AMNESTY by BUSH - The Truth about Section 245(i)

March 19th, 2002 | Compiled by Sabertooth

[FITZ]

The solution to the problem is to get Mexico to help and to help Mexico make conditions such that people will stay home.

That's what Bush should be demanding of Fox. With all those oil reserves in Mexico ---plus the fact they've allowed the oil infrastructure to decay, there should be plenty of jobs for them im Mexico. We allow Mexico to stay extremely corrupt, it seems they'd rather make their money by being the number one supplier of illegal drugs rather than be a decent country.

[Mike Johnson]

...it was directed at about 200,000 people to reunite families...

Needless to say, I have questions:

1) So the illegals who took advangage of the last amnesty are now entitled to bring in all their siblings? And you think this is a good idea?

2)What is the source of the figure 200,000? How do you know it won't be 2,000,000?

3)Why do you think it's a good idea to reward people who have violated our immigration laws by giving an amnesty, full or partial, for any reason?

[Sabertooth]

I can believe people who are my elected officials, or I can believe a bunch of people who are exaggerating and making claims about blanket amnesty. When one points out that President Bush says NO blanket amnesty, you guys just howl that that's not what he really means.

There you go with the "blanket amnesty" straw man again.

Funny how the meaning of that phrase shifts so quickly for those of you who obsess over it.

When a mini-amnesty is pointed out, you run around saying, "it's not a BLANKET Amnesty!" As though that was the point. Yet when you do, you are at least making the correct distinction between a partial and a full ("blanket") amnesty.

However, when President Bush makes a promise against "blanket amnesty," and it's pointed out that this is not a promise against any or every partial Amnesty (which is consistent with the definition you were originally using in your straw man attempt), you feel its out of bounds.

I take President Bush at his word when he says he doesn't favor "blanket amnesty." I also believe that he's looking for any means possible, by any name possible, to grant Amnesty ("normalize," "regularize," etc.) to millions of Illegals.

Just not all of them. Hence: "no blanket amnesty."

[deport]

Not to worry...... We'll build some fences, station a few more troops along the 1,933 miles of Mexican-US border and issue papers to all citizens so that they can prove they are here legally. Then we'll set up check points within each state and along each state's border crossings and have everyone show their papers as the pass through the check points. Boy we'll have this under control then.... It will really be nice when we all get our papers to carry everywhere we go. Heck if we all just had a Charlie Brown blanket everything would be okay....

You have a good one now.... don't forget your papers when you leave to go out today.

[kylaka]

Once upon a time, I'd be content to wait for the Readers Digest "condensed version". RD got bought out by some liberal German company, so I can't do that any more. I gotta slog though the original text now, and cancel my subscription to RD. (RD has indeed taken a marked left turn too). Thanks for digging this out ST.

[grania]

Yep, the Byrd who voted against Impeachment, was a memeber of the KKK. That Byrd.

And your point is?...Fact is, he's supporting what Americans want on this one. GWB's support of immigration at this time in our history is unacceptable.

[Consort]

It seems to be more of a serape amnesty then a blanket amnesty because it covers less people.

[RnMomof7]

Call Robert Bird..Call Robert Bird..he is the only one left with any common sense..and boy does that mean we are in trouble

We have to encourage him not to trade the amnesty bill for some WV pork ( that is my biggest fear!)

[Miss Marple]

OK. I don't know what I'm talking about. Whatever.

When you have figures for the numbers of miles on the Mexican border, the number of miles currently fenced, and the amount of money it will cost to complete the fence, we will talk.

As far as enforcing the laws, I believe I just saw that Tyson was under prosecution for bringing in illegal aliens, something that wasn't done for the previous 8 years. But you stick to your view and wallow in your anger.

No point in arguing, is there? We simply disagree.

[Miss Marple]

Vell, let me zee yoor paperz!

[4Freedom]

MM, you sound like a typical bureaucrat. You want all kinds of numbers before we can talk about fencing the borders. Ok, I'll call Sears for an estimate. :-)

It'll be a drop in the bucket compared to what it will cost to support the next 11 million illegal aliens that cross the border.

Wow, that must be one hell of a big factory Tyson has there, if all 11 million illegal aliens, presently in the U.S., are working there. What a farce. 20 years and we have an ongoing investigation of Tyson's Chicken to show for all the anti-illegal immigration laws that are on the books.

More great detective work there, Miss Marple.

