Wouldn't it be better to extend affirmative action to everyone. (i.e. Affirmative Action is SO GREAT, we won't deny it to anyone. Everyone who applies to college gets 10 bonus points. Everyone who applies for a job gets 10 bonus points.)
Then, when one of the supporters needs, say, a brain surgeon, they should be compelled to use one who got through medical school on Affirmative Action.
Need an architect? Only an AA architect for supporters.
Need an engineer? Ditto.
In other words, if less than the best is good enough for the rest of us, the AA-supporters should put their dollars, selves, and families where their mouths are and commit to using mediocrities.
But these elitists demand nothing but the best, don't they? This is hypocrisy shouted out loud, but nobody notices. Let's notice, and bring upon them the logical outcome of their stated preferences.
--Boris
And it has been proven to not be difficult. allow me to reiterate from a previous post ....
Let us visualize a real live controlled border. That would require a fairly large construction project to build semi-sunken border stations at one mile intervals from end to end across the southern border with Mexico. By placing them at one mile intervals no point on the border is more than 30 seconds from a border station. By sinking them into the ground, one level is completely protected against almost all man-portable weapons and the second level (ground level) can be bermed on three sides except for the horizontal observation and firing ports along the east, south and west sides. the north side would extend out to include a 3 sided, covered bay where the interceptors will sit at the ready.
Each such station will be staffed by five three man teams. As this is a closed border plan, there is no need for more than three per station. Allowing 5 shifts per station, the three normally needed for 24 hour staffing at 8 hour shifts, plus two ?weekend? shifts that could rotate out with a weekday shift, giving the week day workers opportunity for time off, vacation, backup for sick days, etc.
Then there is the eternal question, how much?
Ahhhhhhhh, there is the beauty. ZERO. This will not add a single dime to the budget. WHY? The money is currently being pi$$ed away for nothing and where it is going will only get worse. Allow me to rub salt here . .
""When approving the Medi care bill last month, Congress allocated $1 billion to help border hospitals cover those costs. President Bush is expected to sign the bill Monday.""
Which he did. So the money is there, it is just being spent in a reactionary mode. In a proactive mode most of the money will only be spent only in the first year, after that the cost would drop dramatically.
OK, lets do the numbers.
1330 miles from Atlantic to Pacific ='s 1330 stations.
1 station initial construction 165,000
1 electronics and weapons 40,000
3 trucks @ 40,000 each 120,000
15 staff, 5 shifts at 3 per shift 630,000
utilities (water, electricity) 12,000
Total for one station for the first year (including construction)
$967,000
Total for the 1330 stations required
$1,288,044,000
and that is including construction cost.
After the initial construction,
Back out 90% of 165,000 to = 16,500, or annual maintaining
apply the same 10% maintaining to the other front end expenses
and the total annual bill is . . . $870,352,000
Case Closed.
The only reason the border is NOT closed is the fed WANTS the criminal invaders here.
the only question is . . . WHY?
Many will argue that they are just poor "immigrants" and we should welcome them. We already welcome immigrants, NOT illegal border busters. If they are "immigrating" why are they crossing the border at night, paying other criminals thousands of dollars each to smuggle them into the u.S.
SMUGGLING IS NOT IMMIGRATING.
And as for this BS about them only committing a mistomeanor by crossing the border illegally, there is another school of thought. Lets take a look at that, shall we?
Just a thought, what if the IRS began to receive reports regarding the transfer of funds to locations outside of the united States and it became apparent that is is a nationwide trend.... therefore invoking conspiracy laws.
Say for example, an individual living in the united States ILLEGALLY had conspired with other individuals living in the united States ILLEGALLY to create a hideout from the investigative branch of INS or whatever the heck they are called these days. They have rented the hideout under a fake name and all of the conspirators chipped in to pay the rent on the hideout. Then, in order to avoid local law enforcement agents, all of the ILLEGAL Aliens live in the hideout, thereby circumventing the reporting regulations for an alien ILLEGALLY living in the u.S. That would be a crime, right?
OK, let's say those same aliens living ILLEGALLY in the u.S. all had jobs and because they are paying very little to support themselves, (they are all living in the hideout, thereby paying 1/5 to 1/10 what the average American pays in rent and lest than 1/20 what the average home owner pays in monthly mortgage payments) they are sending regular sums of money out of the county, money that was earned during the course of ILLEGAL ACTIVITY, i.e. not reporting there illegal status, hiding their address from law authorities, and falsifying federal IRS forms with fake SS numbers. This would all constitute crimes, right? Well, what kind of a crime?
STRUCTURING, IE money laundering......
