Posted on 11/15/2005 6:51:13 AM PST by DTogo
...HANNITY: Because you had made a controversial statement, and you seem to be backing off of it now, and it was that people that are here illegally, that they all ought to be sent back.
I'm paraphrasing.
And it seems like now you've sort of backed off that position a little bit, because there are million that we estimate that are in this country illegally.
Why wouldn't we send them back?
CHERTOFF: ...I also recognize we've got, according to some estimates, 10 to 11 million illegals already in this country working. And the cost of identifying all of those people and sending them back would be stupendous. It would be billions and billions of dollars...
HANNITY: Why — in that sense, aren't you really rewarding those that didn't respect our laws and sovereignty? In other words, OK, you're saying, you came into this country illegally.
Now that we've identified you, we're going to let you even stay longer and make money, and then you can go back in three to six years.
Why don't we say, no, you're here illegally, you didn't respect our laws, you ought to go home? Why don't we just say that?
CHERTOFF: Well, Sean, you know, it's really an issue of practicality.
I mean, as a practical matter, we've got to identify these people and pull them out of the shadows.
Now, this is not an amnesty. This is not — the president's proposal is not a path to citizenship. It's clearly temporary, and it clearly envisions people who would have to commit to go back....
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Ok. It makes WAY more sense to me logistically and monetarily, but I don't have anything personally staked on the position. Like you said, someone has to be excluded if someone is included. That said, we are nowhere NEAR the need for limits. Our economy is growing at close to 4% and we have no deflationary wage pressure and unemployemnt is under 6%. We have absorbed between 10 - 20 million illegals so far with no threat to our economy We do have other problems, but those relate to the undocumented nature of their presence, NOT the downward pressure on wages that freepers love to pontificate about.
I would like someone to tell me, HOW DO WE REPLACE THE MANPOWER?
I've heard and can come up with many reasons myself, for border control but, NO ONE has an answer for my original question. Is that because there is no answer?
"You obviously haven't grasped the scope and scale of this problem. Estimates are that there are more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the US today. That is a number that is greater than the population of all but 7 states individual states. Further, 1 in 4 births are now to immigrant mothers. It is a daunting enough task to contemplate sealing the borders and absorbing those that are already here. As Chertof stated, removing them would be impossible."
I'm swimming in illegals here where I live in the North East. Believe me, I know the scope of the problem. I'm not of the mindset that "nothing can be done...because it's toooo hhhaarrrdddd...or it's such an inconvenience. Save the whining for DU.
Chertoff is a sock-puppet yes man, like most other Bush apointments.
With the few strokes of a pen...or God-forbid...by just enforcing existing laws on the books, we would create a situation where most of the illegals would self deport within 18 to 24 months.
But I guess the appeal of SHamnesty is just too appealing for some like yourself.
"1. National ID card REQUIRED for EVERYONE, VALIDATED US birth certificate primary document to apply.
2. EVERY transaction in the US requires presentation of National ID card. Failure to require presentation of NIDC for transactions results in HEAVY fines."
Not really necessary. A biometric scan...like a retina scan should be required for opening up a bank account...as well as to authenticate anyone who wants to go on the government dole. Once the bennies dry up for illegals, they'll self-deport in no time at all.
>>>You are a poster child for everything despicable about "conservatives" (really statists who would support the IRS, higher taxes, and implementation of a police state if it would further their immigration hobby horse) in the immigration mess we have.>>>
Then get the hell out.
It IS descipable when people place their neighbors in danger (as it is UNSAFE for 10 people to live in a 2 bedroom house) by fire hazards, etc... all to send money to another economy that doesn't care about ours at all.
Go take a few dozen illegals and leave me the hell alone.
Apparently it doesnt take you any effort to remain clueless. Unless you are talking about an armed army invading, dropping bombs or shooting people trying to get in is no different than shooting people trying to get out. And that is not moral equivalence, it's a fact.
BTW, what is all this OBL crap? On that I dont have a clue...but then I dont sit around talking to myself and other clueless xenoophobes all day like some seen to do.
