No.
Thank you for answering honestly.
Was being facetious...if you see no difference between parties, you might as well sign up for the Democratic Underground...maybe that'll open your eyes...
Posted on 05/15/2006 5:48:16 AM PDT by areafiftyone
May 15, 2006 -- WASHINGTON - In his live, nationally televised address tonight, President Bush will tell Americans that it's impossible to deport the estimated 11 million illegal aliens living here.
"We must reject amnesty, but recognize that it is not realistic to round up millions of people and send them home," said White House spokeswoman Maria Tamburri in a preview of Bush's speech.
She said Bush plans to spell out his vision for sealing the border, enforcing the law, and "creating a rational system for workers to come into our country and to do jobs Americans won't do." Bush plans to visit the U.S.-Mexican border this week, and will dispatch his Cabinet to help sell the immigration plan.
The Senate plans to return to the contentious issue this week now that Republicans and Democrats have a deal to plow through controversial amendments. But the House and Senate are far apart on whether to put illegals on a path to citizenship.
Tamburri said Bush would call for "better equipment, increased funding, and advanced technology" to secure the border.
She didn't confirm press reports that Bush wants to expand deployments of National Guard Troops to step up border enforcement. Some Guard troops are already deployed in Arizona and New Mexico, but Bush is considering a big increase.
White House National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said that enforcement was the Border Patrol's job - but then asked whether they needed help from the Guard on an "interim basis."
"This is not about militarizing the border," he said. The president is looking to do everything he can to secure the border. It's what the American people want."
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
We'd have to put a lock on each end to keep out salt water...
Really? We differ on that. Absent force or fraud, the arrangements I make with others concerning the price of goods or services is actually NOYB.
Of course, evil and cowardly people have always enlisted thugs, government employed or otherwise, to impose their will on others. I'm not necessarily talking about you, I don't know if you are one of those people.
What's a FROBL?
Vote buying is only part of it.
There also all of those employers out there who are big contributors to our politicians. Basically, it's all about them. Taxpayers be damned!
Flat will not happen. I'm taking bets.
Understand - but there is a way to do it if there is the will. I doubt there is the latter.
Any job that Americans won't do, doesn't need done to begin with.
But that's what they want him to do
I suppose it's a good debate tactic just to tell someone something's not their business... ;)
susie
Often it is difficult, to see events clearly and in the proper context. To me a simple world map 3' x 4' in front of me hanging on the wall is a good tool. The Mexican border connection: I predicted, that Iran was the actual focus of american attention 5 years ago, simply by reading news and looking at the map. As some wrote, in deed, Afghanistan and Iraq (to the east and west) are now becoming the 2 pieces of a Vice grip. For all practical purpose it's like having american territory right next to Iran. This takes years in the making, so Bush is not stupid, also he works with highly knowledgable staff that is independent from the presidency and has long term views. Iran get's very nervous right now, and the letter is practically a semi verbal decleration of war. America is preparing for a potential military conflict with Iran. Closing the uncontrolled Mexican Border is an important final step to seal America off for self protection purpose. 10000 guards is not a joke, its a ~ 1000% increase.
The problem is not the citizenship of persons born in the United States, who are citizens by Constitutional definition, it's the granting of priveleges to their parents just because of their relationship with the new citizen. That and the federal and state welfare programs, which are just as much a problem whether the money goes to some never married mother of 5 (by 5 different sperm donors) in the bowels of New Orleans, or to the child of illegal aliens fortunate enough to be born here.
Another problem is the glacial pace with witch the INS acts. A man here at work, born in San Antonio, has siblings born in Mexico. They are both college educated professionals, and would like to come to San Antonio to live. They have a sponsor, their brother, useful skills and experience in using those skills. One has waited 7 years, the othe a bit longer. Someone on another thread posted that it's not the well educated Mexicans who are coming here, but rather the lowest classes. The INS is part of the reason for that.
BTW, tomodachi is Japanese for friend.
The point I make is none of us can stop others from making our business their business, just because I or somebody else has some interest or the will to make it so.
But, in making the point, I also punted the ball into trivial irrelevancy. Call it a coffeebreak. :-)
I'm sorry but that is simplistic logic that falls apart under examination. Just consider enforcement on employers and the impact of current court rulings. Employers can use any of 22 documents to verify the eligibility of an employee. Any 3 of which is sufficient to shield the employer from knowingly employing an illegal. Most of these documents are easily forged. If the employer is presented with the document and it appears to be a forgery the employer can either accept it at face value and be legally shielded or submit it to some form of verification. If they attempt to verify and do not do the same to all the documents of all of their other employees, then they are subject to discrimination lawsuits (which the ACLU is eager to fund and support). Even employers who do not wish to break the law choose See no Evil hear no Evil because they can't risk a lawsuit.
This is all based on court ruling currently on the books. It is easier to beat the Feds in court than the ACLU. So, employers accept the documents and FED enforcement has dropped off because of a hostile court environment.
Change the courts and I might buy your argument, but currently you are denying the reality of what happens when these cases go to court.
Your "Hit the Playground" concept would result in so many 4th amendment lawsuits it would bring enforcement to a standstill. There's that little matter of probable cause without discrimination. Equal protection and all that.
When someone says it's easy, they are immediately admitting they have not thought it through. In a conflict, the opposing sides do not willingly submit to a change in tactics. They react and modify their own tactics. So beyond actually examining current factors thouroughly, you are ignoring the ability of the enemy to react and counter.
Before you say easy about anything, stop and make a list of all the reasons that it won't be easy. The list will be long. It may be possible to overcome the obstacles, but nothing is easy because nothing exists in a vacuum.
No.
Thank you for answering honestly.
Was being facetious...if you see no difference between parties, you might as well sign up for the Democratic Underground...maybe that'll open your eyes...
I have supported the Pres. on almost every issue. Defended him on here and in public. Depending on his speech tonight we shall see how much longer I will support him. Not listening to what I wish is expected. Not listening to what the majority of the American citizens want is something else.
FROBL = Free Republic Open Borders Lobbyist
We'd have to put a lock on each end to keep out salt water...
Ah, another stroke of genuis! We could set up reverse osmosis seawater desalination plants in the Gulf and the Pacific and pump fresh water through the locks into the channel. Win-win-win!
Funny, you still haven't offered anything except fear. Never too late....
if you see no difference between parties,
When unable to make a point of your own, make up something that you can falsely attribute to the person you are addressing and then knock it down.
It's called a...
Wonderful contemporary example, thank you!
APf
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.