4.18.1956(a)(1)(B)(ii) Money Laundering-Illegal Structuring,
18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)(ii) See Statute
[Defendant] is charged with violating that portion of the federal money laundering statute that prohibits structuring transactions to avoid reporting requirements. It is against federal law to engage in such conduct. For [defendant] to be convicted of this crime, you must be convinced that the government has proven each of the following things beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that [defendant] entered into a financial transaction or transactions, on or about the date alleged, with a financial institution engaged in interstate commerce, involving the use of proceeds of unlawful activities, specifically, proceeds of the [insert crime here(illegal alien) ];
Second, that [defendant] knew that these were the proceeds of unlawful activity;
Third, that [defendant] knew that the transaction or transactions were structured or designed in whole or in part so as to avoid transaction reporting requirements under federal law. ------- The defendants are also charged with knowingly conducting and attempting to conduct financial transactions that involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, knowing that the transactions were designed in whole or in part to avoid a transaction reporting requirement and while conducting and attempting to conduct such financial transactions, knowing that the property involved in the financial transactions represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956(a)(1)(B)(ii).
The Treasury Department has published a booklet entitled, "Money Laundering: A Banker's Guide to Avoiding Problems," which contains a list of suspicious activities that the Treasury Department says fit the profile of a "money launderer." These activities include: 1) Paying off a delinquent loan all at once; 2) Changing currency from small to large denominations;3) Buying cashier's checks, money orders, or traveler's checks for less than the reporting limit (i.e., under $10,000); 4) Acting nervous while making large transactions with cash or monetary instruments; 5) Opening an account and using it as collateral for a loan; 6) Presenting a transaction that involves a large number of $50 and $100 bills; and 7) Presenting a transaction without counting the cash first. . . .
"Structuring" is defined by the IRS as any effort to avoid reporting cash or other monetary transactions over $10,000 by breaking them down into smaller "related" transactions over any 12-month period (defined by USC 31, Sec. 5322-5324-Money Laundering Control Act of 1986, as amended). A structuring violation carries with it a criminal penalty with a mandatory prison term, heavy fines, and confiscation of structured funds and money "connected" to them. (A civil penalty of a $25,000 fine with confiscation of structured funds also exists.) Monetary instruments included in structuring are cash, cashier's checks, money orders, and traveler's checks.
"Structuring" is now defined as money laundering, and is a criminal offense. You can now go to jail for dealing in cash to protect your financial privacy, if the IRS thinks you're trying to hide or structure your transactions or monetary instruments.
It seems to me that that the above is describing a nationwide conspiracy of ILLEGAL ALIENS that are defrauding the government and a guilty of a long list of federal conspiracy crimes.
It also occurred to me that the crime was committed, or rather, under the definition of conspiracy, the crime began when the illegal alien set foot on u.S. territory with the intention of getting a job "that nobody else wanted."
Well well, let us review the facts.
1. All the illegals KNOW what they are doing is against u.S. law.
2. The border an be closed for .10 cents on the dollar of what it costs PER YEAR, that would be 22 Billion, due to their presence. It would cost less than 2 Billion to close it.
They are in fact criminals and were felons by their own admission the moment they set foot on u.S. territory. What the government is thinking by allowing this to go on in the face of such universal opposition of the wishes of the Americans will be political genocide if just one of the annual two million criminal border crossers are involved in a major terrorist event. That is not pubies or dems, just politicians and gubbermnt in general.
NO reason to not close the border.
MANY reasons to close the border NOW.
Does this current government really believe all Americans are so stupid as to let this go on?
As a lifetime student of the political processes, I can absolutely assure you that this is very far from certain. There are a great many imponderables. Frankly, I think that Bush will get somewhere between 39 and 61% of the vote, but at this juncture, with a very, very unpredictable 10+ months to go, anyone who tries to be more definite than that is whistling in the dark. For example, Goldwater had already passed JFK in some polls, right before the assassination. He ended up with only 39%. For example, the Senior Bush appeared unbeatable, the year before the election. The rest, there is history. Lincoln appeared headed for defeat in 1864 until some major victories gave him greatly enhanced credibility.
Those who believe that the victory in Iraq will be a plus next year, are not considering all of the factors, there either. For example, the Cox ticket, which reflected the Wilsonian legacy, less than two years after the victory in World War I--I think every rational person will concede that World War I was a bigger event than the war in Iraq--didn't even get near to that 39%, I have given as the bottom of the likely range.
The writer has given rather compelling reasons for many of us to look elsewhere--not in 2008, but starting here and now. He underestimates the power of his own argument.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site