May 30 2007
Bush’s Sister Soldjah Moment On Immigration
Those on the far right of the immigration issue have lived on exaggeration and wild, unsubstantiated claims. The readers on this site who twist the need for a manageable and enforceable guest worker program into cries of amnesty and voting rights for immigrants are the classic example of a lack of any good argument being covered up by hysterics. The country is fed up with the status quo and wants the immigrants to come forward, be checked and identified and given tamper proof IDs so we can enforce the laws, boot the criminals and hold employers accountable for not checking for those pesky tamper proof IDs. And the folks barring the gate to these needed changes (especially the booting of criminal immigrants) are the same folks who flaunt stories of violent crimes by immigrants (legal and otherwise) as the reason we cannot make the changes to get rid of the bad apples.
President Bush knows this hyperventilating minority has become incoherent due to their frustration and anger at being marginalized. The more hype they pile on the already piled up rhetoric further alienates the immigration hard liners from the broader group of Americans who, by 2-1 or higher, back the guest worker program as a pragmatic (if not perfect) solution. The best we will see in a decade if it fails again. So it is no surprise Bush (and many of us) are going through a Sister Soldjah moment to distance ourselves from the useless and anti-productive exaggerations coming from the hard liners in order to win some sanity and progress - finally - on this issue:
“If you want to scare the American people, what you say is the bill’s an amnesty bill,” Mr. Bush said at a training center for customs protection agents and other federal agents here in southeastern Georgia. “That’s empty political rhetoric trying to frighten our citizens.”
It was some of Mr. Bush’s toughest language as he started an intensified effort to build support for the compromise bill in the Senate.
Tough but accurate. The hardliners find any option for illegals to pay restitution and get legal work status “amnesty”. They have taken a legitimate concern about giving illegal immigrants immediate citizenship and totally pollluted it with wild fantasies and over the top exaggerations. And to what end? To kill off change. It is long past time we let the immigration-hypochondriacs stew on some real changes - since they fear change over everything else. They wring their hands whether we do something or not. So let’s do something!
Their concerns are based primarily on science fiction built upon wild extrapolations while assuming no good whatsoever can come of any solution. Basically they are the purveyors of the pathological example - which has as much chance of coming true as man made Global Warming. The interesting thing has been the more they post and voice their wild claims the less credible I (and many others I suspect) find them, and the easier it is to move past them and build new alliances. Like most doomed movements, sometimes the best path to victory is to let them speak and share their unique views. They are their own worst enemy - we simply just need to point out the wild exaggerations and unserious claims. Not to mention the fact what they say they want addressed cannot be addressed because they are blocking progress. Want immigrant criminals to get booted? Pass the Bill. Otherwise we are stuck right were we are now - unable to enforce the laws because current laws don’t work the way people think they do.
Much of the Guest Worker program will work and will produce results. Many peolpe will be targeted for deportation based on their criminal past. Those that stay know they must behave and know they are not hidden from the system since they had to have been processed to stay. But these needed changes are irrelevant to the hardliners. In their realities their is no hope no matter what we do. Which is why it is time to set them aside and get something accomplished.
43 Responses to “Bush’s Sister Soldjah Moment On Immigration”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
AJ,
Again, I think you are missing the boat. The real issue is start engorcing the laws & the borders THEN decide the what to do w/ the illegals. Nothing else makes any sense. And we don’t need any more useless laws to accomplish this.
PMII,
Maybe, authorization for tamper resistant ID cards. Maybe, funding for a record keeping system. Maybe, the tools for employers to verify their job applicants. Maybe, a guest worker plan that reduces the need for “enforcement.”
How are we going to pay for Social Security, Medicare, medicaid and a slew of other government programs for the 12 to 20 million illegals who over night become legal?
conservativered,
By encorporating the young immigrant workers into the system, SS might just be saved from the slow death occasioned by our 2.1 birth rate.
And don’t forget the millions of unclaimed SS dollars in the system due to the fake SS numbers used by many illegals.
