Poll: Do you trust your elected leaders to make the right decision on immigration issues?

PHXnews ^ | 12/24/03 | PHXnews

[MickeysHangover]

Here's a poll I saw that I know most of you would be interested in.

"Do you trust your elected leaders to make the right decision on immigration issues?"

YES

NO

http://www.phxnews.com/

When it comes to immigration, it seems that our leaders are always trying to cater to the hispanic vote.

Now, we discover that Bush and McCain are working on a master immigration plan just in time for the next election.

I'm curious to see where you stand on this issue of trust.

Thx and Merry Christmas.

Can I still say that on this web site? :)

[EGPWS]

It is difficult to have an exact figure because the illegal nature of their presence prevents any enumeration, but the U.S. Census Bureau estimated 8.7 million illegal aliens were here in 2000, and immigration officials estimate that the illegal alien population grows by 500,000 every year."

Place the figures where they best fit the agenda, for nobody can put a definitive number on it, I guess it is open for any number that suites the individual placing them.

Like I have previously conveyed, one way to alleviate the problem is to bring the full force of government down on it, spend much more money than we already have, and at the same time we can pay much higher taxes to pay for the crackdown, thus there goes our personal freedoms sucked further down the whirlpool of the drain.

Granted, I AM flagged when political jargon is spewed in reference to ILLEGAL aliens. After all, many of us lifetime citizens have to suffer the long arm of the law from speeding tickets to protecting our property and in some cases, I'm sure, can be very detrimental to a family's livelihood.

IMHO, cracking down on an "illegal" alien should be a primary concern.

Through lawful means, not by taking more freedoms away from us law abiding citizens to justify another political agenda.

[inquest]

the illegals can be stopped by fining the businesses that employ them and making it unprofitible for them

I've heard that suggested before, and that particular idea doesn't sit well with me. It should not be the job of a private employer to investigate its employees to determine citizenship status. That's government's job, not the private sector's. And immigration laws should only inconvenience immigrants, not citizens.

A better approach, IMO, would be to keep the EEOC off the backs of employers, so that employers don't feel the need to beef up on their "diversity" ratings by hiring illegals.

[Arpege92]

I think you have that backwards. Yes are 4 % and No are 96%. :-}

[ckilmer]

betrayal is the name of the game. there is also cowardice and stupidity. and also the way in which God lets people go --who do not cling to him.

[TheCrusader]

"It should not be the job of a private employer to investigate its employees to determine citizenship status."

I see your point. But still, if thirteen guys pour out of a 65 Volkswagon and apply for a job on your ranch in Southern CA, they can't speak English worth a chit, can't look you in the eye when talking to you and look like as if they've been sleeping in the desert for three weeks, you can probably assume they are illegals.

[inquest]

Good point. I suppose it's kind of like laws about receiving stolen merchandise. You're still liable, even though you didn't "know" it was stolen.

[SBell]

Bush may be a better choice than any of the dwarves but, IMO, he's not that much of a better choice.

Great points! He still beats the dwarves, of course. Break it down in as many clever ways as you like, but it still comes down to one of two choices:

1.) Decent American
2.) Left-wing, terrorist-loving fucktard

I'm gonna opt for the former...

[inquest]

Currently, I'm considering whether or not I want to leave my vote for president blank next fall.

Mind if a make a very strong request of you? If you don't want to vote for Bush, then could you at least vote for the Constitution Party candidate or for someone else you'd think might be worthy of the office? It'll make a much larger impact than a blank space.

[breakem]

.....or in a bad union!

[TLI]

I'm afraid President Bush has a multicultural future in plan for all of us - welcome to the Brazil of the northern hemisphere as some of my Scandanavian friends say

There is a lot of racial crime there too, shootings, stabbings, muggings, murder, kidnaping.

http://www.hrlawgroup.org/country_programs/brazil/default.asp

"Racism remains pervasive in Brazil though the black community is estimated to constitute between 50 and 60 percent of the country's population. As evidence of the systemic effects of racism in Brazil, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has called special attention to the high illiteracy rate among blacks, relegating many of them to employment in low paying jobs such as street sweepers and domestic workers."

