AMNESTY FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS? (a question for Freepers)

August 22nd, 2002 | Sabertooth

[Reaganwuzthebest]

I don't think you can claim credit for Abraham's loss.

Where did I say that I was claiming credit for Abraham's loss?

You can't deny reality, he and Dick Chrysler sabotaged immigration reform in 1996 that would have gone a long way to keeping out the kinds of terrorists who blew up those buildings. FAIR and Numbers USA did extensive media coverage of Abraham and his positions during the campaign, it cost him the election.

You are totally missing the point anyway, even if only 3 to 5% of voters are swayed by a candidate's views on mass immigration/amnesties, that could be enough to kill their chances of winning.

Immigration is a very important issue to many people, any attempts to keep topics focused on prescription drugs and Social Security will be defeated as soon as candidates take questions from voters. It always comes back to illegal immigration and its impact on communities. Watch C-Span once in a while when they cover town meetings and see what citizens talk about.

As far as Michele Malkin, get a life, this is about illegal immigration. She or her parents came legally. As far as legal immigration goes, during the eighties we took in approximately 500,000 annually. I see no reason to go back to those numbers as opposed to the nearly 1,000,000 today. That's way too high, they need to be moderated so communities can absorb and assimiliate them better.

[Sabertooth]

I was told approximately 1/3 [of the Section 245(i) Amnesties were granted to Illegals were sponsored by employers]. That's an off-the-cuff, ballpark figure also.

So in your opinion, when I've stated that a few hundred thousand of the million Section 245(i) Amnesties so far granted have been employer sponsored, is that a fair estimate?

And since I understand that employer-sponsored 245(i) Amnesties count against immigration caps, is it also fair to say that a few hundred thousand legal immigrant candidates were not allowed into our country to make room for these Amnestied Illegals?

[georgiabelle]

Sorry it took so long FF.

Really I'm a little above Gainesville. In fact I try to avoid Gainesville as much as possible. I go to Mall of Ga. in Buford most of the time.

After saying that, I was in Gainesville the other day(Doctors are down there) and you can see where all the graffiti has been whited out. It's everywhere. And I can vouch that it was not a problem before now.

Also I was sitting at a railroad crossing and all the boxcars had graffiti on them. Mostly gang signs and names. It's awful around here. One student told me they go down the hall 5 abreast and knock the other students out of the way. Apparently the administration are afraid of them. It's coming to a slow boil around here.

[Marine Inspector]

You are absolutely correct, and that is one of the major flaws of 245(i).

[hchutch]

Oh, give me a break. For the record, I wanted Clinton convicted for his actions.

I've been quite patient with your condescending attitude on this, but I am going to draw some lines here. You have the right to your opinion, but I will draw a line when you try to degrade my opinion, just because I asked my brother about what he saw and experienced. If you were looking for more imformation on a subject that was being hotly debated, you would try to find out more about it. I happened to do that.

Unfortunately, what my brother observed did not fit in with your preconceived notions, and so you chose to denigrate what he was and make wild accusations. I've been patient with it for a while, but it is running out. I think you are pretty close to incivility on this thread. I can deal with someone disagreeing with me if they are civil, but you seem to enjoy tossing this stuff out, and claiming Clintonism where none existed.

And you accuse me of a false premise when you have made wild accustions? Hello pot, this is the kettle calling...

[F.J. Mitchell]

No You weren't that bad-every thing I would have said, had already been said when I got there. That went over 600 responses in a hurry didn't it. I guess we are all concerned about this run away illegal imigration-rather than being able to absorb the immigrants, they are absorbing us. That is the route to destruction for our own culture.

[4Freedom]

"When it comes down to the level of immigration, while a plurality (49%) wants the levels decreased, 48% say they should stay the same or be increased (36% stay the same, 12% increase).

Sorry, that's more obfuscation. Faulty logic alert. More incorrect, Chutch Brother's assumptions.

If I wanted to mislead, as well, I could say that 85% want the levels decreased or to stay the same, while only 12% want an increase.

That would be equally deceptive, though. I'm a conservative Republican and above that. ;^)

In actuality, if the same respondents were given only the two choices of increased or decreased, that 36% would be split between the two remaining choices.

The numbers would probably be more like 84% levels decreased and 13% levels increased. That's fair, no? :P

LOL!