It’s not a zero sum game.
when the border is secured all things are possible. i’m not talking about the faux security in this and prior bills. real security from coast to coast. until then we’re all whistling past the graveyard in terms of reduced illegls swarming across the border.
the white house and their supporters should stop trotting out the hobgoblins about this is the best bill that we can hope for. they said that about the last one and the one before it all the way back to 1965. if you want some ‘comedy central’ moments you should read ted kennedy’s quotes as he touted each as the final long awaited solution to the plague of illegal immigration!
The Macker
The numbers do not support your position. The demand for services from low wage immigrants will not be enough to cover their costs.
Macker, I don’t believe that workers that are paid under the table are paying into the SS system and their employers are not either. However, once this amnesty for all bill passes, they will be able to CLAIM that they paid into the SS system and get credit for it. If you want to save SS you’re gonna have to privatize it..
And I don’t believe in man-made global warming.
Note: comment by a hardliner(another name for someone that wants the laws enforced)
conservativered,
Low wage workers pay a disproportionate share of sales tax.
SS retirement benefits are proportional to employee contributions.
Thus, it’s a bit more complex what the numbers show. But one thing is clear: That the US needs an added younger work force both to do the work and to support the SS program.
Those on the far right of the immigration issue have lived on exaggeration and wild, unsubstantiated claims.
The readers on this site who twist the need for a manageable and enforceable guest worker program into cries of amnesty and voting rights for immigrants are the classic example of a lack of any good argument being covered up by hysterics
On the other hand, why must a successful guest worker program, which I am in favor of, have anything to do with amnesty or citizenship or voting rights? I’ve not seen all this business about ‘wild and unsubstantiated claims, I guess I’m not visiting the ‘far right’ sites, and don’t intend to.
The country is fed up with the status quo and wants the immigrants to come forward, be checked and identified and given tamper proof IDs so we can enforce the laws, boot the criminals and hold employers accountable for not checking for those pesky tamper proof ID’s
And that’s exactly why so many don’t like this bill, it doesn’t accomplish ANY of those things. I see it as just another set of laws passed because past laws weren’t enforced and someone wants to feel like we are DOING something. We are, we’re making them legal WITHOUT any repercussions. The very first page clearly states that everyone is given immediate probationary status and there are no provisions for ever ending that probationary status. People repeatedly stating that it does, and that includes the President, does not change facts. I note that they never dispute anything that is quoted word for word from the law, they just claim people are hysterical, etc.
That’s because the “draft bill” is the best proof, just quote from it verbatim and if you’re paying attention, you can’t find anything in it other than “forgiveness”(some refer to it as amnesty) But for the sake of harmony we’ll just call it ‘forgiveness’
President Bush knows this hyperventilating minority has become incoherent due to their frustration and anger at being marginalized. The more hype they pile on the already piled up rhetoric further alienates the immigration hard liners from the broader group of Americans
Actually it’s quickly, once they read the bill, becoming the hyperventilating majority. Then I would suggest he pile up some ‘truth hype’ on top of it. Unfortunately when the ‘truth’ is piled on, it turns more and more against it. It’s amazing how the truth can get in the way of facts.
“If you want to scare the American people, what you say is the bill’s an amnesty bill,” Mr. Bush said
That’s why he is insisting that it’s not an amnesty bill. But, I don’t care how it’s spun, paying a minor fine to get ‘forgiveness’ is still amnesty.
The hardliners find any option for illegals to pay restitution and get legal work status “amnesty”.
That’s because a pig in a poke is still a pig in a poke.
They have taken a legitimate concern about giving illegal immigrants immediate citizenship and totally pollluted it with wild fantasies and over the top exaggerations.
So even tho they’re ‘hysterical’ you say it’s still a “legitimate concern about giving illegal immigrants immediate citizenship ”
And why wouldn’t they be hysterical? Why not just have a guest worker program with just the ‘right to be a guest worker’ why does it have to involve amnesty or citizenship?
Macker
Thus, it’s a bit more complex what the numbers show. But one thing is clear: That the US needs an added younger work force both to do the work and to support the SS program.
No, if they privatize SS and pass the Fair Tax, that’ll take care of the problem.
On principle, I’m not opposed to some sort of path to legalization for a substantial portion of the current illegal alien population.