>>>cartel don't have the Hildabeast in their sights for 2008. Only us few true conservatives with an all out assault on her can stop it from happening.>>>
I'd take 10 Bush's before I'd take Hildabeast. My husband isn't particularly political is TERRIFIED she will make it in. He has vowed to actively campaign for whoeever is running against her.
So. It would solve the problem we have in this country with high crime and gang problems.
Your post to Chronic_Loser
>>>Well guess what- one side here is espousing the same defense of illegal behavior that DU does. And it isn't me.>>>
I thought for a second you were defending, but then I realized you were referring to yourself. So I guess Chronic's MO is to call someone a DU member if they don't lovingly embrace lawbreakers. I was told that my opinion of Mexicans sending 90% of their money to an economy that doesn't give a flip about us was the despicable part of conservativism. I guess we are both evil conservatives. I wear it proudly. :o)
But comments such as "My white American born Citizen son can't get a part time job because illegals are filling the slots" are. So are comments such as putting a $500 bounty on the head of every illegal, dead or alive.
This is the first time I've seen NPR quoted as a source on Free Republic.
Les Miserables "White American born son" needs a part time job. Maybe he will do back breaking work for pennies.
Nope. I am going to stay. I will see freedom win, and enjoy watching liars who call themselves "conservatives" choke on their own hateful venomous bile as hispanics see the american dream take place with a salsa flavor. We will have to get our out of control border under control, for certain. But no one except a small group of spiteful, bitter, vengeful fauxconservatives believes that the ONLY way to get control of the border is to build a fence and expel everyone not here legally. It is NOT the only way, and it is not the smartest way, and it is not the most painless way..., hell, it ain't even a GOOD way. Even those who don't buy a market approach (aka ...., "more" open borders vs "less" open borders and "controlled" amnesty vs "unlimited" amnesty) to the problem don't advocate the kind of draconian "PUNISH THE BUSINESS OWNER" gestapo tactics some of you people advocate. If you could see thru your own anger for half a second you would know that true conservatives believe in freedom and want to see the benefits of freedom expanded to all who can reasonably benefit. Police action to fix a problem needs to be weighed ALWAYS against the potential infringements on freedom, and you have NO idea what you are asking for. Faux conservatives continually rant as though there was only one of two choices: Slam the door shut and expel all foreigners or simply allow the border to be a sieve with no oversight. And..., it really doesn't matter if you restrain from pointing out the sneering condescension and slurs or just say "screw it, I am going to call em like I see em, some of you people are just haters." Either way gets the same apoplectic gush of name calling, groundless accusations, fatuous objections, and just plain lies.
It IS descipable when people place their neighbors in danger (as it is UNSAFE for 10 people to live in a 2 bedroom house) by fire hazards, etc... all to send money to another economy that doesn't care about ours at all.
If I want to invite my whole extended family of 30 people to live with me to save money and send every dime I have to Bangkok, it is, simply, none of your damn business. I once had a client who owned chinese restaurants. She owned a home and she had BUNK BEDS in the living room and in her room and the second bedroom. Her extended family lived there and they operated 3 restaurants. They sacrificed personal comfort and in 8 years all of them bought (almost all in cash) three VERY nice homes in exclusive subdivisions. They were willing to sacrifice for a goal they had. You, obviously, think it "unsafe" to do so, although there are no stated covenant restrictions in this particular neighborhood to the number of persons per dwelling. If you think it is "unsafe" then there is no need to get the fed involved. Check the zoning restrictions/covenants, and if there is a violation, demand that the local authorities enforce the zoning/housing restrictions, or get the local homeowners to enact covenants and then file suit against the homeowner for violation (you may have a case for depressing property values if there are restrictive covenants and the place is a dorm.... I know of local citizens in Atlanta who got rid of a crackhouse that way). Me? I think the idea of being "unsafe" in a 2 bedroom house is just a sour dyspeptic complaint that some people will sacrifice when it might be inconvenient, especially if they already have a hobby horse they are riding.
Believe it or not, if robots can perform heart surgery on human beings, they can harvest crops. Several companies in California have been working on robotic harvesters and other mechanical harvesters, but the powerful United Farmworkers Union has thwarted forward progress on this.
