Posted on 07/02/2003 5:22:03 PM PDT by xrp
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:36:44 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
WASHINGTON
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Take it to the Supreme Court.
The Feds agree with your opinion. Hanging this issue on Bush makes you look silly.
Right back at you RudeOne....
Please look into your crystal ball and tell us which border, Mexico or Canada, the terrorists who'll carry out the next major attack against the United States will cross over.
Ask Tancredo...I don't rely on predictions and fear mongering.
9/11 Repeat Would be Fault of Bush, Congress, GOP Lawmaker Charges (Says Tom Tancredo)
[CBP Press release]: Funding for these additional permanent positions was provided in the fiscal year 2003 budget passed by Congress.
New funding had to be provided for these new permanent positions. If these positions were being transfered, then no new funding would be needed.
The bottom line is -- 375 existing employees will fill 375 new positions and 375 new hires will then fill the 375 vacated, existing positions.
Where are you referencing this from?
The press release was at http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/newsroom/. The site is currently down -- it last worked several hours back. I suggest if it doesn't work tonight, then try it tomorrow morning and then ping me if you feel like having a normal conversation about it.
The wording in the press release does not specifically use the word "replace". Instead it only uses the quote that I previously supplied to you which is as follows; "Funding for these additional permanent positions was provided in the fiscal year 2003 budget passed by Congress".
I can't guarantee that the workers will be replaced. Instead, I can only use the best reasonable interpretation of the quote I gave to you above plus the fact that there is nothing written in the press release that says that they won't be replaced.
It all comes down the the best reasonable interpretation of the quote I gave you...or possibly we can email them to get a les ambigious statemnt on if there will be replacements or not.
You know what, PRND21, this is an issue I've had to deal with for the last twenty years. I know you have too, so stop the B.S. You know it's a problem and you also know we shouldn't be quasi legitimizing these people by recognizing their foreign docments. Bush could stop it in five minutes if he wished to.
Mexico can issue any card they damn well please.
Yep they sure can. And do we have to acknowledge it? Do we have to okay banks using it. Do we have any tools we can use to prevent that? You bet your ass.
US States accept it.
Oh really. Thanks.
Take it to the Supreme Court.
I don't have to. We have a President of the United States who swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, and that includes Section IV Article IV. Section IV Article IV doesn't make any references to granting amnesty to invaders.
The Feds agree with your opinion. Hanging this issue on Bush makes you look silly.
Yes, I guess expecting George to honor his oath is rather silly isn't it. Well at least in your mind it does.
Where are you referencing this from?
Yes!
2) Canada is laxing drug laws so there is money to be had in catching them too
Turf interruptus????
In 2000 we had 11,000,000 illegal immigrants in this nation, conservatively. Since we finalized the granting of amnesty in the 1989 time frame, we have had at least one million a year new illegals flood across our borders. In the eight years Bush will be in office, there will be around another eight to ten million enter our nation. That will be roughly twenty million illegals. Of those twenty million illegals, there will be perhaps as many as 8 million women of child bearing age. They are not going to be celebate, so we're talking about an additional five to ten million children from this group, conservativly.
By 2010 we're talking about between 20 and 30 million illegal immigrants existing on our soil. By comparison California only has 35 million or so occupants.
While you and I sit here going toe to toe, our nation is being overrun by illegal aliens.
Right now we're catching between ten and twenty percent of the people coming across the southern border. We catch hundreds of thousands of them each year. Nobody has any idea how many are actually coming in. It could be double what we think it is. Who knows?
Thanks for the discussion. As it appears you may be right and I have said I will go by your comments and clipping, I appologize.
Appology excepted -- thanks.
BTW, I was a Buchanan supporter back in 1992 when he ran well but lost in the N.H. primary. That, IMO was our last shot. The barn door has been wide open for years and I've become more fatalistic about it.
JB, does the BP know about this route?
Did you follow the Mexican elections and see the serious turn to the Left they just took??? Some conservatives aren't they!!! They're headed Communist. Thank Fox!
Stupid comment. The Socialist Machine in Mexico hindered his every move.
He (and the Right) failed and you seem pleased.
You and others here on FR got what you wanted...more PRI.
Enjoy the increase in illegals.
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.