However, and this is where I just can’t go along with Bush, or with you AJ, I think it is absolutely critical to secure the borders and assess the situation after we do so, before we make any decisions about legalization.
I also think legalization must be tied to (1) exclusion of nationals of countries with ties to terrorism, (2) mastery of written and spoken English, (3) active and permanent renunciation of former citizenship, (4) absolutely clean records here (any arrest that doesn’t result in acquital or a ‘no prosecution’ decision means back to wherever), (5) only immediate family reunification, and (6) and end to anchor citizenship.
I know the Democrats would gut the enforcement provisions of the proposed law as quickly as they can, and I simply do not trust either Bush or the Republicans in Congress to stop them.
My position: I was fooled once on immigration in 1986 (let’s not even get into 1965), and I want proof - through effective border enforcement - that any compromise will be carried out fully as promised, BEFORE we support the compromise bill.
No need to deport the illegals now, just enforce existing law as they come into view, and secure the border. Now.
The country is fed up with the status quo and wants the immigrants to come forward, be checked and identified and given tamper proof IDs so we can enforce the laws, boot the criminals and hold employers accountable for not checking for those pesky tamper proof IDs.
Tamper proof IDs - “subject to the availability of appropriations”
boot the criminals - “subject to the availability of appropriations”
hold employers accountable - “subject to the availability of appropriations”
page 131
SEC. 306. INCREASING SECURITY AND INTEGRITY OF IDENTITY
DOCUMENTS
(a) Purpose- The Secretary of Homeland Security, shall establish
the State Records Improvement Grant Program (referred to in this
section as the `Program’), under which the Secretary may award
grants to States for the purpose of advancing the purposes of this Act
and of issuing or implementing plans to issue driver’s license and
identity cards that can be used for purposes of verifying identity under
this Title and that comply with the state license requirements in
section 202 of the REAL ID Act of 2005 (division B of Public Law 109-
13; 49 U.S.C. 30301 note).
(b) States that do not certify their intent to comply with the
REAL ID Act and implementing regulations or that do not submit a
compliance plan acceptable to the Secretary are not eligible for grants
under the Program. Driver’s license or identification cards issued by
States that do not comply with REAL ID may not be used to verify
identity under this Title except under conditions approved by the
Secretary.
(c) Grants and Contracts Authorized—
(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary is authorized to award
grants, subject to the availability of appropriations, to a
State to provide assistance to such State agency to meet
the deadlines for the issuance of a driver’s license which
meets the requirements of section 202 of the REAL ID Act
of 2005 (division B of Public Law 109-13; 49 U.S.C. 30301
note).
page 207
SEC. 411. COMPLIANCE INVESTIGATORS.
(a) The Secretary of Labor, subject to the availability of appropriations for such
purpose, shall increase, by not less than 200 per year for each of the five fiscal years
after the date of enactment of [name of bill], the number of positions for compliance
investigators and attorneys dedicated to the enforcement of labor standards,
including those contained in sections 218A, 218B, and 218C, the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) and the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 651 et seq.) in geographic and occupational areas in
which a high percentage of workers are Y nonimmigrants.
Cato, Everyone agrees to securing the borders. Accept it or admit you are simply vying for the status quo. Name one person who says we do not need to secure the borders. You can’t.
Next exaggeration?
boot the criminals - “subject to the availability of appropriations”
page 38
(3) UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS.—In each of the fiscal years 2008
through 2012,
the Attorney General, subject to the availability of appropriations
for such purpose, shall increase the number of attorneys in the
United States Attorneys’ office to litigate immigration cases in
the Federal courts by not less than 50 compared to the number
of such positions for which funds were made available during the
preceding fiscal year.
(4) IMMIGRATION JUDGES.—In each of the fiscal years 2008 through
2012, the
Attorney General, subject to the availability of appropriations for
such purpose,
shall—
(A) increase by not less than 20 the number of full-time
immigration judges compared to the number of such
positions for which funds were made available during the
preceding fiscal year; and
(B) increase by not less than 80 the number of positions
for personnel to
support the immigration judges described in subparagraph
(A) compared to the number of such positions for which
funds were made available during the preceding fiscal
year.
