Mexican officers are now co-operating with the US counterparts
Madrinas, rogue Mexican military drug smugglers.
Posted on 08/21/2004 9:04:20 PM PDT by ETERNAL WARMING
(08-21) 15:55 PDT MEXICO CITY (AP) --
President Bush's nephew, campaigning for overseas votes in Mexico on Saturday, called the federal policy of arming U.S. Border Patrol agents with plastic pellet guns "reprehensible."
Speaking in a mix of English and sometimes-halting Spanish, George P. Bush said his uncle was not to blame for the gun policy, which has angered Mexicans. He instead blamed it on "some local INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) guy who's trying to be tough, act macho."
"If there has been American approval for this policy, that is reprehensible," Bush said of the guns, essentially paintball projectiles filled with chile powder. "It's kind of barbarous."
The pellet guns, which were approved at the federal level, have been used on a trial basis since 2001 in California and Arizona. The U.S. Border Patrol fired the pepper-balls in 81 instances in 2002-03 and reported no deaths or severe injuries.
President Bush's Hispanic nephew -- he's the grandson of migrant worker Jose Maria Garnica -- is in Mexico on a week-long visit to drum up support for his uncle among the estimated 1 million Americans living there.
The younger Bush, whose father is Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and mother, Columba, is originally from Mexico, acknowledged at a news conference that the war in Iraq is not popular in Mexico but defended the military action, saying "we're almost done with it."
He also acknowledged that "there are some people in our (Republican) party who don't see the benefits of immigration," but promised that President Bush was a proponent of immigration reform.
He called Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez "a dictator" and cast doubt on his victory last week in a recall referendum, saying Chavez had "a long history of fraud." Outside observers, including former President Jimmy Carter, have endorsed the Venezuelan vote counts.
Christopher Fussner, global chairman of Republicans Abroad, which funded Bush's trip, called Mexico "the most important country" for getting overseas votes.
Fussner said Republicans are advertising in overseas English-language newspapers around the world in hopes of capturing expatriate votes.
Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's campaign also has enlisted family members to woo voters in Mexico. His sister, Diana Kerry, chairwoman of Americans Overseas for Kerry, visited Mexico City in July.
Kerry supporters also held a voter-registration and ballot-request drive in Guadalajara on Thursday.
It's neither. It's an argument against illegal immigration. Whether or not we personally like social welfare programs, if our laws specify welfare for citizens, we can set budgets and establish plans for taxes and program scope.
With illegal immigration, planning becomes impossible. Since rule of law isn't important to you, I can see why this argument is meaningless to you. You're either a Libertarian who doesn't see that we're at war and our borders need defending, or else you're a dupe of the bleeding heart left.
In either case, you're not telling us how we're going to manage the real problems we have because of illegal immigration. You're not explaining how we're going to pay for all of this aid we're offering. You're not offering us a means for dealing with the loss of capital we experience when illegal immigrants take their untaxed, under the table income and send it to their Mexican families. You're not presenting us with any ideas that are new and likely to help.
You just want things to stay the same. Change is coming, and because most Americans agree that our borders need defending and immigration should be regulated, it will be you who is left behind.
In the future, we'll have immigration, but our borders will be much less porous. It may not come during this president's term in office, but it will come. The leaders we have today who ignore this crisis will be voted out.
Mexican officers are now co-operating with the US counterparts
Madrinas, rogue Mexican military drug smugglers.
I've already told you exactly how to solve illegal immigration, but you don't want to do that, so clearly you're worried about more than just illegal immigration. What could it be I wonder?
rule of law isn't important to you
Sure it is. I just like changing stupid laws. Our country has done so throughout our history.
who doesn't see that we're at war and our borders need defending
Of course I believe we're at war. I also realize that you defeat this enemy by killing them and cutting off their financial supplies, not by arresting them. John Kerry and you believe that you can stop terrorists by arresting them. I think you stop terrorists by killing them. I also realize there's a difference in Mexicans that want to work here and Al Qaeda members.
You're not explaining how we're going to pay for all of this aid we're offering.
Elect people who don't offer it. Texas has taken the opposite approach to the California approach, and not only does Texas not have nearly the budget problems that California has, it's Hispanics are also far more likely to vote GOP than Hispanics in California. Your mistake is taking out your anger for CA liberals on Mexicans. Really stupid way to solve the problem. Just FYI.
Change is coming, and because most Americans agree that our borders need defending and immigration should be regulated, it will be you who is left behind.
If most Americans supported doing what you propose, it would be done. Politicians do what the majority of their constituents want. But most Americans don't want to do what you propose. It's one thing to tell a pollster that you want to kick out all illegal immigrants... it's another to deal with the massive hikes in federal spending, federal restrictions, and federal price hikes on goods and services that would come directly or indirectly from your proposal. Ain't gonna happen, Cletus. Sorry to disappoint you.
