ARE HISPANICS NATURAL DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS?

Cooking With Chef Carlo ^ | 4/14/2014 | Carlo3b

[carlo3b]

ARE HISPANICS NATURAL DEMOCRATS OR REPUBLICANS?
OR SHOULD WE ASK,
ARE HISPANICS MORE LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE?

I report, you decide..

Broadly speaking, the Hispanic society, regardless of nationality;

• have strong family values,
  
• deeply held religious beliefs,
  
• a rigorous work ethic,
• strong community commitment,
• fun loving,
• traditionalist by culture,
• socially charitable,
• strong gender identities..

In the most generous interpretation, which political identity better fits the natural characteristics of the Hispanic community?

I believe if you ask the average Hispanic, legal or illegally in our country, the following questions, the answers would be astonishingly different than the average American would attribute to the media's interpretation of this community;

• Do you believe it is fair for a country to protect their boarders?
• Do you believe there should be laws for legal immigration into this or any country?
• Do you believe it is fair for people to break the law to become a citizen of a country?
• Do you believe it is fair for a taxpayer of any country to provide any healthy adult with any form of welfare, if jobs that they can do, are available?
• Do you believe it is fair for law abiding citizens, to expect people that break the law should be prosecuted?
• Do you believe that people that enter a country should pass a vigorous background investigation before they can apply for citizenship or work permit?
• Do you believe it is fair for applicants for permission to become a citizen or worker to have acquired certain proof of personal responsibility to include;

1. A vigorous background check to insure they have honestly answered the questions, law abiding background, physically and mentally healthy, financially capable..
   
2. A legally responsible citizen sponsor, or guaranteed employment..
3. A agreed upon, predetermined, time limited, periodic reporting for compliance..
4. A prohibition against any felonious illegal activity for a minimum of 10 years..

I believe the main reason there is a flaunting of our immigration laws, are our immigration laws themselves, and the proliferation of rules that have created a cottage industry of regulations that maintain  the status quo, on both sides of the boarder.. There should be a complete review of the worker program, and temporary and permanent status, with levels of time and costs..

I am convinced they would apply and complete these requirements if they were more fairly unburdened with profit motives of the current methods, and they would vote in favor of their inherent beliefs, which is unquestionably Conservative..

[zeestephen]

The evidence at hand.....

I have been reading your immigration comments for years.

You oppose Amnesty, but rarely, if ever, in detail.

Do you want the DREAM Act “children” deported?

Do you want illegals deported who provide an income or essential care to a legal household?

Do you support annual E-Verify for all employees?

Do you want enforcement of civil and criminal sanctions against employers who hire illegals?

I cannot recall that you have ever expressed an opinion on our current policy of creating 1 million new citizens per year.

Do you support that number?

Do you support family re-unification (a.k.a. chain migration) that results in almost 1.5 million new Green Cards each year?

Do you understand that if we “Convert” just 2% of white voters to the Conservative cause, that would result in more votes than “Converting” 10% of Hispanics?

[okie01]

I have been reading your immigration comments for years.

Alright, let's continue.

If you[ve been "reading my immigration comments for years" you evidently missed the plan I posed:

a. Secure the border
b. Enforce the current laws regarding employment and visas.
c. Include E-verify in the enforcement process...enforce civil and criminal penalties on employers...make illegal presence in the country a felony, rather than a misdemeanor (as it is now).
c. Cut off all government-sponsored welfare to non-citizens.
d. Wait an unspecified period (say, 3-5 years), see what's left. My presumption is that the vast bulk of illegals will have self-deported. Address the small remnant appropriately -- but under no circumstances, nor at any time, would citizenship be conferred to any person who was here illegally.

I have rarely commented on our legal migration policies, other than to note that Teddy Kennedy is the man responsible for the unholy mess they are. Personally, I would favor a moratorium on all legal immigration, pending a full review and accounting for the impacts of our current policies.

Eventually, in my opinion, it would be best to have a strictly limited immigration policy that reflected the best interests of the country. I.e., acceptance of a limited number of healthy, capable immigrants with needed skills. In other words, pretty much the pre-1965 policy.

Did I pass muster?

What annoys you, I suspect, is my support for legal Hispanic immigrants. I have worked with and have many friends in this community. And I know that most of them object to amnesty for illegals.

Nor do I have a particular animus for the bulk of illegal Hispanic immigrants. If I were in their place, I might well do as they did -- seeking to find a better life for my family.

Instead, my animus is reserved for the people who created the immigration mess via their own corruption and/or indolence and now want to take the easy way out...refusing to fix it, because that would be "hard".

That would be Teddy Kennedy, the Democrats and those Republicans who are, as you put it, "soft on immigration" -- as you accused me of being.

Take it or leave it. I'm done with the thread.

[dontgivein]

The answer is simple: deport all native americans (except for those white-ish cherokees) back to native america.

[zeestephen]

OK, I'll take it.

We could have saved a lot of ink if you had included your position paper in the first Comment.

I know all the Immigration hawks at Free Republic, and your name was not previously among them.

To me, immigration is an existential issue.

If it continues as it has, American Conservatives will face political extinction after the 2020 Census and Congressional re-apportionment.

Please note that my first Comment addressed only your statement about getting 40% of the Hispanic vote.

When I mentioned Amnesty in that Comment, it was within the context of the 40%, and I never implied, in my first Comment, that you supported Amnesty.

I am not annoyed at Hispanics, or any other ethnic group for that matter.

But I am most certainly annoyed that we import 1 million foreign Socialist voters each year.

My own position on Immigration is entirely economic.

I would allow anyone in who has a one year guaranteed employment contract for a minimum $150,000.

After 3 consecutive years, they get citizenship.

For those who wish to start a business, a minimum $50,000 payment to the US Treasury would be required, each year, up front, until their business alone generates $50,000 minimum in tax revenue for three consecutive years.

Most of those folks would vote Socialist, but their numbers would be just a couple hundred thousand per year, they would be amenable to Conservative persuasion, and the tax revenue they generate would be outstanding.