[Sabertooth]

As far as enforcing the laws, I believe I just saw that Tyson was under prosecution for bringing in illegal aliens, something that wasn't done for the previous 8 years. But you stick to your view and wallow in your anger.

That's great news about Tyson.

As for anger, I'm fed up with both parties on the matter of Illegals. There has been bipartisan malfeasance in enforcing our immigration laws for decades. I was angry with Clinton and Gore for their scuttling of many citizenship standards, as well as English-speaking requirements. And I'll freely acknowledge that this mini-Amnesty by Bush is an extension of an earlier one by Clinton.

But Clinton's gone, and I've no use for stomping on his effigy while the President I voted for breaks faith with the American People by shrugging off the "one time only" Amnesty promise of 1986.

I supported that Amnesty, and I've lived to regret it. It was a clarion call to Illegals, and my state has suffered. We've passed 10% and are headed to 15% Illegals in our population. There are 2 million Illegals in my county.

I honestly don't think you appreciate the magnitude of the problem here.

Any Amnesty for Illegals, regardless of size, only emboldens them, and draws more.

People North of the Mason-Dixon and East of the Mississippi who wax compassionate about reuniting Illegals with their families, etc. have that luxury because they don't have to live the consequences of their self-congratulation.

[Dane]

And your point is?...Fact is, he's supporting what Americans want on this one. GWB's support of immigration at this time in our history is unacceptable.

And please show me any quote where Bush says, everybody come to the US. Just one

You beleive the hyperbole and fear mongering and it is more than unacceptable it is sad.

[lucysmom]

"It seems to be more of a serape amnesty then a blanket amnesty because it covers less people."

Perhaps a poncho amnesty because it has holes in it.

[ATR]

The solution to the problem is to get Mexico to help and to help Mexico make conditions such that people will stay home.

This suggestion ignores the fact that the Mexican government's objectives are exactly the opposite. They benefit enormously from using mass emigration to the north as 1) a pressure valve for their overpopulated, mismanaged country and 2) a source of hard cash for their economy, via money sent home from emigrant workers. That's the good part.

The bad part is that they also see mass emigration to the US as an effective tool for gaining political leverage over their powerful neighbor to the north. By allowing dual citizenship they create a situation where Mexican nationals can become a significant electoral block in American politics, but still retain their identification with the home country. In coming years, they will influence this bloc's behavior at the American polls, and broker that influence in Washington to their benefit - and the average American's detriment. Also, in coming years almost all state and local government from Texas of California will be in the hands of Hispanics, whose national loyalty to Mexico will still be strong. They will govern strongly in the interest of Hispanics (having no appreciation for the caucasian, progressive ideals of equal treatment and civil rights) and ultimately will seek to reintegrate that area with Mexico.

This has been throughly thought through in Mexico, and they have every intention of trying to make it happen. They are not at all interested in keeping people home in Mexico.

[Sabertooth]

Any thoughts here?

[hobbes1]

One. Going about it this way, is faster and cheaper than Having that Crack Staff at the INS going after them to deport them, only to have them return.

This problem was exacerbated by the previous administrations rush just before '96. THAT WAS THE SENT MESSAGE that created this mess. Fixing it requires one of two things, documenting them, and making them LPR, or CATCHING them, Deporting them, and then Probably documenting them.

The INS is barely capable of the first. They are not Capable of the second.

[american spirit]

Good post. Let's add....cease all forms of welfare-style aid to these people such as HUD assistance, WIC/food stamps, free medical, etc. THIS IS CORPORATE WELFARE AND THE MAIN MAGNET DRAWING THESE PEOPLE INTO THE USA. This whole scam allows big and small businesses to EVADE their fair share of taxes and amounts to another tax on us suckers in the form of higher and higher medical premiums.

[Mike Johnson]

How about we just allow local police to detain illegals when they're busted for some other reason? I seem to recall a story from last week in which police in Tallahassee(?), Florida, were forced to release a group of illegals because the INS couldn't be bothered to pick them up. How about we streamline the deportation procedure for persons caught illegally entering the country? How about we don't release, on bail, persons ordered to be deported? How about we deny welfare benefits (including unemployment compensation) to illegal immigrants? Actually, as things are, the cops can demand your ID just about any time they want, but that isn't really necessary to enforce the immigration laws.

[goldstategop]

Its as clear as mud. Robert Byrd gets it. Why didn't Dick Armey? Americans in the post 9-11 environment want less immigration and more emphasis placed on securing our borders. This is not the time to grant amnesty to illegal aliens. Its time to put America first. The Senate should kill Section 245(i).