Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Up to 61 million Immigrants Might Flow into U.S. Under Proposed Reform
Rocky Mountain News ^ | July 1, 2006 | Robert Rector

Posted on 07/01/2006 7:15:40 AM PDT by kellynla

Think the immigration debate is mainly about giving amnesty to the 10 million illegals already here? Think again. Amnesty is a drop in the bucket. The real issue is the staggering increase in legal immigration hidden in the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, recently passed in the Senate. By a ratio of about 4-1, U.S. voters would prefer less immigration, not more. But the Senate bill would do just the opposite. The original bill would have allowed as many as 100 million people to legally immigrate to the United States over the next 20 years. We're talking about a seismic shift of unprecedented proportions.

Facing criticism, the Senate has amended the bill - which now would allow "only" 61 million new immigrants. That still more than doubles the current legal immigration rate, from 1 million a year now to 2.5 million.

Current law would let 19 million legal immigrants enter the United States over the next 20 years; the Senate immigration bill would add an extra 42 million.

Why such extraordinary growth? Consider how the new law would work.

Under the Senate bill, immigrants could enter or attain lawful status within the country through nine channels. In each channel, immigrants would gain permanent residence and the right to become citizens:

(Excerpt) Read more at rockymountainnews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: aliens; borderlessness; employerswhocheat; givemecheaplabor; illegals; iloveillegals; iwantcheaplabor; knownothing; rant; sameoldsameold; teardownthatwall; thebordersucks; whine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 261-276 next last
To: Gaffer

"But, he needs to be convinced somehow."

I'm afraid that "convincing" is not going to happen.
We will just have to make sure that the 2008 GOP candidate for POTUS will ENFORCE THE LAWS especially the immigration laws.


181 posted on 07/02/2006 8:26:43 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited; FreeReign
FreeReign:

"Consult" does not equal permission"

AmericaUnited:

"That's what you call manufacturing "red-meat", to be thrown at all the mindless moon-barkers. They then will rant, rave, bark up a storm all about something that is a made up lie/distortion"


You mean mindless moon-barkers like your rabid LaRaza Nazi pals, right?

Now let's look at this "consultation" that the traitorous US Senate managed to insert into their bill again, shall we?

From Thomas Sowell:


" In Washington, the Senate immigration bill has been selling our birthright for a message of political pottage.

Far from "controlling the borders" as advertised, this bill reduces our existing control of the borders. Under a provision inserted at the eleventh hour by Senator Arlen Specter, the Senate bill forbids the federal government from building a fence without first consulting with the Mexican government.

In fact, state and local governments are also forbidden by this bill to take any border control actions without first consulting with their Mexican counterparts. In other words, if the city of San Diego wants to put up any sort of barriers, it would have to consult with the municipal authorities in Tijuana before doing so.

This legislation was never about border control. The laws already on the books at this very moment allow us to control the borders, to build any fence we choose, without consulting the government of Mexico."



http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/06/birthright_sale.html

This Bill FORBIDS federal, state and local authorities from even attempting to build any wall without consulting Mexicans. Sounds like seeking permission from Mexicans to me.
This bill is simply nuts. It deserves to be killed, and it will. John MacCain and The Swimmer are power drunk and insane.
182 posted on 07/02/2006 9:19:35 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
the Senate bill forbids the federal government from building a fence without first consulting with the Mexican government.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN GET PERMISSION FROM MEXICO. You post 1000 words, and have said NOTHING NEW, absolutely nothing to rebut "Consult does not equal permission".

You prove my point that you and your type are just irrational, emotional, nonthinking boobs.

183 posted on 07/02/2006 9:45:57 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: hershey
It's actually less than that. Mexico is the single largest source of illegals but the do not make up 85% of all illegals. You have tons of other illegals from Central and South America plus Asia as well. You then have all those people who over stay their visas for years.
184 posted on 07/02/2006 9:46:19 AM PDT by Cyropaedia ("Virtue cannot separate itself from reality without becoming a principal of evil...".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
con·sult v. To exchange views; confer.

In the future, if you don't know what a word means, look it up in a dictionary. It will save you from barking at the moon in public over your own misunderstanding and making a fool out of yourself.

185 posted on 07/02/2006 9:52:56 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Hope so. But I don't see anyone (Republican) that would uphold ALL of the laws from the pitiful subset that is available now.


186 posted on 07/02/2006 9:55:12 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
"THAT DOES NOT MEAN GET PERMISSION FROM MEXICO"

No screaming!
Bottom line:
According to the Senate Bill, no American authority (federal, state, local) can build any wall without consulting Mexico.
That's permission, and veto power for Mexico alright.

"You post 1000 words, and have said NOTHING NEW, absolutely nothing to rebut "

So far, all you have posted here is hysterical ranting from your LaRaza talking points.
Screaming Mexican Nazi invective is not going to get you anywhere.
You will just end up bursting a gut,which is not necessarily a bad thing, if you ask me.
187 posted on 07/02/2006 9:57:47 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
"You prove my point that you and your type are just irrational, emotional, nonthinking boobs."

You want to see unthinking, robotic, hysterical, moronic, brain dead, Nazi, vermin, you should go back and look at the videos of your rabid Mexican illegals "demonstrations".
They are the biggest bunch of idiots I have ever seen.
Their rabid demonstrations are the best thing that could have happened to the anti-illegal immigrant movement in this country.
Talk about stupid!
188 posted on 07/02/2006 10:02:53 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
And if Mexico claims that they need "more or additional "consultation/talks" or that they have not been "adequately consulted" or that they have a host of important concerns that "require more consultation" that were not sufficiently addressed in previous talks...etc., etc.,. There are a dozen different ways the Mexican government can exploit this if they truly wanted to.

