Posted on 03/13/2002 3:24:46 AM PST by Enemy Of The State
Edited on 04/22/2004 12:32:49 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt said he would support the bill with the border security provisions.
WASHINGTON
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Mind explaining your criteria for "massive round-ups," so as to not violate the 4th Amendment?
Big wall. From San Diego to the Rio Grande - watch towers - military mans it.
(If the Chinese could build one 3,000 years ago, we can do it today, so I don't want to hear it).
China was ruled by a despotic government 3,000 years ago, and what the Emperor wanted, the Emperor got, no arguments accepted. The US is not in a similar condition. The wall may be physically achievable, but it is not fiscally achievable.
And the Great Wall ultimately failed in its mission.
This won't buy any time. This will only cause more work and bog down the already dysfunctional system.
On top of INS's current workload, Congress just added 250,000+ applications.
The Mexicans did.
The "MEXICAN INVASION" didn't start until the liberals, pushed on by the AFL-CIO, closed down the bracero program that allowed Mexican nationals to legally enter the country and work on a seasonal basis.
The moderators are out of control on this thread today!
File a complaint with Mr. Robinson if the moderators are really "out of control."
They're censoring and sanitizing this thread like nobody's business!
Maybe some folks should lay off the naughty language.
How many yanked posts so far?
Lots.
Man this place has gone so PC and so downhill. I know it's a cyclical complaint but it really has. This is just absurd...
Believe it or not, it is possible to discuss immigration policy without using various and sundry ethnic epithets. Maybe you should learn how to do it.
Anybody know if "FreeConservatives" Forum is as bad as far as the PC scrubbing of the threads contents?
Nope. Why not go over there and find out? If they do let you post that stuff, feel free to leave FR.
MI
Personal attacks against FReepers you disagree with. Racial epithets. THAT sort of "stuff."
I speak my mind.
So did John Forbes Nash, Jr. "Speaking one's mind" does not automatically validate whatever is said.
Yes, there is. By decreasing the level of scrutiny on those that are here, and getting them legal, QUICKLY, the going forward provisions of the bill (Which is really he important part....) can be implemented.
No, not really. According to remarks from Tom Tancredo on the House floor yesterday, all the "going forward provisions" of the bill had already passed the House, so the action yesterday actually did nothing for the important parts of the bill -- they were already passed. These provisions were just repackaged/linked with the 245(i) legislation and passed again (in an attempt to fool people?). Note the lead "House Again Passes Border and Visa Security Legislation" as well as the line in the story: "These protections, already passed by the House without opposition on December 19, 2001, have been held up by Democratic opposition in the Senate." I don't know if having the 245(i) component makes the package more palatable to the Senate, because I don't what Democratic opposition there has been to it in the Senate. The INS may well have to expend considerably more resources dealing with the 245(i) provisions which would prevent them from going forward on other things and, as always, any type of amnesty sends the message that illegal immigration is really okay, accepted, and tolerated. So, we will probably have more illegals in the future to to scrutinize, not fewer. I heard an immigration lawyer being interviewed say that some in the "immigrant community" think that this is a blanket amnesty and if that rumor, although false, spreads how many will try to get in here to take advantage of it?
Patience is key here. The Dems will tangle themselves up in lies, and we'll be able to say we tried to work it out when we hammer them.
I agree...since when is paying a $1000 fine for breaking the immigration law considered amnesty? Do these same people consider it amnesty when they pay a speeding fine? Do these same people consider speeders criminals even after they have paid their fine? Everyone is going off half cocked and they haven't even bothered to read the bill.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
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.