Posted on 08/07/2003 8:27:02 PM PDT by AZ GRAMMY
On the contrary, I am the worst nightmare. Both traitor sellout political parties are the wet dreams of bolshvik trial lawyers.
There must be a strict policy of no more immigration, of troops on the border, of rounding up illegal aliens and throwing them out and offering voluntary expatriation to those here who are already citizens. They've got to be offered money to leave and many of them will take up that offer because many of them have never seen money like this. It will be a decent sum of money but it will be a fraction of what we'll end up paying over their stinking lifetimes.
In case anyone misunderstands, I support what the vigilantes are trying to do, and I think they're having some success because we're talking about it here. But I don't support inhumane treatment of people, and I think anytime you have inconsistent enforcement of immigration laws, you have a potential for great suffering. The vigilantes are the most inconsistent force in the entire equation!
In other words, if we mined the border and put up signs in spanish saying
PELIGRO, EXPLOSIVOS ALTOS, MINAS Anti-personnelit would be more humane than random citizens arrests by crazed vigilantes, and the random but regular deaths of whole boxcars of people due to starvation and dehydration.
That's my biggest complaint with the 'Homeland Security' BS. It harrasses US citizens without solving the problem of foreigners being here that want to do us harm.
Wait, have lots of people been troubled by Homeland Security who shouldn't have been? I'm all for profiling if it keeps a bomb from getting onto my commercial flight. In any case, I would agree that TIA and some of the other programs that have been proposed go too far. But it's a new world. Anyway, we will have to experiment as a people in trying to resolve these issues.
The Border Patrol and the INS are doing a miserable job, and if they don't improve something has to be done.
Agreed, but I think they're doing a bad job because they're understaffed, poorly equipped, and have an inconsistent mandate. It is our politicians who support them, and from governor to governor, from senator to congressman, from President to the FBI, nobody has any consistency.
This is a huge problem, with many examples. We need to channel our venting into constructive actions that improve the situation. I'm open to suggestions.
Vote for politicians who are consistently on the side of legal and limited immigration with standards. The vigilantes are going to hurt people and we don't want that. But talking about it here on FR is better than doing nothing!
This part of your otherwise excellent post I would disagree with. The 1986 bill, despite the amnesty clause did contain tough new mechanisms for getting illegal immigration under control, most important of which were employer sanctions and thousands of new border patrol guards. During Reagan's remaining two years in office attempts were made to enforce the sanctions, but after he left compliants from business halted anymore INS action. So while he probably could have done more, like place the military on the border, he did a recognize a problem with illegal immigration and sought out a legislative remedy.
The amnesty was promised to be a one shot deal that affected long-time residents only, and it was not anticipated to be in the millions as it turned out due to the enormous fraud involved. Really all it ended up doing was encouraging more illegal immigration, something current politicians should be considering when proposing new amnesties.
Yes Reagan was a strong supporter of legal immigration, I think most Americans are. It's fine with me too, within reason. During the 1980s we took in approximately 500,000 a year, that worked out well and I see no reason why we need what we're getting today, which is over a million. Communities must have the ability to absorb new people, which includes schools and other social costs. At the present time we're being overwhelmed.
Uh...is this some kind of trick question? Low sperm count from industrial pollution maybe? You seem to be implying something that is obvious to you...why don't you just tell me. WAIT!! I'VE GOT IT!!! The Mexicans are are stealing our embryos!!! Of course, it all makes so much sense now.
But I just happen to think that it ought to be for people who already live here
That would have originally been the Injuns...they ain't too keen on the whole American Dream thing. I really wish your predecessors had thought as you did and stayed home instead of coming to America. Then I wouldn't have to hear you whine about how you got your freedom and everybody else can go screw themselves
Reagan said this about the American Dream...
Passing on to another generation and the generations after them this thing called the American dream -- making sure it remains a beacon of hope to a troubled but waiting world.
It sounds like you would shut down that beacon.
I'd like to think that you just have not really thought much about any of this, but I fear that is not the case. Your characterization of today's immigrants as lazy and shiftless are not new. They are the same type of things that were said about the wops, kikes, polacks, and chinks as they came to America in sizable waves many years ago. You think your bigotry is different and justified because the Mexicans are worse than any immigrants we have had before. yeah right. You can't even get you slurs correct. Most Mexicans are not Muslim they are Catholic 89% and Protestant 6%. Why don't you "Find out" some real facts before you post, instead of just making this stuff up as you go. It makes you look dumb.
The Mexicans don't hate Dubya...aside from the Cubans, Dubya never had a better minority vote. Certainly the homegrown American Blacks and Jews hate Dubya but that doesn't fit in with your propaganda so you skipped that part.
Can you tell the difference yourself?
I can tell the difference between a person like you and the Mexican immigrants who are happy they don't have to make their sister sleep with the sheriff. They marvel at the limitless freedom of this country and you fret that America is nearly destroyed.
$12 billion out of $38 billion would be a large percentage…if I knew WTF you were talking about. What is this $38 billion? Is this the new math? You get an “L” for learning because you are very special.
So 12 billion "ain't nothin'" and you don't like blonds.
