Immigration bill un-Christian, anti-life, governor says (Huckabee)

LITTLE ROCK - Gov. Mike Huckabee Thursday denounced a bill by Sen. Jim Holt that would deny state benefits to illegal immigrants as un-Christian, un-American, irresponsible and anti-life.

Holt, R-Springdale, replied later that Christian charity does not include turning a blind eye to lawbreaking.

Senate Bill 206, filed Wednesday, also would require proof of citizenzhip to register to vote and would require state agencies to report suspected cases of people living in the country illegally.

"Somebody needs to ask Sen. Holt what welfare this bill would stop," Huckabee said in a question-and-answer period with reporters on Thursday morning. Many aid programs are state-administered but federally funded and are mandated to be available to people in need, Huckabee said.

Even if benefits to people who are in the U.S illegally could be stopped, "I don't understand how a practicing Christian can turn his back on a child from this or any other state," Huckabee said.

Holt replied, "I think the politically correct movement has misconstrued what compassion really means. They think compassion means that any person can disrespect our laws and that we're supposed to be tolerant and let them get away with it.

"True compassion is correcting them so in the future they can be law-abiding citizens," Holt said.

Holt said he would seek a state attorney general's opinion on what the bill would do if passed. He said he would delay further action on it, at least temporarily, to allow the attorney general to respond.

The bill is modeled after a similar law in Arizona and supported by the newly formed group Protect Arkansas NOW. The group's chairman is Joe McCutchen of Fort Smith. "I know Sen. Holt and Mr. McCutchen say they're pro-life," Huckabee said. "We're trying to preserve the life of someone who, when born, will be an American citizen with his first breath. We can spend $900 on pre-natal care when the mother is pregnant. Instead, this bill would have us take a chance and spend $2,000 a day at Children's hospital if the baby's born and something has gone wrong. That's anti-life."

Huckabee said he took exception to characterization of immigrants in the bill and by its supporters as exploiters of social programs. "They pay sales taxes on their groceries," Huckabee said. "They pay fuel taxes. If they're using a fake Social Security number, they're paying Social Security taxes and will never receive any benefit. It would be closer to the truth to say they're subsidizing Joe McCutchen and Jim Holt more than the other way around.

"Something that's not worth sharing is not worth celebrating," Huckabee said. "This is the kind of country that opens its doors. This bill expresses an un-American attitude."

McCutchen, reached by telephone at his home in Fort Smith, repeated some of Holt's arguments, including the one that the people referred to in Holt's bill are in the United States illegally.

"They broke the law," he said. "My angst is not with them, though. My angst is with the state and federal government for not enforcing our laws."

People living illegally in the United State has "overwhelmed our school and welfare system," McCutchen said. As for whether the bill reflects un-Christian attitudes, McCutchen said: "Jim Holt is as good a man and as good a Christian as any man walking this Earth."

"Doggone it, the rule of law is not being upheld, and that's wrong," McCutchen said.

McCutchen joined Holt in a news conference last week to announce the forming of Protect Arkansas NOW and to discuss plans to file SB 206. Since that news conference Friday on the state Capitol steps, McCutchen was featured on the web page of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks membership and activities of groups such as the Ku Klux Klan. One group tracked by the center is the Council of Conservative Citizens, which claimed McCutchen as a member, according to the law center's article. The article is available at: http://www.splcenter.org/index.jsp

"To anybody who will listen, I'll make a speech at my own expense," McCutchen said. The CCC "asked me to come up and make a talk on illegal immigration. The talk lasted 15 minutes and I drove myself to Virginia to give it. I financed that thing by myself."

A letter of McCutchen's was reprinted in a magazine owned by the CCC, according to the law center website. "I did buy a list of donors from the American Immigration Council. I sent out a letter to about 200 people telling what I was doing," McCutchen said. "I suppose one of those letters went out to this magazine.

"That was the end of that, I thought," McCutchen said. "I'm just astounded by the attention this has received. CNN (Cable News Network) was at my home Tuesday afternoon. The very next morning, the Southern Poverty Law Center sent this out and the segment on CNN is on hold."

My children aren't hungry. And I don't USE public funds. For darn sure, NON-citizens shouldn't get them either.

Let me apologize. I misread your post. I thought you were telling me you were not getting your benefits because of illegals. I'm sure you are a fine mother.

If my taxes weren't so high to pay for ILLEGALS, I could get my children some of the extra things they want in the way of music lessons, etc. It is MY money, after all.

I agree. Our taxes are being wasted on people who are not working. Some of them are lazy, and irresponsible. Some are drug addicts and crooks. It sounds to me like you believe as I do that no one, citizen or illegal, should be getting a free ride.

You might not agree, since you seem to advocate Communism.

I have some sympathy for the disabled and the insane and don't oppose Federal welfare for them, but that is probably the extent of my socialism. I don't support benefits for illegals, but also don't scapegoat them for...

Government mandates for emergency rooms that apply to all patients, citizen and illegal.
Unemployment insurance which pays citizens to stay home.
Social Security America's biggest ponzi scheme.
Liberal and inept education

I checked out your posts just after the elections. Your excitement over our Republican wins is obvious. If you check out my posts you will see I am pro-life, pro-gun, pro-tax cuts, pro military, pro God, and pro GOP. I agree something needs to be done about illegal immigration. I believe Dubya's guest worker program will help solve this problem.

