Replies

Here's the deal. I maintain that a large part of the argument against amnesty is socialist-based ("we can't afford them"). You brought up other reasons like they're Democrats who Obama's purposely bringing in to bolster his party. Fair enough.

I never said I was FOR illegal immigration even though I see where a portion of these people are actually helping us (you might even construe that as a socialist argument except this is breaking unjust laws in favor of free-market volunteerism which is always beneficial).

My point is, let's call at least the socialist-based whine what it is. I guess my other point is the potential mammoth problems with what you propose. Eisenhower got rid of a million plus, but Eisenhower's not Obama and one million plus is not 30 million. You credentials being what they may, don't answer these tough and real issues.

Here's the deal. I maintain that a large part of the argument against amnesty is socialist-based ("we can't afford them").

You have an odd idea of what constitutes socialism.

You brought up other reasons like they're Democrats who Obama's purposely bringing in to bolster his party. Fair enough.

Those reasons are sufficient, to a reasonable man who is conservative, to virulently oppose Amnesty.

Eisenhower got rid of a million plus, but Eisenhower's not Obama and one million plus is not 30 million. You credentials being what they may, don't answer these tough and real issues.

I addressed both issues to satisfaction: One million easily becomes two, four, or six million with the force-multiplier of modern technology and assistance at the State level, and while Obama is heinous, he is incompetently so -- further, it would never happen under Obama, since he is staunchly opposed to deportation. The point becomes moot under Obama. It will have to occur under a Conservative (not a Republican) President.

If we ever see one in our lifetimes, that is.

Work for that.

Don't work for Amnesty, which will guarentee we will never see a Republican or a Conservative President ever again.

I maintain that a large part of the argument against amnesty is socialist-based ("we can't afford them").

You are really way off base with this statement. Amnesty has nothing to do with socialism, fascism or capitalism. Amnesty can be granted, or not, by any nation, regardless of ideology. The question is whether it is the right thing to do in the eyes of citizens and their elected representatives.

Amnesty has to do with the (mass) pardoning of those who have committed a crime. These foreign citizens have come here without following the normal legal process to work (visas) or live (citizenship) in this country.

The normal legal application and process for visas and citizenship are in place to weed out those who logically should be turned away....criminals, subversives, the diseased, terrorists, or clinically insane. Amnesty would short-circuit this process. You can read the reasons for being "turned away" here.

This is why I am against blanket amnesty. Oh, by the way, you need to brush up on the meaning of socialism.