Why? Because it is precious beyond value. It represents the most beautiful, free, and enlightened land on the earth to most third world people. And it won't stay that way if we keep inviting them here in droves. They would come here to live under a bridge, and with your zero government ideal in place, the land owners and factory owners would hire them at even lower wages that what they're illegally paid today.
All of your solutions are like every other Libertarian solution: you demand total capitulation to your ideal system and only then will things function properly.
Today's parties try to work within the realm of reality. It just so happens that on gun control and immigration, the Republicans think they can get elected more easily if they're soft. That's all about algebra, not about what's right and wrong. And they may be mistaken in their math.
If most Americans supported doing what you propose, it would be done.
Have you been watching the news lately? For 20 years it's been politically incorrect to call wetbacks illegal immigrants. This month it's suddenly fair game. Sure it's somewhat anti-Bush, but it's anti-Kerry, too.
The status quo is in tatters. Watch the world change all around you. It's coming, and it's coming fast.
Many would. Many wouldn't. And what's wrong with them coming here to work? If there were no programs, they'd have to work just like every other immigrant that came here for years. Why don't you just be honest and admit that you just don't want more Mexicans in California?
All of your solutions are like every other Libertarian solution: you demand total capitulation to your ideal system and only then will things function properly.
I'm actually a Republican who understands how the free market and capitalism works. I also am not the one fretting over this issue (if you'll notice, it's you and your totalitarian friends that raise the biggest fuss over this issue) because millions of Mexicans come and go from the US each year currently. I'd just like to see the laws changed so that they could do so more freely and legally.
The status quo is in tatters. Watch the world change all around you. It's coming, and it's coming fast.
Haha. OK. Can you give me some examples of how this is happening? I can point to the millions upon millions of Mexicans that have immigrated here legally and illegally over the last couple decades (and the corresponding booming economy). What have you got to support your claim?
I think you're actually the one who is clueless about markets; it looks to me as if your anarchist ideas about borders are part of what will lead us to totalitarianism here in America; and finally you seem to be just an apologist for a temporary position the Republican party is taking out of convenience this week to get a few million extra votes on no principle whatsoever than to win the election.
Good for you!
How so?
and finally you seem to be just an apologist for a temporary position the Republican party is taking out of convenience this week to get a few million extra votes on no principle whatsoever than to win the election.
They are actually doing it for several reasons: 1) The net benefits to our economy of the illegal immigration from Mexico have been very positive (so they push to make it easier for Mexicans to come and go freely), 2) Small business owners in numerous industries are desperate for more minimum-wage level workers and they have large influence in the GOP (much moreso than the Hispanic lobbies do), and 3) the Hispanic population as a percentage of the US is growing, whether you like it or not. Texas hasn't been as conservative and GOP as it is now in over a century. And Hispanics have never been a larger percentage of Texas (32%, just like California) since we were a part of Mexico. How do you reconcile this?
As far as your legal/illegal thing goes, let me put it this way. If a government somewhere or at some level in the US decides that jaywalking in a certain area will be illegal, then I agree, that government has a right to prosecute jaywalkers. But if the federal government decides to pass a law that not only will jaywalking be illegal nation-wide, but that they are creating a massive Department of War on Jaywalkers that will employ thousands of federal workers to hunt down, arrest, prosecute, gun down (if "necessary"), imprison, ajudicate, and/or deport all jaywalkers, then I would absolutely oppose such a ridiculously stupid law. Wouldn't you?
(And, fwiw, I would oppose that Department of War on Jaywalkers idea because I believe it would be stupid, unnecessary, wasteful, totalitarian, counter-productive, and most importantly, harmful to the health of our nation. For the exact same reasons I oppose our immigration laws regarding our Southern border.)
"Anything else is anarchy. What we have now is anarchy."
What risk said!
First we declare an immediate moratorium on all immigration, except for those people who are currently in the legal "pipeline". Next we close down the Mexican border along with the porous borders at our airports. Thirdly we scrap the current "lottery" system for visas and return to a system were we can pick and chose who comes here, according to our needs, not Ted Kennedy's self-hating concept of dumb luck. I would suggest forbidding immigration from any Islamofacist nations, even our allies, such as Saudi Arabia, except maybe I would let the women in, but not the men. After this, we start to seriously deport illegals, criminals first and fastest. I don't know what we should do about the "anchor babies" as it is impossible to do much without amending the constitution. The longer we let the current state of anarcy go on, the harder it will be to deal with this problem, and we will eventually have to deal with it, the public will demand it.
I was a complete open borders person until 9/11, now I'm as anti-immigration as any one. Bad people doing bad things have made me change my mind.
It's not a matter of liking or disliking them --- and the open-borders types never can explain how this massive migration of people out of Mexico is doing that country or those who stay behind any good at all ---- Mexico will never become a decent place until they change their government and aspects of their culture --- unlimited immigration actually keeps that from happening.
