Replies

Well, let me surpise you a little - I favor English as the official language of this country. I don't like the multiculturalists at all. I the big problem is a system which has hooked too many people, citizen and immigrants on the degrading narcotic of welfare.

I think we need to figure out a solution on illegal immigration, but I am NOT buying into the Tancredo-Malkin solution to the problem - instead, I favor an approach closer to what Luis Gonzalez posted yesterday (That thread is here http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/822665/posts if you want to take a look). My only difference with him is that I feel there are situations where people ought to be cut some slack for coming here without dotting the Is and crossing the Ts - fleeing things like Castro's dictatorship in Cuba, the dictatorship Chavez is trying to establish in Venezuela, the ethnic cleansing in Zimbabwe, and the barbaric population control policies of the People's Republic of China, or situations where they felt that they, or an immediate family member was in physical danger from a group designated on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations.

I also am of the opinion that we also ought to consider other mitigating factors. I do not think that minor children are capable of forming criminal intent, nor should they be punished for the actionsof their parents, particularly if they are adults when we catch up with the parents who willfully and knowingly broke our immigration laws, and therefore, I support the DREAM Act and will probably be writing my Senators to urge their support for that measure.

If you can't handle that, it's not going to be my problem.

If you can't handle that, it's not going to be my problem.

What makes you think I can't handle it? You start with a false assumption about my motives, and then throw a hissy fit. And then wonder why you are on the receiving end of insults. I have simply said that I am opposed to illegal immigration and the current wink-and-nod approach at all levels of government towards such. You in turn go out of your way to insinuate that I therefore am opposed to immigration in general.

I think we need to figure out a solution on illegal immigration, but I am NOT buying into the Tancredo-Malkin solution to the problem

There are hundreds of solutions and have been discussed at length here and other places. Thinking up solutions is NOT THE PROBLEM. The problem is the government, as they are aiding and abetting this crisis.

I don't think you quite grasp the situation hutch. The government has no desire to stop this invasion of millions. None.....Zero.....Nada........IF they had any desire at all, it would have been done decades ago.

So you mention what Luis believes. Let's bring that in:

The quick (and deadly) solution of militarizing the borders, is scary, and has no possible end in sight, the moment we think we have things under control and stand down, the ants will come again. It's like taking an over-the-counter cold remedy, you're still sick; you're just too medicated to notice; and as soon as you stop taking it, you feel like crap again.

I think there is room for fair debate here - I have concerns about using the military on the border, but we should try to make it much less porous. It doesn't need to be airtight, just a point where many more potential illegals are caught then the current sieve. Oh, and BTW, having a couple of private border patrol groups trying to spot illegals is hardly militarization - it instead is as much of a political statement as anything.

We need to seriously curtail the welfare entitlement programs, for everyone too, not just illegal immigrants.

I don't think anyone here would disagree.

We need to limit State assistance to anyone believed to be here illegally to:

· Emergency medical services
· Emergency temporary shelter
· Transportation to the border.

So Luis is on the same page as I am here. And I imagine that the guys in American Patrol would agree wholeheartedly. So where is YOUR beef here?

We need to challenge the current interpretation of the XIV Amendment in Court, a well-organized, well-financed challenge seeking to eliminate "anchor babies". We need to severely fine and/or prosecute employers found guilty of knowingly using illegal alien help. We need hard time for smuggling, and manufacturing and/or distribution of falsified legal identification documents...hard time, not Fed time.

I think just about everyone here would agree.

We need to increase the technological abilities of the INS and the Border Patrol, and improve their efficiency.

Something the border patrol groups are trying to demonstrate by purchasing technology with their own money and attempting to demonstrate that it can be effective on the border.

I think we should offer incentives to American manufacturing firms looking to set up shop overseas, to build in Mexico, and not China. Mexico needs to co-operate with some internal reforms, and by relaxing some laws. If we are about to help a nation grow economically, I want it to be the one right next door to me, not the one who has nukes trained on me.

A fair point, and one open to honest debate.

We should also bring back the Bracero program, it's a win-win.

I think it would need a serious overhaul, but it's a good debate as well.

Any individual caught in the U.S. illegally should be deported, and not allowed to return to this country, for any reason, for life. But I also think that if we find someone who has been here illegally for fifteen years, working, not breaking laws, setting roots, and otherwise being a model member of the community, we need to give them special consideration, and try thinking out of the box for a kinder solution.

This is probably the thorniest subject - because in the end you are also rewarding lawbreaking. But this point is open to debate, especially if the parties can openly express their opinions without being called racist.

So what gives? Tom Tancredo is hardly differing with what Luis proposes - Luis says anyone found here illegally should be deported, and Tancredo is saying just that - yet you seem to say the two are on different pages. Maybe if you get your own opinions on this matter in better order, you could hold a better debate, instead of just flinging SPLC nonsense to get the other side pushed out of the debate...