(5) BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS MEMBERS.—The Attorney General
shall, subject to the availability of appropriations, increase by 10
the number members of the Board of Immigration Appeals over
the number of members serving on the date of enactment of this
Act.
(6) STAFF ATTORNEYS.—In each of the fiscal years 2008 through
2012, the
Attorney General shall, subject to the availability of
appropriations for such
purpose—
(A) increase the number of positions for full-time staff
attorneys in the Board of Immigration Appeals by not less
than 20 compared to the number of such positions for
which funds were made available during the preceding
fiscal year; and
(B) increase the number of positions for personnel to
support the staff
attorneys described in subparagraph (A) by not less than
10 compared to the number of such positions for which
funds were made available during the preceding fiscal
year.
Macker,
Their “math” doesn’t work, but they will not admit it. Somehow more money going into SS is worse in their math. I have thought about fixing all the bogus numbers I have seen, but the blinders are on. Don’t waste your time with the die-hards, reach out to those who want progress instead of fantasy perfection. Perfection means nothing which means status quo. The math is simple. Progress means fixing much of what is wrong. Zero or something, that is all they offer. I take something.
Everyone agrees to securing the borders.
Subject to the availability of appropriations, of course.
page 3
TITLE I—BORDER ENFORCEMENT
Subtitle A—Assets for Controlling United
States Borders.
SEC. 101. ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL.
(a) Additional Personnel-
(1) U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION OFFICERS -
In each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012, the
Secretary shall, subject to the availability of
appropriations, increase by not less than 500 the number
of positions for full-time active duty CBP officers and
provide appropriate training, equipment, and support to
such additional CBP officers.
(2) INVESTIGATIVE PERSONNEL-
(A) IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT
INVESTIGATORS- Section 5203 of the Intelligence
Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public
Law 108-458; 118 Stat. 3734) is amended by
striking `800′ and inserting `1000′.
(B) ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL- In addition to the
positions authorized under section 5203 of the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
2004, as amended by subparagraph (A), during each
of the fiscal years 2008 through 2012, the Secretary
shall, subject to the availability of appropriations,
increase by not less than 200 the number of
positions for personnel within the Department
assigned to investigate alien smuggling.
(3) DEPUTY UNITED STATES MARSHALS- In each of the
fiscal years 2008 through 2012, the Attorney General
shall, subject to the availability of appropriations, increase
by not less than 50 the number of positions for full-time
active duty Deputy United States Marshals that assist in
matters related to immigration.
More of the proposed border security.
page 4
`SEC. 5202. INCREASE IN FULL-TIME BORDER PATROL
AGENTS.
`(a) Annual Increases- The Secretary of Homeland Security
shall, subject to the availability of appropriations for such
purpose, increase the number of positions for full-time active-
duty border patrol agents within the Department of Homeland
Security (above the number of such positions for which funds
were appropriated for the preceding fiscal year), by not less
than—
page 5
SEC. 102. TECHNOLOGICAL ASSETS.
(a) Acquisition—Subject to the availability of appropriations for such
purpose, the Secretary shall procure additional unmanned aerial
vehicles, cameras, poles, sensors, and other technologies necessary to
achieve operational control of the borders of the United States.
I can’t help but wonder how available those appropriations will be, after this bill is signed into law. I’m thinking not very available at all.
Name one person who says we do not need to secure the borders. You can’t.
terrye,, on this site, for one. Teddy Kennedy, Linda Chavez,
Saying we need to secure the borders and pretending to want to do something toward actually accomplishing that are two different things.
Look at what was said when the fence bill was passed 6 months ago, look at Chertoff’s intent to secure the border, or build the fence. NO ONE is serious about that.
FE,
I don’t have a quick link, but my understanding is that a substantial amount has been paid into the SS system on behalf of illegals, all unclaimable by them.
“Enforcement” is so much more than fixing the border. Otherwise, we generally agree, except for the rhetoric.
Cato
On principle, I’m not opposed to some sort of path to legalization for a substantial portion of the current illegal alien population.
on principle, I don’t think anyone is opposed to a path for legalization for any or all of our illegal alien population. It already exists. It’s called applying for naturalization as a citizen and those immigration laws have been around a long time. They should get a copy of the laws and apply just as anyone in the whole wide world is eligible to do. A special amnesty and shortcut to front of line? no way..
