A Few Questions For Die-Hard Bush Supporters

Toogood Reports ^ | June 5, 2002 | Lee R. Shelton IV

[Marine Inspector]

To be truthful, no one on the ground in INS is impressed with Border Security bill. Other than a possible pay raise for me, it really does very little in improving the border.

The student tracking only computerizes what we already have, which does not track anyone. The INS and Clinton killed the best hope for a great student tracking system a few years ago.

All the high-tech visas in the world will not stop the 2 - 4 million that cross the border illegally every year.

Nothing in this bill would have prevented Atta from getting into the country. It would have slowed down their training, but the terrorist are pretty patient and would have waited.

[Marine Inspector]

Forgot to add that nothing in this bill will go into effect, because it has not been funded and probable will not be funded until after the November elections.

[patriciaruth]

Would an immigration lawyer have a better understanding of 245(i) if my Congressman seems hazy on what he is voting for?

[patriciaruth]

no one on the ground in INS is impressed

Tell me, are they actually sitting on the ground? Is that why the paperwork is backlogged for a year?

Ignore the feeble joke. I'm actually interested in your opinion about what the problem is and what would fix it, if you would be so good as to opine on the subject.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"In the US, if you get caught by the INS, you get your finger prints taken and a nice photo. After that we give to a stern lecture and then we take you back to the border and ask you politely not to return."

Which is far better than punishing someone who is trying to sneak in by keeping him here, feeding him, clothing him, providing medical care, and weight-lifting equipment for a period of time, with the option of staying longer as a reward for bad behavior.

[NittanyLion]

Very thoughtful post. Don't let the fact that you got no responses back deter you - your posts on this thread are the best of any I've seen.

FWIW, I think the GOP really needs to step back and define what they stand for as well. When you're the opposition party, it's easy to become obsessed with gaining power - to the point where your platform becomes secondary. It's been a couple years now, and examining where they're looking to go would be a great idea. I suspect it would sell to the public as well, if the public believed this was an honest, nonpolitical effort.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Nothing that we could do, short of not allowing anyone in from anywhere, could have stopped Atta from coming in.

With Bin Laden's millions, even an extensive background search would have been useless.

[Starwind]

Thanks. It is/was a really busy thread and folks can overlook a post. The silence could also mean there were no immediately obvious fauxpaux (sp?) or maybe they're think'n up some thoughtful rebutals.

[NittanyLion]

The silence could also mean there were no immediately obvious fauxpaux (sp?) or maybe they're think'n up some thoughtful rebutals.

You should take it as a compliment. Your post was insightful enough to preclude any canned responses claiming you're a Bush-basher. Job well done.

[Marine Inspector]

Would an immigration lawyer have a better understanding of 245(i) if my Congressman seems hazy on what he is voting for?

To be perfectly honest, In five years of working for INS, I have only seen one Immigration Lawyer who had a good grasp of Immigration Law.

Personally I don't trust immigration lawyers and do not recommend them to immigrants. There are many free or low cost services out there that know more about immigration law than most immigration lawyers.

Just my opinion and your lawyer may know what he is saying, but most immigration layers never went to school to study immigration. If you wish to know about immigration law, the best person to speak with is an Adjudicator or Inspector.

[Marine Inspector]

Ha Ha, NOT.

If you want the problem fixed, this is what needs to be done:

1. Cut off all welfare to anyone not legally in the US. No health care, emergency services, food stamps, drivers licenses, ect...

2. Punish those people and businesses that hire illegals. Through the subject in jail and seize the assets (selling the assets to fund the INS).

3. Stop sending billions of dollars to our middle east enemies and get it into Mexico in a very controlled fashion and bring there economy in line with ours and Canada’s.

If there is no welfare` benefits and no jobs and Mexico is not a bad place to live, then Mexicans would not be heading north and would be more pro active in keep illegals out of there country that are heading north.

[Marine Inspector]

Agreed.

[Marine Inspector]

Agreed, and this bill is designed to stop people like Atta, which really can't be done.

If you want to stop the Att's of the world, you need a functional intelligence apparatus that passes along its intel.

[sleavelessinseattle]

I've been a baaaaad boy!

LOL Twy not to make youaw posts incompwehensibew! Love BABA

[4Freedom]

This bears repeating.

"You're a pretty amusing paradox, Luis.
You have no fuel,
you bring no heat...

But, you're never out of gas."

lmao

[Luis Gonzalez]

I would add one word to your post.

"If you want to stop the Atta's of the world, you need a functional, international intelligence apparatus that passes along its intel."

[Satadru]

I am saying that the law is that they be deported, but that is not what happens in reality. In essence, the bill that just was just signed does nothing to address the border jumpers. Maybe we need to lay mines on our borders to stop this infiltration.