"Our taxes are being wasted on people who are not working. Some of them are lazy, and irresponsible. Some are drug addicts and crooks. It sounds to me like you believe as I do that no one, citizen or illegal, should be getting a free ride."

And some unemployed are people who cannot find work that will allow them to pay their bills because the criminal aliens have so depressed the wage scales that little in the way of physical labor can support a person who plans to work and retire in America without lv ing 8 families to a single family dwelling and then return home to Mexico/India/China and live large from the wages that criminal businesses paid them under the table.

But please keep posting. Remarks like this one of yours and the one about unemployment INSURANCE really wake working class people up to the fact that so many neocons are morally bankrupt and would sell off this country one peice at a time if it helps their quarterly profit margin.

So do you expect people to not claim their medical INSURANCe benefits too, or does that make them lazy as well?

LOL! Keep on trucking neocon!

Guys like you wake people up far faster than I can by my lonesome.

These are a number of reasons why I post responses to people, the least of which is whether the person I'm responding to will comprehend, be changed by or even read it. Many people read this forum. Not all of them post here. I am read by more people than those I respond to.

In every post to me on this thread you have sought to introduce racism into the conversation. Even when confronted on the issue, you continued to do so. In this latest post you sought to demean me for not agreeing that some of those objecting to illegal immigration are racists. As a believer in Christianity, I am not obligated to judge other people. I am obligated to contemplate, assess and modify only my behavior. You are a very good object lesson, why people shouldn't try to judge others. You have been wrong with regard to me on a number of occasions on this thread.

Since racism is your thing, let's contemplate that issue for a moment. You evidently believe that the Mexican nationals should receive preferential treatment when it comes to immigration into the United States. You have advocated for that at length on this thread. I have objected, and so you have sought to cast me as a racist. Even in your last post you said, " I do not think you are a racist, or at least I see no evidence other than your opposition to Dubya's guest worker program." Bud, opposition to Bush's guest worker program is not evidence of racism. None the less, you had to slip in that implication.

One of your criteria for supporting Mexican nationals be allowed into the nation in elevated numbers, was that they are poor and deserve a right to make a better life for themselves. You have defended this at length, and if memory serves, you also noted that it was the Christian thing to do, or some such. You'll have to excuse me for wondering how credible your demand of philanthropy is, when I note that you haven't advocated for any other world citizens to be able to enter our nation at will. You don't lobby here for any other race but Mexicans. Where is evidence of your lobbying efforts for poor Canadians, Panamanians, Peruvians, Indians, Shri Lankans, Chinese, Vietnamese, Laotians, Malaysians, Australians, Brits, Polish... the list is quite extensive, but you haven't touched on a single nationality other than Mexicans. I have said that two to three millions illegals entering our nation each year was wrong. You have refuted every single attempt to get you to acknowledge that, and call for it to end. Evidently you are convinced that Mexicans have a right to be here. Why just Mexicans?

If you truly believe that two to three Mexicans each year should be able to come here, on top of the present legal limits, then you must advocate that for all the worlds poor. Whatever flow you advocate for Mexicans, you must also advocate that for each of the other nations I mentioned. I mentioned twelve nations by name. There are about 165 members of the United Nations. If we allow two million people to immigrate from each of these nations, that would be 330 million new residents in the United States each and every year. In just three years we would have one billion new residents in the United States, all of them poor, most if not all of them only having about a 4th grade to 8th grade level of education. We would have to help house, feed and clothe them. We would have to provide healthier and education to their young. We should have to pay for the hundreds of thousands of births they would generate.

I don't want to see one more post on this forum by a racist. I'm sure you would agree. And if you're not going to advocate the same treatment for other nations you are for Mexicans, that includes you.

Lets move on. You responded to my mention of crime by illegals, saying statistics disproved my generalization. Once again, you produce the lie, rather than acknowledge the problem. In California jails and prisons, illegal immigrants make up anywhere from 25 to 33% of the population. As near as I can tell, illegal immigrants probably make up somewhere around 10 to 15% of the California population. That would mean that they are reprsented in jails and prisons by about two to one over U.S. Citizens.

Later on you seem about ready to cry since I wouldn't say Robert Byrd is a racist. This topic is about illegal immigration. It is not about Robert Byrd. I have never supported Robert Byrd. I've never voted for him and have continuously trashed the democrats for have an ex member of the KKK, in their body. This just isn't the place to discuss that. This a thread about illegal immigration. Once you noted that Byrd was against Bush's worker program and illegal immigration in gerneral, there wasn't anything else to say on that topic. Big whoop-di-do. The only racism I've seen on this thread so far, is some loon demanding preferential treatment for only one nation's people. I might add, they are demanding that even over their own citizens.

As for you intelligence and your principles, I wouldn't make that arguement if I were you. You are so far out on the limb you are trying to saw off.. I'd just climb on down and rethink my next move.

