come from, you didn’t point out where I said anything like this. And you think I’m the one doing that, better check out the mirror.
WE UNDERSTAND WHAT IS IN IT
“I don’t doubt that you THINK you understand but I see a lot of jumping to conclusions, distortions, and outright fibs coming from that side of the issue”
“I see a lot of jumping to conclusions, distortions, and outright fibs ”
BUT, I hesitate to point this out, but you didn’t quote any for me.
please show me a “jumped to conclusion”, a “distortion” and especially a “fib”
For MACKER
“This is why we keep repeating that all elements of a workable plan must be adopted at once. The carrot is the biometric, database linked, ID card which entitles the holder to guest worker status and in some cases eventual citizenship. The stick is no card , better employer cooperation due to easier status verification and increased employer sanctions.”
AND exactly where would we find this “all elements of a workable plan must be adopted at once. ” plan?
If you have read the Senate bill, it provides for Amnesty for All, no terms, no conditions that are enforceable, just give them the citizenship papers baby, it’s all over.
Please don’t say it does anything like securing the border. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing in the bill that provides for that. It says some things like hiring a guards, things like that, but over about 10 years. So let’s close One of the 100 barn doors after the horses are gone. That’ll help a lot.
Crosspatch says that no illegal has been tied to terrorism nor did an illegal kill 28 in Milwaukee or 7 in Indianapolis.
But an illegal has been classified as the worst serial killer in the United States. He has been convicted of 9 KNOWN murders and has been credited with at least 30 more. His name is Angel Resendez, a.k.a. The Railroad Killer. In and out of our penal system, deported more than once, he managed on his off time from serving time and killing American to vote in two national elections. The federal government announced that they could not catch him but a diligent rookie Texas Ranger did. He is now scheduled to be put to death in Texas. The Mexican government had demanded that Resendez be returned to Mexico on the basis that Resendez is a Mexican national and the United States does not have the juridiction to put him to death.
http://www.immigrationshumancost.org
And perhaps Crosspatch should read this:
http://www.drdsk.com/articles.html#Illegals
Wonder if there was any terror involved when these people were being abused. And before you dismiss the report, read the good doctor’s credits.
And while Crosspatch wants us to feel all warm and fuzzy over illegals, perhaps he won’t have a problem when it is his child that comes down with a strain of TB that can cost up to $1.5 million to treat.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050608-122811-2326r.htm
Crosspatch says 99% of illegals are hard working people. So if illegals represent 5% of our population, why is it that they are also up to 29% of our federal prison population and as much as 50% of the prison population of some states?
Crosspatch touts how at just one check station, 100 illegals were apprehended but doesn’t mention that when the ICE bust neted 1,000 illegals, one-fourth of them were released before dinner time and now half of them are suing the United States and demanding to be allowed to remain. Why can someone who isn’t even a legal citizen sue our government because they broke the law?
Crosspatch wants to give them amnesty for the laws the illegals broke. Maybe he can give us a list of the laws he thinks are worth prosecuting them for? Murder? Rape? Stealing a credit card and using it? How about breaking and entering? Or would Crosspatch be willing to allow them to break into his house and live there as long as they paid their share of the house payment? And maybe Crosspatch would like to give us the illegal-crime ratio in Larado, Texas. How about L.A.?
Crosspatch says it would be too expensive to deport the illegals. It would cost billions. Yet he seems to have no problem with Texas spending $4.7 BILLION in 2005 for education, medical care and incarceration along for illegals. Wonder how much California spent?
Crosspatch says we are just being emotional. Perhaps. Murder, rape, disease has a tendancy to make people emotional.
I say Crosspatch, somewhat willingly, seems to remain uninformed.
Web sites for Crosspatch:
http://www.drdsk.com/articles.html#Illegals
http://www.immigrationshumancost.org
http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050608-122811-2326r.htm
The worst serial killer in U.S. history? Angel Resendez, ILLEGAL
hey retire05 see this quote from Crosspatch from above when he was referring to me:
“So far what I hear is people being emotional and making up catastrophe scenarios with no basis in reality catastrophe scenarios
“waiving their arms, foaming at the mount, and yelling about the evil “illegals†as if they robbed a bank or something.