[BeAChooser]

Clinton was tried, and found "not guilty".

Now remember, folks, this discussion about Clinton, impeachment and his "guilt" started when Luis chimed in, on a discussion I was having with William Tell, to claim that Clinton was properly investigated and prosecuted in the Monica and BJGate matter. So I guess he thinks the impeachment trial was "above board". Not a very conservative sounding notion, is it? And if it was above board then he must also agree with the "not guilty" verdict? Is that true Luis? Do you agree with the "not guilty" verdict of the Senate in the impeachment trial? Why that sure doesn't sound like something a conservative would believe, does it?

And I guess Luis thinks that trial was all that was all that was need, justified or ever possible where Clinton AND Clinton related crimes are concerned. He wants you to ignore the possibility that Clinton AND MANY OTHERS could have been tried in a REAL COURT after Clinton left office for the lies told DURING the impeachment investigation and for MANY, MANY other crimes that weren't even covered or investigated during the impeachment. Again, that sounds like something a liberal would want, doesn't it folks?

So just don't forget where and why this conversation started as Luis tries to distract you from the issue at hand. Instead, notice that Luis doesn't say one word about the lies under oath that both Sid Blumenthal and Vernon Jordan were caught making during the impeachment. Notice he has no response to the fact that Starr allowed the Whitehouse to keep the FBI files for YEARS after they were discovered to be illegally in the Whitehouse. Yet, he claims that those matters were properly investigated and prosecuted.

sarcasm alert on ... Right, Luis ... sarcasm alert off

[Luis Gonzalez]

I also failed to mention the Böer War, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Barney, the Lindbergh kidnapping, and New Coke.

This little trick of yours of addressing what people DON'T talk about instead of what they do talk about is old as your cut-and-paste rants.

"...to claim that Clinton was properly investigated and prosecuted in the Monica and BJGate matter."

You're posting from that alternate universe you occasionally slip into once again, show me where I ever said that Clinton was properly investigated or prosecuted.

Your continued lies and distortions have become the laughing stock of FR. You are our official FR buffoon, I can close my eyes and see the hat and pointy shoes.

What I think, and what I believe in are amply documented in FR, the fact that you believe that you can openly misconstrue what's available for all to see, confirms my opinion that you are simply insane.

[BeAChooser]

I also failed to mention the Böer War, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Barney, the Lindbergh kidnapping, and New Coke.

Funny, but I never asked you about any of those. But I did ask you specifically how you could claim MonicaGate was properly prosecuted if they didn't follow up on the lies by Blumenthal and Jordan during their impeachment trial questions under oath? I did ask you SPECIFICALLY why you think you could trust Starr's investigation in MonicaGate when he allowed the Clinton Whitehouse to keep the FBI files in FileGate after he told us it was illegal for the Clinton Whitehouse to have them? But you don't want to talk about that do you?

This little trick of yours of addressing what people DON'T talk about instead of what they do talk about is old as your cut-and-paste rants.

There is nothing tricky about this, Luis. You make a claim. I present FACTS that seem to demolish that claim. You then ignore those facts and just repeat your claim along with trying to again deflect the discussion away from the question that started it.

"...to claim that Clinton was properly investigated and prosecuted in the Monica and BJGate matter." You're posting from that alternate universe you occasionally slip into once again, show me where I ever said that Clinton was properly investigated or prosecuted.

Oh Boy. Another one that wants to go the way of RedBloodedAmerican. And in this case I don't even have to quote from another thread to prove your LYING. The following if from this thread:

************

To: William Tell

I challenge you to show me even one Clinton crime which is recognized by a majority of Americans.

I challenge you to show me even one Clinton-era crime which was properly investigated and prosecuted?

You won't get a majority of Americans to recognize Clinton crime if you don't do that first.

1163 posted on 6/6/02 6:07 PM Pacific by BeAChooser

To: BeAChooser

"I challenge you to show me even one Clinton-era crime which was properly investigated and prosecuted?"

Monica Lewinski and BJgate.

1165 posted on 6/6/02 6:09 PM Pacific by Luis Gonzalez

********

Your continued lies and distortions have become the laughing stock of FR.

Really. Read the above posts and then tell us whose LYING and DISTORTING.

You are our official FR buffoon, I can close my eyes and see the hat and pointy shoes.

And you are a stealth democRAT, as I've said for months ... as I'm sure most people now suspect. You debate like a democrat and you hold views that only a democRAT would hold. But most important of all, you RUN from all facts that might put democRATS behind bars.

What I think, and what I believe in are amply documented in FR,

sarcasm alert on ... Right, Luis ... sarcasm alert off