Posted on 05/12/2006 9:18:12 AM PDT by xjcsa
Headline only so far...
I will have to go back and check. Those laws were posted today on one of these threads, by a poster whose name began with m. Howlin, Coop, can you help me find them? I have been in and out all day and have lost track. Thanks!
Thanks!
I have a question, if President Bush gets his guest worker program with a path to citizenship, there has to be certain criteria for an illegal to qualify. Correct? OK, then how will all those who don't qualify be deported? I would imagine the standard would be criminal record and things of that type that would disqualify an illegal, so the ones that don't qualify would be those that need to be deported the worst right?
Tell all your friends to stay home and we may not need a wall.
I know 2,000 miles is a very long wall, but we have a very big problem, and so far all efforts to secure this border have failed.
What exactly would you expect to be the result of these threads? These threads are not going to change policy but they do inform. If information leads to the conclusion that Bush has failed his country on this issue then whose fault is that?
You have just admitted to the heart of the problem...........and we can't get anything done as long as guys like you feel like you who have a disdain for President Bush 'own' the illegal immigration issue.
I don't own anything but the words I posted on these threads. The idea that anyone thinks they "own" these threads is pretty egotistical. The idea that someone might think that someone else can even claim they "own" a thread and respond to that claim is pretty sad. It shows a lack of character and weakness of belief.
Why don't you take that up with Jim?
BTTT!!
NAFTA didn't work out the way people had hoped and millions of Mexican farmers and other workers suffered?
I don't think that's true. I do know that they can't ask if they are here legally. In fact, they are required by law to verify the SS#. However, they need go no further. All they are required to do is match the SS# to the name. They are not required to verify if the name and SS# are being used by more than one person.
"Yeah smoke and mirrors, because he can say whatever he wants and never do it. Worse yet he can put them there for a few weeks and then recall them once he gets an amnesty laden piece of legislation pushed through. This administration has no credibility on the issue of illegals and enforcing the law.
Until a permanent solution, the wall, is put in place anything they do is something that can be undone with a pen stroke."
Here's a thought..if he must offer any sort of amnesty, offer it to those willing to work full time building a border wall from sea to shining sea. Not saying we should pay them for doing it or anything but we could offer food and large tent shelters. Then and only then should those volunteers get the break they are looking for. As for the rest of the lot, good riddens.
Thank you for a reasoned reply.
I want to say this again. Many of you have seen me say it on other threads. This isn't a message for the good freepers (like you, Tammy) who live in border areas and see first-hand the horrible results of out of control illegal immigration. To those of you - you have my sympathy and full support.
But many of us are seeing names for the first time. Many of those people signed up some time ago but only post on immigration threads or only bash the President or both.
Jim Robinson wrote the foreward to a book called Hillary's Secret War. Free Republic is mentioned prominently in the book and it details how paid opinion shapers come to forums like this one and try to turn conservatives against Republicans. The other thing the book detailed is how Jim Robinson was able to trace where posters were coming from and a lot of people from the 90's were posting from the Clinton White House and The Washington Post.
These people are trying to destroy this forum and turn us against each other. They are trying to force us to spend so much time defending the president and Republicans that we don't do what we do best -- Research and Activism.
I don't know how to fix this problem, but I don't intend to sit idly by and watch these opinion shapers ruin what is the best place on the internet. And I don't intend to let them stop us from moving forward with the conservative agenda and defeating the democrats either.
Yes. But WHY didn't NAFTA work? Logic says it should have worked. Why are we still getting so many border-jumpers?
it need not be that complex - border security, an improved method for employment ID via new social security cards, and employer sanctions - give me those things for 3 years, and let's see how many illegals deport themselves. my guess is - alot. then, we can assess what should be done with those who remain - certainly, those with american citizen children are going to be put on some path to legalization, and even though I know alot of freepers don't like the anchor baby concept - we have to get real, the families with citizen children are not going to be deported.
if we can get a process in place that works - they we can look at a guest worker program a few years from now. personally, I think that without access to this low cost labor, american business will adapt their operations, and we'll find we don't need as much of this labor as we think.
Herndon might be a small city, but is part of the Washington, DC metroplex, abutting Dulles International Airport.
Northern Virginia is awash in illegals and Muslims. The day laborers stand ten deep in along the curbs every day of the week.
No one else here does, either. (Aside from flaming, accusing people of being pro-amnesty, and say Bush is more pro-Mexico that US, that is...)
simple. NAFTA didn't work because of free trade with China. the business investment that would have gone to Mexico, matching their lower skilled/paid workers with those kinds of jobs, went to china. those jobs going to mexico would have taken pressure off the illegals problem, but american businesses and chinese interests cannot resist the lure of chinese labor.
free trade with china killed NAFTA.
what did that leave us with? it left us with mexico being the source of low cost SERVICE labor for america, but to perform a service job, the physical presence of the worker is required. hence, they came across the border to take those jobs.
What?
It really isn't complicated.
Seal the border.
Enforce our laws.
All it requires is the political will.
"A wall by itself is no big deal of an obstacle to overcome. All you need is a ladder, a rope, stairs, whatever."
Very much true. A moat reinforcing it on either side would help but that would be extremely costly given that we're talking about the desert. However, the purpose of a barricade is to slow the advance. The wall of course would have to be monitored 24/7 by aerial drones.
They're thinking directquick tunnel
For the reasons outlined above, it wont be that easy. 48% voted for John Kerry. When that 48% starts seeing the mass "Elian" raids every night, that 48% will turn into 55% over night, and then anchor babies will be your future congressmen. Bi-lingual education will be mandatory and the Department of Discrimination will be formed. Stem the tide first. Once its contained, we can debate what to do with the people already here. First, I favor immediate deportation for the gang members from south of the border, the vehicular manslaughterers, and drug mules. Once we get rid of that element, we can work on a strict "assimiliation" test. Mandatory English, welfare benefits for a 6 month period, commit no crimes, no wire transfers of money over say, 50 dollars, no voting until citizenship (if eligible)and no public offices held, would be a good start. A fringe benefit might be the stringent tests would force people to leave because they are unable ot unwilling to comply. Just an idea..
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.