Posted on 01/10/2004 6:13:48 AM PST by from this machine
Three words:
SEND THEM BACK.
It's that simple.
During the Eisenhower administration, we sent back something like one million illegals who were here in the "bracero" program. It was done.
If we can send back one million, we can send back 10 million.
All that is required is the will to do so.
Cheers!
- John
Given that the Post had their collective hatchet sharpened & bullseye on Tancredo's back, his reaction to refuse interviews w/ the paper still smacks of a certain arrogance. He inserted himself directly into the controversey & then when the heat gets turned up, he announces that he's taking the ball and going to play w/ the kids on the other block. OK behavior for a private citizen, but it's not OK, IMO, for a guy who draws his paycheck from the taxpayers. I would probably view this a little differently if he refused to talk to the LATimes or the WaPO about it, but the Denver Post is one of Tancredo's local newspapers & this particular story was emerged w/in the proximate area of his district.
As I see it, on one hand Tancredo is a stickler for the rules, an often admirable trait. When he announced his intention to break the term limits pledge he had made to voters, he essentially said that rules (albeit a self-imposed one) don't apply to himself and that begs questions that go directly to his personal integrity. Moreover, as I understand it, term limits was an issue that he was fervent about as the head of the Colorado Term Limits Coaliton & term limits was a central issue in his '98 first-term campaign for congress. Obviously, the voters in his district can enforce his 3-term pledge in November. Or not. The point of this is that when his name is being touted as a write-in candidate for president, his behavior goes under the national microscope & his credibility & integrity are justifiably questionable.
As per the student, Jesus Apodaca, affair--regardless of who the instigators were, the question still boiled down to the debate over in-state tuition vs out-of-state tuition, the difference in costs being quite significant--over $5000 per semester. As a personal aside, w/in 7 months of moving to Wisconsin, I was granted the resident tuition rate when I returned to college--after furnishing a letter from my husband's employer that the move to WI was a employment related transfer. OTOH, kids like Apodaca don't qualify for a resident rate regardless of how long they've been a resident of a state. It's a sticky area--obviously we don't want rich kids coming to the US explicitly for higher education & qualifying for resident tuition rates but, at the same time, do we want to maintain the financial bar at such a high level that we effectively prevent kids like Apodaca from accessing the means to be productive members of society? Some would answer that question in the affirmative; I would not, again stating that it's a difficult issue to sort through.
We can move tens of thousands of soldiers, tanks, buildings, millions of pounds of equipment thousands of miles, over oceans--we can track down and remove these people. Or alot of them.
Thanks for this post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.