Why retire05 you must be one of those highly emotional people just trying to create a false impression of our sweet little “illegal immigrants”
I can’t figure out why both Crosspatch and AJ want us to buy the Senate bill as something magical.
My interpretation, the Dems put it up to get the Repubs to pass it so when everything goes all to hell, they can blame it on Bush and the Repub congress for passing it. But I really believe the House is too smart to go along with it, but in politics, nothing will surprise me
I, too, am baffled why AJ seems so enamored and passionate about the need to pass something similar to this Senate bill. It would have awful consequences for our country. But, there’s no way the House will pass anything close to the Senate bill. The only way a bill would get passed is if enough Senate Dems come our way to support real enforcement measures. There’s little chance this will happen.
Unlike AJ, I think Repub House members in close races will fare much better if they make clear their support for tighter border security and control over immigration. AJ is so fixed on this meaningless 80-20 poll question that he misses completely the key findings of these polls — that the vast majority want control over immigration and secured borders.
Terror suspects seized in Toronto
Wiley,
If you Republicans DO pass some form of legislation allowing current illegals to stay and some factions of the Republican party refuse to participate in future elections, do you think that newly legal voters might vote Republican and swamp the numbers staying home?
Crosspatch,
No, I don’t. I think more “new” citizens may be coming around to the republican side, but I would think a big majority would still vote democrat. The danger to the repubs is that their base won’t come out to vote if they hinder conservative legislation or seem to suuport other matters contrary to their base.
The key for repubs is simply to frame the vote as a choice between the do-nothing, stand-for nothing dems, or the conservative, mainstream America-defending repub.
Any reader of AJ’s site knows that he is a big supporter of President Bush. I, too, like Bush but do differ with him on some issues. One thing should be obvious, though — that Bush really is who he clamed to be before he ever became president — a compassionate conservative. I wish he were less compassionate and more concerned with security at the borders.
Wait a minute… wait a minute..Crosspatch says
“do you think that newly legal voters might vote Republican and swamp the numbers staying home?”
The last time I looked only “citizens” were allowed to vote. The Senate is touting how these illegals will have to go to the back of the line (although I don’t understand how you go to the back of the line when you are already in line, working and enjoying the benefits of being a citizen. Being in the back of the line in being in your native land waiting for the right to enter legally) and it will take eight years or more to become a citizen. Now I realize that the Democrats were out in force, at least in Dallas, during the marches signing up every one they could to vote not knowing their status, but I didn’t see any Repubicans doing that.
So if Republicans are counting on votes from newly legal residents, they must be willing to let anyone vote, citizen or not. Is that next? We give legal residents who are not citizens the right to vote? I thought that was a priviledge reserved for citizens. But then, that is easily twarted. In Texas you do not have to prove citizenship, only provide a utility bill, rent receipt, or paycheck stub in your name. Perhaps Crosspatch should check with his voter registrar and sell just how easily an illegal can already vote. And when the Dems were raising hell because Missouri wanted to demand a photo I.D. for voting I don’t think they were doing it because no one voted illegally.
The Senate bill is a “40 acres and a mule” bill. What it will do is start a system whereby illegals and the newly “legal” expect more and more. Give an inch and they will take a mile(s).
Perhaps then some Americans will file a class action law suit and demand the same rights as has been granted to those who broke the law; forgiveness of income taxes for two out of three years, in-state tuition for our kids when they go to out of state universities, no extra charges if you put your kid in another school district (there is a charge now you know if your kid goes to another school district other than your own), elimination of all identity theft laws, to name a few. Both black and while Americans could do it on the grounds they are now minorities and demand minority status. Affirmative action whould no longer apply to those of Hispanic heritage. They would be the majority (already are in my state) and would not be eligible for minority benefits.
I read a recent article where a reporter was in Mexico interviewing people trying to cross the border. They said that they were hoping to get into the United States before the bill was passed so they would be covered by the “amnesty”. Vicente Fox has been touting the bill as wonderful in his speeches all across Mexico letting his peons know to get here as fast as they can. The more that come here the less that Fox and his predecessor has to do to provide for the lower class in Mexico.
I also noticed that Crosspatch had nothing to say about the information I provided him. Oh well, it’s hard to argue with fact.