I suppose those are jobs "nobody else wants."

If the border is not closed the issues we have now are only the begining.

We will be looking at a future closly resembling Brazil or Rhodesia. The libs, sellouts and trators best listen up. It is a FACT that this will not occure without a fight and by all projections result in a loss on the side of those very same communist agenda libs. Rope time.

TLI

[MissAmericanPie]

They are not catering to the hispanic vote, that is so ludicrous. They are committing treason against the citizens of the United States, all of them. They are deliberately working against our best interest and the Constitution, all of them.

The agenda is globalism, no borders from the north of Canada to the tip of Cape Horn. I'm just waiting for people to wake up and admit it, instead of hiding from it. I guess if you can kid yourself it makes it easier not to have to feel a responsibility to do something about it.

[TLI]

http://www.phxnews.com/

I read several of the "Breaking News" stories there, and they have a "post a comment" feature. Comments are running 100% against more "imigration" from the south. Check it out.

[DustyMoment]

You clearly have your own opinions and that's ok; that's what discussion is about.

TSA - the incompetence of the TSA is directly responsible for a bloated budget to fund a department that has a HUGE load of deadwood on board. You see more TSA employees standing around doing nothing than actually screening passengers. In addition, their policy of not profiling the people who are actively trying to destroy us is sheer insanity. These two points about TSA are more responsible for the slowness of the airline industry's recovery than any other single reason. More people will not get on airplanes today because of the harrassing activities of the TSA towards grannys and 3-year olds than toward the people determined to destroy us. Several airports have already announced that, after the mandatory 3-year honeymoon period with the TSA has expired, they will replace their TSA screeners with private security company screeners such as we had prior to 9/11.

DHS - The biggest claim to fame that the DHS has made is creating a confusing and pointless color code system of threat levels. Most people don't understand it and don't know the difference between one threat level and the next other than the change in colors. In addition, DHS, under Tom Ridge, has failed to perform the most fundamental function of such a department; secure our borders and crack down on illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is a large and growing problem and Ridge sits around yapping "Amnesty". This is a dangerous and irresponsible position for the head of the DHS to assume. Illegal immigrants are known to include Muslim terrorists slipping into this country from both Canada and Mexico. That Ridge and Bush are unwilling to push for secure borders is anathema to a department charged with securing our homeland. We may as well not have this department when this is the policy of the man at the top.

That's why I include these items on the list of what I consider to be Bush's less than stellar "achievements". These are incredible drains on the government's budget with little to show for them.

[AEMILIUS PAULUS]

Question: " Do you trust your elected leaders to make the right decision on immigration issues?"

Response: "In declining states the leadership intuitively choses the most harmful course of action"-A Great Historian 1888

[pageonetoo]

When I clicked on the link, 'NO' was already chosen! all I did was confirm it!!!

[DustyMoment]

I'll keep it in mind. I'd rather be able to vote for Bush, but I am growing increasingly disenchanted with his policies. To be frank, from the policy standpoint, it's hard to tell the difference between Bush and a Dem other than the fact that Bush has shown a strong commitment to the War on Terror. I wouldn't want to trust that to a Dem; ANY Dem.

In addition, by allowing John McCain to develop the bulk of Bush's "immigration reform", I fully expect that we have a whole new screw job in the works that will deprive us of more of our Constitutional rights. McCain has an accomplished track record (via CFR) of attacking the Constitution and winning. Expect to see American citizenship take a backseat to the rights of illegals poring across our borders and sucking up our government benefits. If we think CA has budget problems, I anticipate that America will be bankrupted by the illegals who suck our benefits dry and contribute nothing. When Bush is done with his "immigration reform", Americans who have paid into the system all of their lives, will likely take second place behind the illegals to receive the benefits they have paid for all of their lives.

[Joe Hadenuf]

bump.....