Actually, all we have PROVED is that you are, like many immigration freepers, cloaking your own prejudice behind a thin pretention of concern for upholding the law. How do I know this? Just follow your post..., next:
Were these people here legally? I doubt it. Do you think that job you offered had a 50% cushion of labor charge? (I seriously doubt it) So this kind of points to a scenario where Jose'and Jose-B were not here legally.
Wrong, Homer. You see, I have a small financial services company ( I invest money, broker mortgages, and have an insurance brokerage ), and these guys came to my office to get paid. Across the hall is our branch that sells INSURANCE, and these guys were shopping liability and work comp. They asked if we did insurance, and I sent them to the girl across the hall. She came over and asked what my "feel" for them was (what company?, we have ranges from the best to spotty) My best companies (Safeco, Hartford) demand legitimate SS numbers, or tax id numbers and a 3 year loss run. All three of these guys were legal. Two are on green cards and one is a US citizen. This was one I just happened to know about. But, I did not know before they bid, but I DO know that the white guy who bid against them had two hispanic laborers. Should I ask to see their green cards? Get their fingerprints and send them to the FBI? More entertainment below:
Now your complicit in tax fraud. If you yourself had more than a luke warm 70 IQ you would have smelled something fishy about this business deal. So basically, you pitted a few legit business men (who's estimates were all in the same ballpark) against some scumbag tax cheat business guy...to your advantage. You're just as bad as the tax cheat / criminals crawling across our borders.
#1) legally, you are complicit in "tax fraud" when you knowingly and deliberately HIRE (not contract, Einstein, there is a difference) an illegal and knowingly and deliberately utilize false tax info (bad SS or ID) to withold (or avoid witholding). The law states you have to ask for an ID.... TO HIRE them (please reference above distinction between hire and contract). It does NOT say you have to say "Wait a minute here, you greaser! You a MEXICAN and I think you mightuh FORGED this card..., Lets see some more proof....." although I am aware that to be a "true conservative" here on immigraphobialand on FR I might be required to follow some similiar script. On your remark on my IQ, you probably have it partly right. If I were really smart I would not be down 13,000 dollars on some S&P puts. If I were smart I would be rich. However, if I were smart and rich I still don't think I would be a hysterical antilatino rant who threw out false and idiotic assumptions about which I was clueless. The fun continues:
I'll bet dollars for donuts Martin wasn't running his business legally and paid his indentured servants off the books, thus enabling himself to lop 50% profit off the top. No LEGAL labor based business that I have ever heard of has that percentage of profit.
I would bet dollars for donuts that almost every contractor out there, white, black, or latino doesn't declare all his income or wages. If that comes as a shock and a surprise to you, then you are so damn naive I am amazed you can make it out the door in the morning. Some of the best and most honest contractors I know low ball their labor for the purpose of bidding work comp, and have to adjust their figures during the year. You are clueless and hapless. That is really not bad, as I know alot of people who are naive about stuff like this, but what is NOT ok is assuming you do, assuming you know your anal sphincter from a hole in the ground on this particular case, and then making accusations on that basis. You do have company here on the immigration boards, though. Finally:
Once again, thank you for proving my point. I gave you the rope, and you hung yourself nicely with it
I really don't know what you are talking about here..... guess I just joined you, huh? Should I announce that the water is warm and invite everyone else into the pool so we can all sing the happy idiot song together? Or should I give you a chance to learn something about the cant which you are reciting? Your call (splashing water happily)
..... "hung nicely".... my wife will love that one.
This is a perfect example why true conservatives do not trust the administration anymore.
What "Jerkoff" did was LIE to the American people. To imply that 11 million illegal aliens are here working is a lie. Some are working, a high percentage are drawing welfare benefits and medicaid for hospitalization.
It is also typical Sean Hannity not to point this out to a Republican who evades the truth that the illegal aliens COST US MONEY. It is more costly to pay for their care than it would be to round them up and deport them.
Same with O'Reilly when he interviews Cabinet people and/or the Prez, he asks the tough questions but doesn't badger them - although they deserve to be badgered on some issues, like this one.
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.