AJ,
What I want is ACTION on securing the border BEFORE we make any decision on who we’re going to let stay and who not. Until the borders are secure, I would not alter the status quo concerning legalization. First things first!
Cato, you are clearly a hardliner(another word for those that want laws enforced)
Cato,
What you are saying is my way or nothing. Sorry, but the rest of us want the immigrants checked, the criminals booted ASAP, their ID cards made so we can crack down on employers. There is no reason to delay these - none. So as long as you hold up dealing with the criminal immigrants (legal and illegal) here now you are part of the problem. If your plan is to leave these folks be until your fantasy barrier is built not interested. Dealing with the criminals is much more important than shoring up the border (beyond what is being implemented already).
If you make all illegal immigrants “legal”, without first securing the border, you create an incentive for more people to attempt to sneak into the country illegally.
That is why it is important to FIRST secure the border. Otherwise you actually do more harm than good. Illegal immigration will increase. Is that really what anyone wants?
And claiming that we have to something rather than nothing is absurd. What if that something actually makes the illegal immigration worse? Do we still need to do that? Wouldn’t that be like throwing gasoline on a burning car, because you had to do something. Even if that something actually makes the root problem worse.
I would rather do nothing at all, than to do something that makes the problem worse.
I think we should adopt the advice from the Hippocratic writing Epidemics - The physician must be able to tell the antecedents, know the present, and foretell the future - must mediate these things, and have two special objects in view with regard to disease, namely, to do good or to do no harm.
Let’s not make the problem worse by creating even more incentive to come here, before we secure our borders. That only makes the problem worse.
Apache,
thanks for being honest. You are for the status quo because change frightens you. The funny thing about the hypocratic oath is the skill of the person it is being applies to. For a surgeon it means no experimentation. For a layman it means no surgery (since a layman has not idea how to do surgery).
Your paranoia means you would live with criminal immigrants (documented and undocumented) rampaging in our neighborhoods without any chance of deportation anytime soon. Let’s just say most of us are not ready to make that kind of trade off.
but the rest of us want the immigrants checked, the criminals booted ASAP, their ID cards made so we can crack down on employers.
Funny thing, the 600,000 that were ordered deported last year are still here and we can’t find them, and they are ON the record. It’s not they’re some of these in the shadows. We already have a record on them, they’ve been ordered deported and what did they do? Change their name. Another funny thing, these get IMMEDIATE legalization in the new bill, all deportment proceeding stop because they are now legal.
I’m hysterical, I’m a hardliner and NOBODY can tell me where I’m wrong. The fact that there IS no answer speaks very loudly.
We can’t find them to deport them so our answer is, make ‘em legal.
If we make everybody here and everybody that wants to come here, legal, why do we need a border or border patrol?
You are for the status quo because change frightens you.
I don’t know how you took what I posted and twisted it into that. That’s amazing, AJ.
What I said is I don’t want to make the problem worse. I thought I was pretty clear. Creating even more incentive to enter the country illegally, prior to securing the border will make the problem even worse than it already is.
I’m all in favor of change. And change is inevitable, even if I were opposed to it. Nothing remains the same.
I’m in favor of change that makes things better. I am opposed to change that makes things worse.
This bill may give law enforcement more tools to apprehend and deport illegals, but that won’t matter much if while they are arresting 1,000 criminal illegals, 5,000 more criminal illegals and/or terrorists sneak across the border.
This bill is the wrong kind of change.
Your paranoia means you would live with criminal immigrants (documented and undocumented) rampaging in our neighborhoods without any chance of deportation anytime soon.