People with principles don't throw around the word racism like you do. They don't impugn others unless they are sure. They don't advocate racist immigration policies. They don't try to get people to judge others. They don't advocate the theft of U.S. Citizens hard earned money, so they can give tens billions of dollars it away each year to one specific nation's people. In case you didn't realize it, that's theft. Isn't there a famous quote, "Thou shalt not steal" somewhere? As for intelligence, I really shouldn't have to write this stuff to you.

you have sought to cast me as a racist. Even in your last post you said, " I do not think you are a racist, or at least I see no evidence other than your opposition to Dubya's guest worker program." Bud, opposition to Bush's guest worker program is not evidence of racism.

I do not believe opposition to Bush's guest worker program is necessarily racist but some do oppose it because they are racists. I was clear on this in my previous posts. I speak of racism because I believe much of the isolationist dreck posted at FR is motivated by racism. I was clear on this in my previous posts. I think your isolationist dreck is not motivated by racism. I was clear on this in my previous posts. Get over yourself you little wounded child.

You can read my posts to others and see that I have been polite and gracious in my dealings with you out of the respect I have for your abilities and intellect. I believe my attempts at humor were lost on you, but above this you have taken great umbrage where no slur was intended. If this was caused because my words were unclear or vague I apoligize...but I really don't think my words were unclear.

I am tired of talking over your head and your snotty replys are not motivating me to continue. I figure I'll look better if I just ask readers to reread your latest post to me rather than dispute the false conclusions you charge are proven by my distorted words and your twisted reality. You only make yourself look foolish with schoolyard taunts like "Later on you seem about ready to cry..."

Have a nice day.

Okay, then we agree that opposition to Bush's guest worker program is not racist. That's not the implication you dropped in your post, and you know it. And you know what, I'm not feeling uncomfortable about pointing that out to you. If you don't like being called on your actions, modify them.

You speak of racism because you're drenched with it. You advance unfair, unequal, preferential treatment for your pet group, then damn everyone else for not jumping on board to support it. You would do a lot better to correct this flaw in your own character, before trying to damn everyone else.

I ask for the Mexican people to respect the laws of our nation and abide by them. I ask that they refrain from impacting our nation unfavorably. This isn't isolationist dreck. You think it is.

As for the wounded child comment, you certainly don't like having it revealed that you are a racist. Frankly I don't blame you. You advance the same type of policies that Robert Byrd would, only in reverse. Then you tell others they are aligned with him. Not you though? Right? When this is pointed out to you, it's the other person who is supposed to be acting like a child. Look bub, I asked you to lay off the race-baiting. You couldn't get yourself to do it. Now live with the damnation of your own actions, for what they are.

Only a complete fool would seek to caste calling others racists, and defining their comments as isolationist dreck, as gracious behavior. Then you have the audacity to cast an objective response to this, as 'taking great umbrage where no slur was intended.' My if you aren't forgiving of yourself. No slur was intended? LOL You are clueless.

Well I guess I'll just have to bear up under the charge that you are talking over my head. If charges of racism, categorizing my objection to criminality as isolationist dreck, and my responding to precisely the charges you made, is evidence to you of you talking over my head, I do think it's best you refrain from addressing this issue on the forum.

What is this post to me if not one big whine at being outed for precisely what you are? I responded on point in each post to you. If you don't like someone responding to the words you offer up here, then I'd suggest you find a topic you know at least something about. Hurling insults at other simply doesn't cut it.

NOW do you think you can quit using the racist taunt as a club? I doubt it.

Okay good. I think that's a reasonable thing to do. I don't advocate racism and would join you in frowning on, and commenting about posts that actually did go over the line. You just can't go around calling everyone a racist because they don't agree with you.

You state that you use strong language, because you have strong opinions. I think most of us on this forum have strong opinions. That doesn't mean that we can trash people as being racist, xenophobic, or tell them that their posts are isolationist dreck if they have valid reasons to oppose something. You may not agree with them, but if they are raising a valid point, you should afford them the courtesy of understanding where they're coming from, even if their conclusions aren't your own.

I think most of our opinions have evolved over time. There was a time when I wasn't plugged into politics (or perhaps more accurately important issues). I just didn't take time to think things through. I had a family and they consumed my time. Then about 14 years ago I heard about a presidential candidate's history, and I felt compelled to speak out against him. From then on, I've participated on forums discussing, debating, being insulted and insulting others. I prefer to discuss and debate, but I'm not above giving in kind.

Yes, our opinions do get better and sharper through debate. And when someone is genuinely honest in their debate, I'm a lot more inclined to agree to disagree. I don't find many people who are genuine in their debate, sadly. I am glad that you have re-examined and focused your beliefs. Even if you disagree with me, you should be able to tell others why, without making snap judgments. I encourage you to do so.

Well, I do try to continue responding to someone who continues to address me. I appreciate your comments about my presentation. I try, but I'm not always as consistent as I'd like to be. Thank you for your comments as well.

I expect to see you defending your views and taking others to task on the forum. I do encourage it. I just hope you will debate on the issues, try to understand when folks are raising issues of criminality. If they are wrong, let them know. If they are right, think about it.

Take care.

D1

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.