Posted on 05/05/2010 1:39:35 PM PDT by neverdem
The push is on for providing amnesty to the estimated 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in this country. The supporters of this effort include President Barack Obama, former president George W. Bush, Senator John McCain, Majority Leader Harry Reid and New York Senator Chuck Schumer. Senator Schumer is now chairman of the immigration subcommittee previously chaired by the late Senator Ted Kennedy, a major amnesty proponent.
Amnesty supporters see themselves as taking the high road and claim that amnesty opponents are opposed to immigration, when nothing could be further from the truth. Many amnesty opponents actually support expanding legal immigration. Currently, the U.S. has the highest legal immigration in the world. Every year, we allow 750,000 immigrants to enter the country legally and make them eligible for citizenship within five years. Two hundred and fifty thousand aslyees are also permitted to enter annually. Those legal immigrants have the right to work and earn a living; the asylees are eligible to work six months after applying to work. If we need more immigrants, as many think we do to expand the workforce of our graying population, then we can easily increase the number of legal immigrants.
If we give the current illegals amnesty, you can be sure that 20 or so years from now, there will be a clamor for another amnesty bill as the illegals will continue to pour in. For example, the Simpson-Mazzoli bill, adopted by Congress in 1986, was hailed as the last amnesty bill we would need because the borders of the U.S., then a sieve, would be better protected. However, our borders continued to be porous, and the number of illegals burgeoned, and here we are again with the illegals and their supporters seeking amnesty once more for ever larger numbers.
No country in the world has open borders that foreigners can enter at will, certainly not Mexico. Arizona has an estimated 500,000 illegal aliens living in the state and in 2009, the border patrol agents arrested 241,000 illegal aliens, which is why that state enacted controversial legislation out of frustration. Arizona's citizens are outraged by the presence of many criminals among the people crossing their border - remember there is an ongoing drug war in Mexico with thousands of Mexicans being killed and wounded south of the border by other Mexicans. Arizona does not want that war to spill over into Arizona. Arizona citizens are also distressed with the demands made by illegals upon medical and educational services.
Regrettably, the Arizona legislation went too far, allowing local police to ask individuals "reasonably suspected" to be illegal immigrants for identifying papers. This conjures up images of Nazis engaging in Jew catching in Germany. On the other hand, it would be sound and defensible policy to have the local police examine at the workplace the identity papers of all employees to ascertain whether they are legally allowed to work and, most important, ascertain if employers had intentionally violated current U.S. laws requiring employers to check the immigration status of hired workers. Those employers who intentionally violate the law should be pursued criminally and, if convicted, go to prison. Regrettably, this is not what is happening. If that policy were strictly enforced, illegal aliens would go home, since they are here primarily to get a job and send money home to their families. Recently, I saw an estimate that a million illegals had returned home because of our recession and unemployment in the U.S. which is now at 9.7 percent.
Amnesty supporters refuse to use the term illegal aliens, preferring instead undocumented aliens. They should call them what they are: illegal. Amnesty proponents also should acknowledge that an open border policy is indefensible and irrational and has not been adopted by any other country.
If open borders were such a good idea, why don't we try on a limited scale simply expanding the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) among Mexico, Canada and the U.S. and allow anyone living in those three countries access to jobs in any of them? Would Canada consent to that? Would Mexico? I doubt it.
A week ago, Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Great Britain had to apologize to a woman voter for referring to her as "bigoted" when she voiced her objections to millions of Europeans in the European Union lawfully flooding into Great Britain and taking jobs. I don't know whether she is bigoted in her attitude toward other Europeans, but she doesn't have to be a bigot to object to the English having to compete for jobs and services such as healthcare and education with immigrants from other countries.
Mark McKinnon, who was a senior adviser to John McCain and President George W. Bush, was quoted in The New York Times of April 28th, as stating, "Immigration is the most explosive issue I've seen in my political career." According to The Times, Mr. McKinnon "...also supported giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship." But, in his view, "an election year is the worst time to move good public policy on this issue."
During the Bush presidency, amnesty proponents were twice defeated when they tried to shove their self-defined "good policy" down the throats of the voters. Amnesty advocates believed, as they do now, that they know what is best for us, but the American public stood up and said "no." In an election year, the voters can throw the bums out, and that is why Congress fears to bring the issue up before the November elections.
I predict the Schumer legislation supported by President Obama and a whole host of prominent public officials and the media will fail. I also believe it is outrageous to threaten understandably frustrated, but misguided, Arizona with boycotts because we disagree with the protective procedures it has adopted. Let's leave the legality of those procedures to the courts. We are one country and should not be boycotting one another. Persuasion should be our tool of choice, not punishment.
