Posted on 08/24/2002 7:56:02 PM PDT by sweetliberty
"The National Republican Congressional Committee has been advising its candidates NOT to mention border security and immigration issues in their speeches or campaign literature," stated Janine Hansen Independent American candidate for Congress Dist. 2 in Nevada. "The shyness of the Republican Party and the Bush Administration about immigration explains why they manifest a deafening silence about Rep. George Gekas’s (R-PA) bill (H.R. 5013) called Securing America’s Future through Enforcement Reform (SAFER)," stated Janine Hansen.
"As an Independent American I support Rep. George Gekas’s bill. Represenative Gekas is the Chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee. He will start hearings on his bill next month. This legislation is completely in accord with public opinion polls showing that the big majority of the American people want government to reduce the number of legal immigrants, to stop the irresponsible issuance of visas, to deport illegal aliens, and to use U.S. troops to guard our borders," stated Hansen.
Hansen also stated that House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-MO) announced a Democratic Party plan to introduce legislation to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. Nothing is more unpopular with the voters than amnesty (which Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) called "sheer lunacy"). She accused both Republicans and Democrats of being out of touch with the grass roots on the immigration issues
"America’s doors have always been open to legal immigrants. Had our immigration laws simply been enforced the tragedy of 9/11 may have been avoided. We cannot afford to pretend that immigration is not an issue. We must secure our boarders and protect the American people whether it is politically correct or not," stated Janine Hansen.
Title I of Rep. Gekas’s Immigration bil called Securing the Border, would increase the number of INS investigators and enforcement personnel, lengthen criminal sentences for alien smuggling, beef up the Border Patrol, and use U.S. military troops until the Border Patrol reaches full strength. It would stop granting visas in countries that refuse to cooperate in combating alien smuggling.
Title II, called Screening Aliens Seeking Admission, would tighten up the visa program in order to reduce the risk of aliens using fraudulent passports, require in-person interviews before issuing all visas, and bar any alien who is a member of a terrorist group or supports terrorism. Most people don't understand why this isn't already the law.
Title III, called Tracking Aliens Present in the United States, would establish a comprehensive entry-exit control system with registration and fingerprinting (which INS has promised for years but never implemented). At least 40 percent of illegal aliens (including several 9/11 terrorists) are visa overstayers.
Title IV, called Removing Alien Terrorists, Criminals, and Human Rights Violators , would authorize INS to deport any alien who was inadmissible in the first place or who we have grounds to believe may be a terrorist. This title would reverse several court decisions that accord unreasonable "rights" to terrorists claiming asylum, and would prevent the courts from releasing criminal aliens into the community.
Title V, called Enhancing Enforcement of the Immigration and Nationality Act in the Interior , would protect Social Security cards against counterfeiting and fraudulent use. This title would increase the number of INS investigators, as repeatedly requested by INS, and double the number of INS detention beds.
Title VI would eliminate excessive review and dilatory and abusive tactics by aliens in deportation proceedings. It would also exclude aliens who knowingly make a false asylum application.
Title VII would clean up the problem of voting by illegal aliens. It would require verification of citizenship for voters and applicants.
Title VIII, called Reforming Legal Immigration, would repeal the infamous Diversity Immigrant Program which admits 50,000 immigrants a year, mostly from the Third World including countries that sponsor terrorism, and which helped the Fourth of July LAX murderer win U.S. residency. It would reform the abuses in the refugee program and in the extended-family visa program, and reduce the number of legal immigrants by 20 percent. This would still leave immigration nearly double the traditional level. INS is unable to cope with its current backlog of five million applications.
Thanks for the ping!! Here are some polls that you might be interested in. Granted they are not scientific but I think they pretty much reflect the attitude of the American public.
Zogby did a poll about 6 months ago and it came out about 70% against immigration/amnesty and about 30% for immigration/amnesty. The interesting thing about the poll was that the approximately 70% that were opposed to amnesty was split about even between republicans and democrats.
Immigration is going to be an issue in November and in 2004. You can take that to the bank polls.
The British Conservative Party condemned itself to a landslide defeat in last years' election, because it agreed to keep immigration off the table in the campaign. That decision was as stupid as it was cowardly and unprincipled. There can be nothing more important than the character of your nation. To suggest that it should not even be debated, whom you permit to join your family, as it were, is lunacy, pure and simple. Have the Republicans in Washington all fallen down the Rabbit Hole? Will they be surprised, when we find ourselves replaced by a new party, in a few years?
The only way to save the Republican Party, I suspect, is for those of us who are not afraid of discussing the realities of demographics, ethnicity and history, to speak up and out, loudly and effectively, at every opportunity.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
We need to understand that a nation is not about geography--although most nations of the earth have strong sentimental, as well as legal claims, to geography. A nation is about a people who have a sense of their own common heritage, experience and values. It is about kith and kin, and the geography comes in when people think about the "Land where my fathers died," as in the patriotic song.
In this reality, the individual immigrant who comes over from a foreign land and seeks acceptance into the nation, is obviously no threat. If there is room, and he is seen as acceptable, there is no reason not to accord him--after a time to prove himself--the rights of citizenship.
But the idea of a wave of foreigners, coming not accepting and seeking acceptance, but seeking what wealth and benefits they may acquire for themselves, becoming citizens, is intolerable to those who wish to preserve their own nation. Slandering these latter, as "Nativists" or "xenophobic," will not change the fact that what they advocate is in accordance with all past human understanding. Their slanderers are not statesmen, are not enlightened, and--above all else--are not loyal to their own people.
William Flax Return Of The Gods Web Site
I'd trade you for a bad case of shingles.
No, you don't. Stop kidding yourself.
My original comments were to Cacique and had to do with the image of a rino on a t-shirt. Cacique captioned it, "T shirt of the Congressional GOP". I took that as a general statement and not just pertaining to the subject of this thread.
I then said the following:
Ridiculous. You're painting with a very broad brush and being dishonest towards those hard working conservative Republicans's who support and promote the conservative agenda. Let's give credit, where credit is due.
On the subject of immigration, I thought we were in agreement. The federal governemnt must halt all illegal immigration, immediately. I support using the military to help the INS Border Patrol, accomplish this goal. And my Congressmen are opposed to illegal immigration, as is roughly 85%-90% of all American's.
Where did I go wrong?
I agree, it is intolerable, especially in the light that their stated goal is to take back the land. Atzlan...Texas, California, in other words, the southwest.
The sad part is, they are doing it, right under our collective noses, and the politicians, save one, do nothing.
So damn "hardworking" then why are the pits they are leaving such hellholes?
Uh, try hundreds of years of bad government and see what kind of a pit you'd be living in. We're just lucky that we happened to be born in the land of freedom and... what was it? OPPERTUNITY!
Check out the 2004 Republican Party Platform (Illegal Immigration Plank).
"This new program would allow workers who currently hold jobs to come out of the shadows and to participate legally in America’s economy. It would allow men and women who enter the program to apply for citizenship in the same manner as those who apply from outside the United States."
What will really surprise me is if the other parts are enforced.
"We oppose amnesty because it would have the effect of encouraging illegal immigration and would give an unfair advantage to those who have broken our laws."
I can't understand why they can't see the irony in that statement. Amnesty is amnesty, no matter what you call it and allowing the people to stay who are already here because they broke the laws, IS rewarding lawbreakers.
Why don't they fix it if they are so "hard working?"
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.