But fewer and fewer --- the cost of kidnapping insurance and the skyrocketing violent crime rates are deterring some. Open borders isn't helping Mexico at all and it's not helping the USA. The only thing that will help Mexico is for some of it's citizens to start staying, getting changes made and building that place up. There isn't any good excuse for the level of poverty for the majority of its citizens nor the level of wealth for a mere handful.
Traitors? Isn't this pretty much what G P Bush is when he slanders a branch of law enforcement and risks the lives of the men who are working on the border? He has to know that some of the border agents have been killed while on duty --- and his reckless words could just get more killed. He's over there in a foreign country suggesting that the laws of this country shouldn't be obeyed. That seems hard to defend.
It's not free markets or capitalism when billions of dollars are being taken from the taxpyers to support them. Even the Medicare plan which is supposed to be for senior citizens had $1 billion earmarked for illegals' health care. That's Socialism and Communism.
Because our elections have become so filled with fraud that those who hold allegience to a foreign country will be voting --- it's not the American expatriates they're trying to reach because they wouldn't have to pander open borders and disobedience of immigration law to them. Those Americans living in Mexico obey the immigration laws of Mexico.
Because our elections have become so filled with fraud that those who hold allegience to a foreign country will be voting --- it's not the American expatriates they're trying to reach because they wouldn't have to pander open borders and disobedience of immigration law to them. Those Americans living in Mexico obey the immigration laws of Mexico.
I'm one person that would surely like to have someone as educated on this issue as you seem to be describe all the net benefits illegal immigration has had on our economy. You see, it's hard to see any benefit in watching billions of our tax $ go to these folks, many of whom could care less about this country and our children's future. They can't (and won't) speak English, have no real skills and if not for welfare style services couldn't even function in this society.....and this is supposed to be beneficial?
As far as small business owners seeking to hire illegals, I must be wrong by thinking that they might want to be EVADING a whole lot of payroll taxes by letting go of Americans and replacing them with illegals when it's obvious nothing could be further from the truth. Also, something I'm sure they never thought of was just paying these illegals minimal wages and letting the taxpayers get socked for their medical, food, education, etc. expenses.......it probably never crossed their collective minds. I'm also sure any day now we'll see builders cut prices on houses across the board because it should be obvious they'll want to pass on to consumers all the extra $ they now save in payroll, taxes, medical, etc. by now using illegals........yep, any day now those prices should come down.
It's maybe my own myopia on the subject but I can't seem to find any silver lining in reading stories about honest Americans whose lives have been changed forever because lax immigration has allowed all sorts of miscreants to enter this country to rob, rape, murder, etc. a loved one thereby causing massive amounts of agony for many families. Is His-pandering for votes really worth the price many of these folks have paid by being violated in some or fashion by these invaders?.......(I know you're giving it a lot of thought, but the answer is NO!)
The point is, this is a very complex, convoluted issue with many elements that need to be exposed to the public at large . Heck, I didn't even bring up Bush's idiotic plan to have some illegals receive Social Security benefits, even after they've gone back to Mexico........if more people knew of that nonsense, he'd be toast before you could say matricula card. You need to step back and take good look at what's really going on here, becasue the reality of the situation is far more destructive than certain romantic notions of the "net benefits of illegal immigration".
I have. Thanks.
I voted for GWB in 2000 knowing that my state was up for grabs but I do agree with Pat Buchanan on illegal immigration.
Its funny how Pat Buchanan takes a beating here on the Free Republic but I watched him the other night on Scarbough Country and he was so on the mark about John Kerry that even some of Pats biggest critics here were rooting for him.
Click Here and see Post #190
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: Viet-Boat-Rider
Go Pat go!!
190 posted on 08/20/2004 9:56:26 PM CDT by Jim Robinson [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pats a pretty good punching bag around here but when Joe Scarbough was letting Steve McMahon and that other disgusting rat operative run the show and blaming the Republican Party for violating CFR laws and calling GWB a draft dodger, it was Pat that stepped up to the plate and set the record straight on what was going on in 1971. He said it was guys like Kerry who lost the Vietnam War by aiding the Communist and he made his remarks with quite a bit of passion.
Just because a lot of us don't agree with President Bush on border control or lack there of, doesn't mean we're not going to vote for him.
Notice the pro-illegal types can't answer that simple question.
So has health costs.
Link to FAIR's data on immigrants and sky-rocketing medical cost
You mentioned the AFL-CIO earlier. You should know that the AFL-CIO and yourself are on the same side of this issue. They are wanting amnesty for illegals then they plan to go in and organize them. Once organized into a union, they will demand higher wages and more benefits from their employers. It would also be safe to say that most of them will be voting democratic. There goes that cheap labor and the conservative vote will become more diluted.
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.