Posted on 10/25/2004 4:29:44 PM PDT by Tuttle
FR's being littered with a whole lot of ZOT ashes and it seems to be getting worse by the day.
ROFL! I haven't seen that one before :)
Let me clear something up here, maybe I haven't been articulate enough. I am AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. People who are here ILLEGALLY should be DEPORTED. Our borders should be tightened. I simply think that LEGAL immigration with strict quotas should be allowed. I simply believe it wrong to deport people who are here legally, as the poster of the article suggested. If an immigrant breaks a law higher than a traffic violation, he should be gone. But LAW ABIDING LEGAL immigrants should be allowed to stay, and a limited number of LAW ABIDING LEGAL immigrants should be allowed to move to this country each year. What is so radical or unreasonable about that?
Lady Jag????
#1 - You still haven't answered my question.
#2 - The same sentiments were expressed back then. People back then felt that the country had 'reached it's capacity'. They felt that the new immigrants just 'weren't like us'. And there were plenty of people coming over here illegally then as there are now. Of course, that is a moot point because I AM AGAINST THAT!!!
You keep avoiding the real point of the arguement, which is what is wrong with a limited amount of legal immigration and whether or not legal immigrants in this country for less than 10 yrs. should be deported or not.
I apologize... I misread your statement.. (I have been on an illegal immigration kick all day with prop 200 here in arizona.) I intially read the first two line of you statment thinking they said illegal immigrants and it taint the rest of the article in my eyes from there.. after reading both you response and rereading you intial statment I will say that I agree with you. Once again my failure to read correctly so I do apologize.
The VK loves it when I talk like that.
That's great!
Who cares what they said in 1902? They didn't have 298 million people in the country, and they didn't have millions pouring in illegally at will. What don't you get about this?
It's no longer 1902. Look around man.
True conservatives won't back a sleeze-bag senator who's a liberal on top of being a gigalo.
Period.
Actually, you didn't answer my questions.
Are your schools not over crowded? Your cities? Highways? Hospitals? Are your land fills full? Do you have unlimited resources where you live? Is the medical care where you live adequate for millions pouring in legally and illegally? Are your jails and prisons full? Adequate housing?
Thanks - sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words.
So do I babe!!
sKerry got on top of Clinton?
YOU offend me Tuttle. YOU, not President Bush. Take a flying leap you phony!
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.