Posted on 06/17/2002 1:50:25 PM PDT by Tancredo Fan
STEIN REPORT XXXXX Monday, June 17 2002 14:53:17 EDT XXXXX
TANCREDO, IMMIGRATION REFORM CAUCUS TO CALL FOR TROOPS ON BORDER
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO) and other members of the House Immigration Reform Caucus will announce a new border security initiative at a press conference tomorrow. See the Immigration Reform Caucus release for more information.
Do you support or oppose Drivers' Licences for Illegals?
Do you support or oppose the use of matricular consul (sp?) IDs for Illegals?
Should Illegals be allowed to open bank accounts in the US?
Should children who are themselves Illegals be allowed to attend taxpayer funded schools?
Are you OK with round-ups of Illegals at "day laborer" sites?
The IRS is currently sending letters to employers notifying them that some employees are using false Social Security numbers. As a result, these employees, many of whom are Illegals, are being fired, but not deported. Shouldn't the IRS cooperate with the INS and other law enforcement on this, rather than giving a warning to Illegals to get out of Dodge?
Do you support any "regularization" or "normalization" programs that Amnesty Illegals, such as Section 245(i)?
If so, does it bother you that these Illegals displace law-abiding immigrant candidates who are willing to play by the rules?
Hardly. It's a crime for them to come here.
You've said yourself they should be deported.
I support the use of matricular cards.
For me it is prima facia evidence of illegal status in the US and makes it easier for me to remove them.
But, I don't think any businesses or organizations, other then the INS, should except them.
Bingo.
They are licenses to commit crime.
There are so proud of them, they will show it to me when I ask for it. They will hide their fake green card and SSN card, but they will proudly show their matricular card.
They're not coming to the USA to take real jobs. Their coming here to commit crimes.
Your agreement with that falsehood is disapointing.
Begging the question by way of misrepresentation.
By definition, all Illegals are criminals. They are breaking the law by being here.
They also break the law when they take jobs. All of these things are crimes.
All of these crimes are things Illegals do intentionally. It's what they plan to do when the cross the border. They intend to commit crimes.
Illegals come here to commit crimes.
At least one plays for the L.A. Galaxy. So, I suppose you're right.
A horrid generalization on your part.
Dude, you've said yourself you'd deport the Illegals.
Why is that? Because they're lawbreakers.
Lawbreakers are criminals. That's not a generalization, that's a definition.
You're avoiding the truth, again.
Let's get to it... You claim you'd deport Illegals, but you're one of their biggest apologists on this forum. You oppose every statement critical of them, regardless of the inherent truth contained therein. Why is that?
Ad hominems on sale?
Better get a bigger kitty picture again, you're slipping.
Talk about avoiding the truth.
Jobs, dude, jobs.
No, I won $10 bucks off the illegal that cleans your sheets.
USA! USA! USA!
*Ad hominems on sale?
Jobs, dude, jobs.I presume you're aware that ad hominem fallacies are about name-calling.
Since I didn't call you names, you just engaged in a non sequiter.
Laws, dude, laws.Jobs for Illegals are not our responsibility, they're the responsibility of the home countries to where you've said you think the Illegals need to be deported.
On the subject of fallacies, here you flirt with both ad hominem and guilt-by-association.
Nice string you've got going.
Aint gunna happen....
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.