What does the bill say? Draft bill page 268 lines 8-42
(h) Treatment of Applicants-
9
(1) IN GENERAL- An alien who files an application for Z
nonimmigrant status shall, upon submission of any
evidence required under paragraphs (f) and (g) and after
the Secretary has conducted appropriate background
checks, to include name and fingerprint checks, that have
not by the end of the next business day produced
information rendering the applicant ineligible
(A) be granted probationary benefits in the form of
employment authorization pending final adjudication
of the alien’s application;
(B) may in the Secretarys discretion receive
advance permission to re-enter the United States
pursuant to existing regulations governing advance
parole;
(C) may not be detained for immigration purposes,
determined inadmissible or deportable, or removed
pending final adjudication of the alien’s application,
unless the alien is determined to be ineligible for Z
nonimmigrant status; and
(D) may not be considered an unauthorized alien (as
defined in section 274A(h)(3) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(3))) unless
employment authorization under subparagraph (A) is
denied.
(2) Timing of Probationary Benefits.No probationary
benefits shall be issued to an alien until the alien has
passed all appropriate background checks orthe end of the
next business day, whichever is sooner.
Now, to me this says, any and all illegals in this country can apply and can not be deported, must be allowed to work, can not even be detained beginning at the end of 24 hours after they apply.
So when does this chance of deportation anytime soon kick in? After any and all legal process, including all appeals and all while represented by US taxpayer provided attorneys.
I don’t expect an answer, there isn’t one.
AJ, could you please explain to me how an illegal who has been here for one year, is age 61, and will be given credit toward Social Security, being fully vested after only 4 quarters (when Americans have to be fully vested for 40 quarters) will contribute to the system and not be a drain? After one year here, he and his over age spouse will be eligible for Social Security benefits, if only the minimum amount.
Here are questions for you (although I don’t expect you to answer as you never do): if all illegals, with the sign of the pen, are given “probationary” Z-visas who is going to take them away once they are granted? And when the time on those “probationary” vises expire, who is going to find those people, now back in the shadows and working under the table? ICE? IRS? Border Patrol? And since M-S 13 gang members will be given “probationary” Z visa just because they have no criminal history in the U.S. ( the government only having 24 hours to do a background check, often from foreign nations), are you satisfied that these gang members will become good citizens because they are now out of the shadows? Do you think it is right that there will be no penalty for identy theft like MY Social Security number or yours? And that the illegal will be given credit for the Social Security he/she paid in using a stolen number?
Enforcement:
I never said we did not need to secure the border. Just because I don’t agree with some of the hysterical stuff I am hearing from the hardliners does not mean I do not want to secure the border. I really hate it when people lie about me.
The truth is the hardliners have already decided that nothing will change no matter what, so what difference does it make what kind of bill gets passed, they are like Mikey, they hate everything.
I do support more and better border security and a guest worker program and some kind of legalization for some of the other people here. I want dangerous people deported. I don’t want people from other countries to continue to take advantage of our welfare system and I want to have a better idea of who is here and where they are.
To certain people on the right, that makes me and anyone else who disagrees with them either a traitor or someone who does not support border security.
Sometimes I wonder if they just want to keep the issue alive forever so that they can demagogue it for their own political purposes.
I left the left because of narrow minded people who assumed that any difference of opinion with them was treason and who seemed to think that there was only way to do something, their way. I don’t have to tolerate it on this side of the aisle either.
“Cato,
What you are saying is my way or nothing. While the rest of us want……..”
AJ, the REST of us? We, who believe in the rule of law, who want immigration but want those who desire to come to our nation to do it legally, who want punishment for those who violated our laws, each and every day they spend here with being legally admitted, are the REST. But you chose to ignore our questions or comment on the bill itself. You have a few supporters; Terrye, Crosspatch and Hillary Clinton who has just hired a LaRAZA big wig to be her “human rights” coordinator.
I stated that all politics are personal. It is obvious you have a personal stake in this immigration bill. Because there is no way you could support the language of this bill if you did not. But you will not come clean and say, “this is why I want this bill”. You spin it like the Dhimmicrats spin their “new direction” for the war. At least you could be honest with your readers and state why you think that accepting a really bad bill is better than the status quo and you could be honest in your dog in this hunt.
This bill will kill the Republican party for generations. I am starting to think that is what you want.
Terrye, you may have left the left (why am I not surprised that you were a left winger?) but you have never given up your leftist ideals. That is the one clear thing about you.
Now, care to take a try at answering the questions I posed to AJ that he refuses to answer? Or do you not have the cajones, either?