Take a hard line or get out of the way.
Amen, Chief!
I can guarantee you they're not headed back to Mexico, but for California. The smarter ones are going to figure out how to get around the new law.
The distortions have been so ugly, that I cannot talk about it without spitting like Chris Matthews....lol.
He got a (the only) standing ovation at the Cardinal O'Connor Memorial Mass, and brought tears to my eyes.
Because he has the courage of his convictions, among them being a democrat.
Correct. His stated reason was that it would make it easier for illegals to report crimes. It should be mentioned, however, that New York’s status as a “sanctuary city” was supported by Mayors Dinkins, Giuliani, and Bloomberg, and is unlikely to be repealed anytime soon.
The distortions are having the desired effect. They are leaving in droves ;-)
Arizona estimated that it had 600,000 illegals when they passed the law.
As of 2006, California already had nearly 3 million illegals -- 25% of the US total for illegal immigrants. What in the hell are we going to do with 600,000 more?
And sadly Koch is a Jew too. I have black democrat associates and they want no analogies of themselves (or their ancestors) and illegals being the same situation, being their ancestors were brought here involuntarily. They support the Arizona law.
I was really impressed with Sarah Palins comments of strong support for Arizona last week on Hannity. Many others on FNC had to give their ‘concerns’ to give democrats talking points to accuse us of racism..But she didnt dodge the issue at all.
The one who are doing legitimate work are doing jobs Americans are being bribed not to do. The welfare thing is out of control -- free housing, free food, free medical care. Little wonder they don't want to work for low wages. And employers are saddled with an expensive web of laws and taxes and "worker's rights" which make it absolutely impossible for them to hire legal American workers to do the work the employer needs done, at a price the employer can afford to pay, and only for as long as the employer needs the work done and/or is satisfied with how the work is being done. If they hire an American, they're immediately up to their ears in federal and state laws, unemployment taxes and other withholding requirements, often required to provide medical insurance, subject to phony discrimination, sexual harassment, and worker's comp claims, and if the worker turns out to be a dud, it's often more expensive to get rid of him/her than to just keep paying him/her and hire yet another person to actually get the work done. Much as the whole illegal immigration things angers me, I have quite a bit of sympathy for the employers, who are simply responding rationally to the maze of unconstitutional laws that interfere with the free operation of the labor market at employers' expense.
He did? From what I read during the election, he turned away from McCain because of his choosing Sarah! Apparently, he initially supported McCain. Then he decided he wouldn’t because of Sarah, then turned to Obama; only the Lord knows why! That was a shame. However, he’s been sort-of making up for it!
Call them what they are: Invading Barbarians.
So I suppose asking someone if they have a ticket to get into an event conjures up the NAZIs rounding up Jews then. Good grief, some folks are dumb.
Children are required to have a social security card from birth (at least I believe it’s that early) these days. Is that NAZI Germany too? When people have to identify those kids on their tax returns using the SS#s, is that NAZI Germany?
I mean, all the times we are asked for our IDs. Does that conjure up NAZI Germany?
Immigrants are required to keep their papers on them at all times, so that if they are challenged they can verify if they are here legally. So tell me, why are they required to carry those papers if nobody can ask them for them, because it reminds folks of NAZI Germany?
God, the excuses are preposterous.
You miss the point. Illegals are a ‘race’ protected by special rights that us white males (and AuntB) do not enjoy. Didnt you see Rev Al is in Arizona protesting? His slave great great grandfather was an illegal that sneaked in the country to pick Cotton in the South, jobs whites wouldn't do at those wages.
I caught a little bit of the Medved show today. He was talking about how what he called the “anti immigration” groups were also heavily into pro abortion. I don’t know if this is true, but I am quite certain, that Medved is a tool, a fool and a bit of a schmendrick.
Just, ...wow.
From what I remember, he really didn’t say he was for Sarah or McCain, but he did take the press to task for the shameful way they went after not only her but her family..He, being a long time democrat, I wouldn’t think he would ever vote republican, but his article to the press was a good one..He was one of a few democrats that thought the press was shameful in their reporting and smearing of the whole Palin family...
bit of a schmendrick....don’t hear that word too often
Medved is the paragon of calm reason. He is not bombastical like Rush or Beck. This calmness masks a clinical insanity on immigration. He is fairly devout and this makes him too other worldly. Lost in space on the hard practicalities of illegal immigration and how his beloved amnesty would flood America with at least 50 million third worlders
He's in hell playing craps with Saddam Hussein and Hitler at this very moment.
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.