Posted on 03/26/2006 4:26:15 AM PST by Borax Queen
Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc., says he's not going to be deterred by the wave of demonstrations protesting his bill to crack down on illegal immigration.
Responding to a pro-illegal immigration demonstration in Milwaukee on Thursday, Sensenbrenner called the protest "impressive," but added: "Many have tried to confuse the difference between legal and illegal immigration."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
See post 91, I think Ima Lurker is confused about the two dollars figure.
They moved lumber, bricks, carried squares of shingles, etc. They cleaned up, monitored the fire, etc on another day.
So the illegals can be hired easily.
He he... not my problem... the problem of those who cannot plan.
My guess is you run an honest business and don't knowlingly hire illegals and pay cash with no questions asked. Not every business is run like that. As a caller to a local radio station said last week, the $2.00 per hour (not square foot) is a very livable wage for him because they have 20 people living in one house and pool their money. He said it is a lot more than they could ever make in Mexico. Now, admittedly, I don't know this guy. He could be lying for all I know, but the host of the show knows him and believed he was telling the truth.
I've also had people I know personally, tell me they have lost construction jobs because they won't work for below minimum wage.
Many have tried to confuse the difference between legal and illegal immigration."
Right,
FRONT DOOR OR BE BOOTED!
So then, what do you think is the prime motivation behind Republicans who want to protect them and not hold them accountable. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me we've had a Republican President and Congress for sometime now. What have they done on this issue?
The radio caller could have been confused on the issue then.
Well the Republican Congress last week passed a bill to make being a illegal immigrant in the U.S. a felony. The Senate version of the bill is actually stricter than that. Being a election year, they might have finally gotten the message.
Those flags were distributed by the organizers, specifically to counter the visuals from the last big protest (of Prop 187), and to allow the Los Angeles Times to report that the protestors were "waving American flags".
How long?
The optimists are guessing 15-20 years.
I reckon it'll be quicker than that - 5 to 10, tops.
"It takes 60 senators to stop a filibuster and reid said he will filibuster any bill that doesn't have amnesty."
Fine. With the latest polls showing that most Americans want illegals sent back, Reid will give Republicans an '06 election gift.
Fernando Ortiz was a ‘landscape engineer’ on Long Island who had demanded to be able to vote, on the basis that he had been paying state and federal taxes for ten years. Actually, he had been stopped from casting a ballot by a poll watcher who had suspected his citizenship status, and (illegally, as it turned out) demanded proof of his identity and legal qualification to vote. Ortiz had won a multi-million dollar settlement against the Republican Party of New York in the subsequent “racial profiling and ethnic intimidation” civil suit, but he did not stop there.
Instead, with massive support from the ACLU and various Hispanic “immigrants rights” foundations, he had pressed his demand to be allowed to vote all the way to the Supreme Court…and he won. The Supreme Court, in its famous 5-4 decision, ruled that negligence in securing America’s borders against illegal immigration on the part of the federal government, could not be held against “undocumented workers who played by the rules and paid their taxes,” once they were established in America—legally or not. The federal government had not taken reasonable efforts to secure the border, and had not pursued "undocumented workers" in the USA. Instead, it openly permitted them most of the benefits of citizenship, and it collected their taxes. "No taxation without representation!" was the cry heard all the way to the Supreme Court. The State of New York had then sleep-walked through an aimless and desultory case for denying the vote—and citizenship—to “undocumented workers.”
Following Ortiz v. New York, a stunned America woke up to discover that there were not only an amazing twenty-two million illegal aliens hiding in plain sight across the land, but that eight million of them immediately qualified to vote. In a nation split 50-50 down party and ideological lines, these eight million new voters were recognized to be the certain majority-makers in future elections, and both parties set record lows for cravenness in pandering to their “needs.” Chief among their “needs” were liberal new family reunification laws, and these instant citizens—illegal aliens only a year before—began bringing the remainders of their families to the USA. Legally.
Overnight, wavering Democrat states became locks, and swing states with large Hispanic populations went solidly “blue.” The result was the recent election which had brought Gobernador Deleon to power in Nuevo Mexico, and had also brought radical Democrats to power in the White House and both houses of congress.
Thus had come the political tsunami which swept all before it, a tidal wave triggered by an undocumented lawn maintenance worker named Fernando Ortiz.
Illegals have commited at least one crime by coming into this country, most have committed numerous crimes, many smuggle drugs in when they come as a means to pay the coyote, many are involved in identity theft, and false documents. To ignore their criminal acts because they are working and have established a home makes no sense to me. That would be rewarding criminal behavior. It is like suggesting that if a person commits a crime and gets away with it, and is later caught they should not be prosecuted if they have a job and a home. What about someone who robs a bank and is not caught for some time, when found is working and has established a home- do we overlook that fact that robbing the bank is what allowed them to become established? The illegals that are established here now, only became established through illegal acts, what you suggest would let them profit from crime so to speak.
Good for Jim! I like this guy more and more. Bump...
It is President Bush's choice, and nothing else, that is preventing the enforcement of the laws the vast majority of Americans want enforced. He already has -- and has always had -- all the power he needs to enforce our laws as he well demonstrated after 9-11 with the rapid round-ups of muslim radicals virtually all of whom were charged with immigration violations! We all understand that a few high profile prosecutions of employers of illegal aliens would end the job lure and would go a long way toward solving the problem without the need for draconian round-ups of illegals, but under the Bush Administration such prosecutions of employers has all but stopped.
By his actions President Bush has renounced any pretense of believing in democracy and self-government here in America while hypocritically promoting it in Iraq and around the world.
Bravo. This is the most cogent post that I have seen on this matter!
As long as the border is open, and many more illegals come across every day there is no way the illegal acts can be a moot point. Any reward you give the illegals already here, encourages many more to come. IF the border were secured, and the flood of illegals were stopped or slowed to a small trickle, then some concessions to the illegals here might be possible. It will seal the fate of this country once and for all if we don't seal the border and we do give any concessions to illegals here now. Most people who live near the border see this very clearly, and those that don't can't grasp the root problem.
This is a crisis that has reached the breaking point, the crisis is the ongoing flood. It is hard for those that don't live near the border to grasp that, but that is the crisis and that must be solved before anything else. If the flood is not stopped, nothing else will work so there is no point even debating the rest of the issue until the flood is stopped. Many of the things proposed, like guest worker or some sort of path to citizenship will make the border problems explode if they are implemented without first bringing the flood under control.
Europe isn't dying off, it's committing continental suicide, and the reason has nothing to do with harsh immigration laws.
Europe has even more illegal aliens than the United States, and one of the few nation-states that's actually begun to crack down on illegal aliens, and imported jihadis, i.e. Denmark, is experiencing a renaissance.
We do not need law-breakers from third world countries-with third world educations, and third world values-in order for America to thrive.
If anything, your attitude is what's killing off the American republic as we've come to know it.
Now there's a true American Patriot that my family and I thank and we pray that Bill4437 gets passed."
Is he a "true American Patriot" or is he just feeding us what we want to hear, while he knows full well the bill will never pass?
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.