The old “secure the borders, then we’ll talk” argument amazes me. The U.S./Mexico border is 1500 miles long. Just how quickly do people think this border can be secured (and how many more illegals will slip over the border before it is secured)? It’d take decades to put up a physical wall, and frankly I’m dubious about the efficacy of a “virtual” one.
To the degree that people are saying that the border has to be secured before anything else can be done, I have to say I agree with AJ that such people are in effect (if not in intent) promoting the status quo.
No one has tried to secure the border - it would be easy. All you have to do is stop giving them freebies and don’t employ them. Make it hard for them and they will go home.
AND I really don’t know why we don’t allow more Mexicans in legally every year. Forgot, it’s our government at work……
R05,
Answer: the suppositions underpinning your question are myths laid out to scare people. We call that making a strawman argument - where you create a made up example so simple (and unrealistic) you can knock it down. When you want to deal in reality let me know.
How ironic it is to be accused of being a racist becuase you are against a program that was partially crafted by a group that calls itself La Raza! (the race)
Here’s a little gem from Rassmussen,
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/just_16_believe_senate_bill_will_reduce_illegal_immigration
AJ, I have been watching and listening to blogs, radio, tv, co-workers and I see about one person in ten that like this bill. That NYT poll you keep citing was bogus as all hell. It didn’t even mention this bill. Rassmussen goes right at this bill and the people against it are both right and left, Oh, excuse me, HARD left. We already know that there is no such thing as the right, they are the Hard Right.
The only hysterical emotional persons in this debate are you and the pro bill crew. I have seen many people posts actual parts of the bill here and ask you to defend it and your response is, (sound of crickets chirping). Instead you use words like fear and hysterics to paint your opposition with irrationality, while it is you who are being totally irrational. You do nothing but spit venom at anyone who is a conservative or doesn’t agree with you, but you will not discuss things in an intelligent adult manner. Facts mean nothing to you, you fend off real well thought out intelligent questions with accusations that the premise is exagerated and a myth and follow that up with stupid expressions like checkmate or LOL when it just makes you look more unhinged. You say to FE that his examples are made up and unrealistic and that he is not dealing in reality. Hey, take a look in the mirror pal.
The truth is the hardliners have already decided that nothing will change no matter what, so what difference does it make what kind of bill gets passed,
Not true, a whole lot will change if the bill is passed. Nobody will be illegal anymore and a whole lot of people will start drawing SS benefits, so it matters a lot what kind of bill is passed.
Terrye, I didn’t say you said you were against a secure border. You don’t have to say it outright, just listen to what you say.
add Aitch to the list of people that don’t want border security.
Reality? nobody is interested. How about page 268 lines 8-42 that specifically says you can’t deport anyone. Is that reality or just spin? Does anyone care. If you don’t believe it, then you don’t believe what’s in the bill. How can you or anyone support a bill that you don’t believe what it says?
Reality? the bill says 18000 border agents withing 18 months but only specifies hiring 14000 thru 2012. Reality? that’s what the bill says. Nobody cares what the bill says
That’s reality, will we hear any answers, no. Just another strawman to keep the status quo. No matter that it is quoted from the bill itself.
There is another angle that I don’t believe anyone has really touched on that uses such concepts as logic, and math, and economics. I posted it to my townhall blog. You should be able to click my name and get there.
Crosspatch, thanks for the link, here is some thoughts:
I understand that people should not benefit from breaking a law and it bothers me that we might be letting some off the immediate hook with this proposed legislation but to do otherwise at this point might be cutting off our nose to spite our face.
It’s not a matter of some, it’s all illegals.
We need to know who is here.
This bill doesn’t provide fot that, it doesn’t require documentation.
We need to have them documented. We need to create some serious incentive for them to get registered.
Where does this bill provide for that?
Many of our attitudes toward foreign labor are based on that era that we lived through.
What attitude toward foreign labor? Our attitude is about illegal aliens.
A guest worker program is the best option that I can see available at the moment.
So far you’ve made no argument as to why a path to citizenship or amnesty should be in the equation. Why not just give them the legal right to work.
Tossing out 12 million workers would leave about 6 million unfilled jobs in this country.
Specifically who is recommending this? haven’t seen it.