BTW, Crosspatch, those 10 arrested in Toronto? Where did it say they were trying to cross the U.S.-Canadian border?
CrossP
basically Repubs are gonna vote repub, I will try to resist voting for anyone that supports legalizing illegal aliens, but other than that there is no alternative.. Democrats certainly are not. They are for the U S to go down the tubes even faster than some Repubs are.
I remember back during the Election in ’92 hearing a guy on the radio say, the difference between a Democrat and a Republican is the Democrats want to flush the U.S. down the toilet now, with the Republicans, they want to do the same thing, only let’s wait a few more years before we do it. With the endorsement of this Senate bill, I’m not sure President Bush is willing to wait.
Here is a lovely little picture for all of you to enjoy.
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=126025429&size=0
Could it possibly be any clearer what they want?
From the Drudge Report
By Dani Dodge
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
June 3, 2006
If an election can turn on a sentence, this could be the one: “You don’t need papers for voting.â€
On Thursday night, Francine Busby, the Democratic candidate for the 50th Congressional District, was speaking before a largely Latino crowd in Escondido when she uttered those words. She said yesterday she simply misspoke.
But someone taped it and a recording began circulating yesterday. After she made that statement at the meeting, Busby immediately said: “You don’t need to be a registered voter to help (the campaign).â€
She said that subsequent statement was to clarify what she meant.
The recording, which was played yesterday on Roger Hedgecock’s radio talk show, jolted the campaign.
Busby, a Cardiff school board member, is in a tight race with Republican Brian Bilbray, a congressman-turned-lobbyist, who has based his campaign on a tough anti-illegal-immigration stance. Busby has focused her campaign on ethics reform. The two are vying to replace Randy “Duke†Cunningham, who was jailed after pleading guilty to taking bribes.
Busby said she was invited to the forum at the Jocelyn Senior Center in Escondido by the leader of a local soccer league. Many of the 50 or so people there were Spanish speakers. Toward the end, a man in the audience asked in Spanish: “I want to help, but I don’t have papers.â€
It was translated and Busby replied: “Everybody can help, yeah, absolutely, you can all help. You don’t need papers for voting, you don’t need to be a registered voter to help.â€
Bilbray said at worst, Busby was encouraging someone to vote illegally. At best, she was encouraging someone who is illegally in the country to work on her campaign.
“She’s soliciting illegal aliens to campaign for her and it’s on tape – this isn’t exactly what you call the pinnacle of ethical campaign strategy,†Bilbray said. “I don’t know how she shows her face.â€
The two later met in a debate in Carlsbad last night.
Earlier, San Diego Minutemen volunteer Anthony Porrello said he got the tape from an an anonymous Minuteman and passed it on to the news media and talk radio. News of the gathering had circulated among local Minutemen before the meeting, according to William Griffith, the independent candidate in the race who has been endorsed by the San Diego Minutemen.
He attended, but did not hear the statement. He said he was in the back of the room.
“I heard what I expected to hear from a Democrat who supports amnesty,†he said. Busby says she doesn’t support amnesty, but backs the comprehensive plan pushed by U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that includes opening a path to citizenship for people in the United States illegally if they pay penalties and abide by certain conditions.
Busby said that Republicans are now twisting her words. She does not in any way support or advocate that illegal immigrants vote, she said.
“I was clarifying the question that was being asked in Spanish and then stated that you do not have to be a registered voter to help the campaign because there were many people who appeared to be to be under 18 in the group who wanted to volunteer,†she said in a statement. “I’m not surprised that the Republican Party is making this last-minute, desperate ploy and it is absolutely false.â€
“you don’t need papers for voting”
“shoot the President between the eyes”
OK, so these were just slips of the tongue. No big deal. No one is advocating assassination of the president or illegals marching up to the polls to place their votes for the Democrat candidate. Right….
Now reverse the rolls and let a Republican make those statements about a Democrat and see what happens. While our MSM would get the rope ready for any Republican who had a “slip of the tongue” they will give Democrats a pass.
Can there be any doubt what Democrats feel about illegals voting? Just check Clinton’s record on amnesty for felons and his MotorVoter Bill.