[Sabertooth]

I actually think Section 245(i) is flawed from head-to-toe.

Employer-sponsored Amnesties penalize law-aibiding immigrant candidtates.

Family sponsored 245(i) Amnesties penalize law-abiding citizens and legal residents of the United States of America.

And in both instances, lawlessness is excused and rewarded. Perfect for the Clinton Legacy.

I'll go a step further... currently, lawful family reunification also busts our immigration caps. The cap numbers are about as honest as a prison sentence... the number given is never intended to be the actual outcome.

I don't have a problem with family reunification in principal, in fact I think it's desirable, provided the family can pull their own weight financially. But chain immigration, even if legal, ought to count against immigration caps. If this was done, compassion would be served and the rule of law upheld simultaneously.

[4Freedom]

In's Out?

They're going to break their noses going threw the wrong door, with signs like that.

[I_Love_My_Husband]

Remember I told you I was at the INS with my husband? There's nothing but 3rd world criminals who can't/won't speak English there, the INS itself is staffed by these same people, and you only have to make $14k a year to SPONSOR someone in! AND, if you don't make $14k a year the government will HELP YOU to sponsor someone in.

The doors are wide open and it's dangerous.

Oh yes. I was there because MY husband is from England. It's very hard to get here from England or any Euro country, but the doors are wide open for Saudis/3rd world criminal scum.

[4Freedom]

Threw=through

[WRhine]

And, as far back as June, 2002 (nine months after 9/11), 52% still felt that immigration was a good thing. And by a 51-31 margin in December of 2001, people felt immigrants contributed to the country as opposed to making problems.

HC, contrary to what your referenced poll (gallop) indicates, just about every national poll conducted on the issues regarding immigration in the last 5 years have shown strong and broad support for immigration reform which cuts across all ethnic, racial and political lines—including Hispanic Americans.

This is a well-known TRUTH that most immigration advocates like to downplay or ignore. In fact the CBS poll on the same page showed that 59% of those polled said that “Legal” immigration should be decreased. Now do you honestly believe that if the question were about “Illegal” immigration that the percentage of those saying it should be decreased would have been LESS than 59%? I hope not.

You strike me as a case study in the life of a political operative who has no appreciation for the truth, just propaganda and twisted reasoning in an attempt to justify warped positions that support your particular special interests. On that, you are no different than most democrat political operatives.

[WRhine]

BTTT.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

As the immigration crisis worsens we will see more of this in the GOP.

Exactly. Hutch and others refuse to admit immigration is on the minds of a lot of people. To him, it's a non-issue no one cares about. Even when a Republican loses because of it, they'll try and blame it on some other reason.

[Logic n' Reason]

No amnesty for any illegal alien now or ever. Deportation to country of origin is A MUST!

[4Freedom]

Sorry, I can't give you that much of a break.

You subjected us to your brother's biased opinions, that differed from a recent, scientific poll by a huge factor, 10 times on that prior thread and then you start in with his biased opinions again on this thread.

You use half quotes from Bush, taken out of context, to try to win an argument.

You twist poll results. (12% increase plus 36% stays the same) = you win?

You try to use a liberal, NEW YORK TIME'S POLL to demonstrate that immigration isn't an issue with CONSERVATIVES?

You berate me and challenge me to "put up or shut up".

So, I put up.

Now you're drawing the lines on decorum, after you've so mightily transgressed?

Who do you think you are?

[WRhine]

Oh yes. I was there because MY husband is from England. It's very hard to get here from England or any Euro country,but the doors are wide open for Saudis/3rd world criminal scum.

If there was a handbook on how to "Destroy America" the above would certainly be in it. In fact the Communist Manifesto goes into great detail about how mass immigration from 3rd world countries helps their cause by creating social and political instability in Western Nations. Seems that many in the Beltway have read it.

[Joe Hadenuf]

You bet...

In fact the Communist Manifesto goes into great detail about how mass immigration from 3rd world countries helps their cause by creating social and political instability in Western Nations. Seems that many in the Beltway have read it.

It's working quite well...

[4Freedom]

Bill and Hillary Clinton didn't tell the American people, on the campaign trail, that the first thing they would do when they got into office was socialize our healthcare system.

Remember what happened?

[4Freedom]

Karl Marx would be so happy.