I never said anything about not liking blondes. Please let me know if you are having trouble reading what I write. If English a second language for you or if you are under 12, I can try to write appropriately for your skill level.
Well,well,well. I've really stumbled into the pulgaria here
OMG in your drunkenness you are now making up words. pulgaria.
I don't like the fact that people are coming across the border and being labeled as criminals. I'd prefer to see this problem solved with a program like Dubya has proposed. Amnesty for working families, expanding legal immigration, free-trade and promoting business in Mexico, but lastly cracking down on businesses who hire illegals,and stronger enforcement of the borders.
I believe the cost of tightly enforcing the borders will exceed any reduction in Medicare, schooling cost, and whatever other sins people may ascribe to illegals. The illegal labor is allowing some of our products to remain competitive in the marketplace.
I don't feel sufficiently knowledgeable to argue the effectiveness of the 1986 immigration bill with you. Thank you for your thoughtful and well articulated comments.
"During the 1980s we took in approximately 500,000 a year, that worked out well and I see no reason why we need what we're getting today, which is over a million. Communities must have the ability to absorb new people, which includes schools and other social costs. At the present time we're being overwhelmed."
Indisputable.
Legal immigration needs reform. 250,000 to 500,000 a year, open for debate just where from.
But what to do about the 11ish million Illegals here now? Methodical round-ups? Employer asset forfeiture?
Clearly something must be done now to stop the flood coming across the southern border before anything can be done about those already here.
First, let me ask if you are a Libertarian? You sound just like several I know. One of them thinks that Texas is big enough to sustain the entire world's population.
But I like your reaction to the previous question. Actually, I'm not sure myself. I could guess. I'm from a family of four siblings, and one set of cousins is six. What changed between then and now? You have to admit that something is different. When my generation's family members were being born, there was still a homesteading program in Alaska. The Cold War was raging and Americans felt that they were making a difference. The population of the planet was half then what it is now.
That would have originally been the Injuns... they ain't too keen on the whole American Dream thing. I really wish your predecessors had thought as you did and stayed home instead of coming to America. Then I wouldn't have to hear you whine about how you got your freedom and everybody else can go screw themselves.
Where and how to respond to that comment? It was a culture clash and the natives lost. Or don't you believe in clashes of civilizations? I think both sides could have done a better job of accepting the other, but it didn't happen that way. Besides, which side are you on? I'm not asking what your race is, I could care less.
You quote Reagan's comments about being a beacon to the world as though it automatically sustains your position. His comments do not support your position. America can be a beacon to the rest of the world without allowing a single immigrant across our frontiers. Our foriegn policy and our trade with other countries, as well as our cultural exchanges could allow us to remain a beacon without any further immigration. I think it's time for people in countries in Africa, South America, Asia, and the Pacific to fix their own problems.
Why don't you "Find out" some real facts before you post, instead of just making this stuff up as you go. It makes you look dumb.
Now you're just being cranky. I personally know immigrants from all of the groups I cited, and right now I'm annoyed by most of them for separate reasons. You don't seem to know as wide a range of immigrants as I do. I didn't say there weren't exceptions. And I didn't say even that most of them have the negative characteristics that I cited. But it doesn't take that many before there is real trouble. And there is.
They marvel at the limitless freedom of this country and you fret that America is nearly destroyed.
And how would you know that it's safe? You're so eager to give away the farm. But how much blood has your family given for this country? We've been here since 1655, I've lost two grandparents (that I know of) to Indian attacks, and I qualify to be a son of the American Revolution. Just in the last century all of my father's brothers served in WWII, and both of my grandfathers served in WWI. On my father's side, all of my grandfather's brothers were in uniform. I have two cousins who fought in Vietnam. Their father was a POW with the Japanese for 44 months.
Those of us who have given our family's blood for this country might have a different opinion from yours, so quick to open the floodgates to the exponential population explosion happening outside. I'd rather see the problems fixed in the lands that send us their immigrants than letting those people come here.
No doubt.
I've been following this thread for a day and a half now and heard some flawed observations by our libertarian opponents. One solution is to eliminate welefare. We all want that but I watched L. Sanchez congresswomen from California on Joe Scarbough last night and all she could talk about is a living-wage for janitors and what would Arnold do for hispanics? I was thinking "how in the world can this women get elected to anything when preaching a communist agenda?" Is it because she's buying votes by offering welefare. I would bet she won big in her district and that it has majority hispanic. So I guess the gardener and nanny are voting for her after all she's going to try to get them a living wage.
I just don't see welefare being eliminated in California by the ballot box so why should we let more immigrants (both legal and illegal) in and tip the balance in the rest of the country?
Whatever our own internal problems are at the public trough should be just that -- our own. I don't want a dime of my tax dollars going to illegal immigrants, unless it's to feed them their last meal before shipping them out.
I'll do you one better. The only dime of my taxpayer dollars to illegals is for the gasoline in the truck that ships them out.
I agree that just cutting welefare won't solve this problem. Another old agrument was that who would will pick the fruit and vegetables if not for the illegals? Well Dan Stein said it best. Just let the free market take its coarse. Simply supply and demand. No more end runs around the American people.
bump!
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.