Replies

You’re trying to be on both sides of the fence at the same time. You cannot be both for and against illegal immigration. I suspect that the spin you put on one area of enforcement as representative of all areas of enforcement reveals your true allegiance to illegal immigration, and your list of concerns that conservatives have was just a list taken from the post of someone who really does want to put a stop to illegal immigration. If they were really your concerns, you wouldn’t be spinning lies to make it look like our immigration laws are already being enforced.

I’ve seen your method used in all types of debates. “I support enforcement of our immigration laws, but they’re already being enforced.” “I support the right to life, but denying food and water to brain damaged people isn’t euthanasia, because they aren’t really alive.” “I support the WOT, but there aren’t any terrorists in Iraq.”

Your methods are transparent. You claim to support one viewpoint, without any supporting evidence, but the only “facts” you provide are in opposition to the views you claim to support. Try something new.

You don't have a clue and absolutely no reading comprehension skills. I NEVER said I was for illegal immigration. I merely corrected someone with facts when they said there was no enforcement, then ya'll went off on a rant about other issues that I never even brought into the equation and I told you that I wasn't going to deal with those issues because they had no bearing on the facts I presented. It's not me that's spinning lies, dear...I gave the enforcement facts right off of the Govt. website. As I posted to someone else earlier, "For the record, I don’t support this bill. But I’ll be damned if I am going to sit by and let people lie about the facts as that one poster did."

To put it so you can understand it (if that is possible), if ICE picks up and deports 10,000 illegals and 1,000 of them come back across the border, that does not mean that the full 10,000 were not deported by ICE. Instead of taking into consideration the fact that 10,000 were deported, I get this "so what, 1,000 came back across the border" attitude. I give credit where credit is due, sorry if you don't, but I deal with facts not rhetoric.

Again, for the record, I am for:

The border fence
A time limit for application for a temporary worker program. If they don't apply by the deadline they are SOL.
Criminal background checks with all convicted criminals immediately deported
Fines for those that broke the immigration laws
Databases set up to track those who are approved
Making sure that those that do stay are gainfully employed and sponsored by their employer who would have to certify that they have made a good faith effort to find Americans to fill those jobs.
The employer would be required to conform to all labor standards, including minimum wage requirements and equal pay standards
A limit on the Visa (maybe 3 years?), so they have to go back and reapply from outside after that, getting in line behind those that already applied.
Immediate family only entry
No anchor babies

I put them in a list format so you can hopefully process the information without going into overload. Now you try something new, like not twisting my words and distorting my views.

Oh, and just for grins, here's another clue for you...see post #27 and #38 as well as other posts on that thread. I was supporting Tancredo's co-sponsored bill back in 2005 and didn't think it was nearly enough. I have one more comment in mind, but I might get banned for it...but suffice it to say you have a certain hand gesture pointed in your direction.