My point is if there is absolutely no need for any permission whatsoever then there is absolutely no need to explicitly require formal talks/consultation with the Mexican government. Period. It our fence and we can build it if we want to.

189 posted on 07/02/2006 10:05:48 AM PDT by Cyropaedia ("Virtue cannot separate itself from reality without becoming a principal of evil...".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: Cyropaedia
"And if Mexico claims that they need "more or additional "consultation/talks" or that they have not been "adequately consulted" or that they have a host of important concerns that "require more consultation" that were not sufficiently addressed in previous talks...etc., etc.,. There are a dozen different ways the Mexican government can exploit this if they truly wanted to."

Yup.
In fact they already are.
Saw a segment on O'Reilley Friday, in which the Mexican foreign minister is already threatening to sue the American government if any of the national guardsmen at the border apprehend any Mexican illegals?
Why?
Because the US Senate voted to fiscally take away any arrest powers they might have had, and expressly prevents our Guardsmen from arresting illegals. And of course the Resident and Homeland Security say so too.
Its just sickening.
Needles to say, O'Reilley was incensed, and so was I.
190 posted on 07/02/2006 10:13:31 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Cyropaedia
"My point is if there is absolutely no need for any permission whatsoever then there is absolutely no need to explicitly require formal talks/consultation with the Mexican government. Period. It our fence and we can build it if we want to."

Correct.
In fact, there are already laws on the books at this very moment allow us to control the borders, to build any fence we choose, without consulting the government of Mexico.
So why is the US Senate allowing Mexico to interfere in our internal affairs now?
191 posted on 07/02/2006 10:17:15 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
>>con·sult v. To exchange views; confer.

In the future, if you don't know what a word means, look it up in a dictionary. It will save you from barking at the moon in public over your own misunderstanding and making a fool out of yourself.

Well here's an angle that you obviously haven't thought about but I know that the Mexicans have : ( From a future Washington Times headline ):

"Mexican Authorities Refuse to Take Part in Any Talks Over Proposed Border Wall Until Concessions Are Made Regarding "Undocumented" Immigrants."

Who will wind up looking like the fools then...?

192 posted on 07/02/2006 10:20:03 AM PDT by Cyropaedia ("Virtue cannot separate itself from reality without becoming a principal of evil...".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

I was. When are you?


193 posted on 07/02/2006 10:26:25 AM PDT by jwh_Denver (I'm politicked off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
"con·sult v. To exchange views; confer. "

Ok wise guy.
Our government is bound BY LAW to consult these Mexican clowns.
So say a local authority wants to "consult" some tin pot mayor pf a Mexican town.
All the guy has to do is, simply "go on vacation" indefinitely, or be "out of town" or be "regretfully unavailable" like forever.
Since our own Senate has made it illegal for us to build any wall without "consultimng these Mexicans, that means, we are basically screwed.
We don't build any walls.

"In the future, if you don't know what a word means, look it up in a dictionary. It will save you from barking at the moon in public over your own misunderstanding and making a fool out of yourself."

I suggest you take your own advice, Mr LaRaza/MEChA.
BTW. I'll bet I know more about the English language than you do.
You see, unlike you, Mexican is not my first language.
194 posted on 07/02/2006 10:32:21 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Cyropaedia

"Who will wind up looking like the fools then...?"

Mr. AmericaUnited aka MexicoUnited?


195 posted on 07/02/2006 10:33:58 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: Cyropaedia
My point is if there is absolutely no need for any permission whatsoever then there is absolutely no need to explicitly require formal talks/consultation with the Mexican government. Period. It our fence and we can build it if we want to.

I do agree 100% with you on this. That being said, I really don't like hysterical ranting over made-up, phony boogeyman issues.

And as far as Mexico stalling or playing games, the langauge says "consult with", NOT "consult with till there is mutal satisfaction of terms of both parties, blah, blah, blah." or "consult with till the other side is satisfied". Don't try to make this into a GIANT BOOGEYMAN that it's not.

196 posted on 07/02/2006 10:36:18 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
So say a local authority wants to "consult" some tin pot mayor pf a Mexican town. All the guy has to do is, simply "go on vacation" indefinitely, or be "out of town" or be "regretfully unavailable" like forever.

The langauge says "consult with", NOT "consult with till there is mutal satisfaction of terms of both parties, blah, blah, blah." or "consult with till the other side is satisfied". Consult with could also be satified by sending a notice of intent and giving them a deadline to respond. PERIOD! But you need to create a GIANT, PHONY BOOGEYMAN ISSSUE in your own head. Get help!

197 posted on 07/02/2006 10:41:22 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
"And as far as Mexico stalling or playing games, the langauge says "consult with", NOT "consult with till there is mutal satisfaction of terms of both parties, blah, blah, blah." "

Tell me how you propose to "consult" with a guy that is deliberately "out of town" forever?
Remember, this guy knows that BY LAW, you have to "consult" with him before you can do anything.
He has every reason, to NOT "consult " with you.
What you gonna do 'bout it?
198 posted on 07/02/2006 10:47:20 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
"Consult with could also be satified by sending a notice of intent and giving them a deadline to respond. PERIOD! "

Read your own definition in # 185 again will ya, Mr LaRaza?
199 posted on 07/02/2006 10:49:43 AM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
Tell me how you propose to "consult" with a guy that is deliberately "out of town" forever?

There are a thousand ways to overcome your BIG, SELF-CREATED BOOGEYMAN. If the mayor is out of town, you send notice to the acting mayor, or second-in-charge, or town council, etc., etc. So simple, except for people like you who need to scare themselves like 11 year old girls at a scary movie.

200 posted on 07/02/2006 11:00:39 AM PDT by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 261-276 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson